Download to read offline
![1 SAMUEL 2 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Hannah’s Prayer
1 Then Hannah prayed and said:
“My heart rejoices in the Lord;
in the Lord my horn[a] is lifted high.
My mouth boasts over my enemies,
for I delight in your deliverance.
BARNES, "The song of Hannah is a prophetic Psalm. It is poetry. and it is prophecy.
It takes its place by the side of the songs of Miriam, Deborah, and the Virgin Mary, as
well as those of Moses, David, Hezekiah, and other Psalmists and prophets whose
inspired odes have been preserved in the Bible. The special feature which these songs
have in common is, that springing from, and in their first conception relating to,
incidents in the lives of the individuals who composed them, they branch out into
magnificent descriptions of the Kingdom and glory of Christ, and the triumphs of the
Church, of which those incidents were providentially designed to be the types. The
perception of this is essential to the understanding of Hannah’s song. Compare the
marginal references throughout.
CLARKE, "And Hannah prayed, and said - The Chaldee very properly says, And
Hannah prayed in the spirit of prophecy; for indeed the whole of this prayer, or as it may
be properly called oracular declaration, is a piece of regular prophecy, every part of it
having respect to the future, and perhaps not a little - of it declaratory oil the Messiah’s
kingdom.
1](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-1-320.jpg)
![&c. — That is, opened wide to pour forth abundant praises to God, and to give a
full answer to all the reproaches of my adversaries. Enemies — So she manifests her
prudence and modesty in not naming Peninnah, but only her enemies in general. I
rejoice in thy salvation — The matter of my joy is no trivial thing, but that strange
and glorious deliverance thou hast given me from my oppressing grief and care, and
from the insolent reproaches of my enemies.
COFFMAN, "Willis cited six reasons why "some scholars" reject this song as
pertaining in any sense to Hannah.[1] All six reasons are utterly worthless!
(1) The placement of the song is alleged as "a reason," but it appears in the text
exactly where it belongs, precisely following the dedication of Samuel at the
tabernacle and in connection with the worship service mentioned in 1 Samuel 1:28.
Where else would the critics have placed it?
(2) The fact that 1 Samuel 2:11 is the natural continuation of 1 Samuel 1:28 is
erroneously called "a reason," but there are a thousand instances in the Holy Bible
were a verse, or ten verses, or a hundred verses, or whole chapters could be deleted
and the disjoined portions be styled as "a natural continuation." In my
commentaries, I have cited dozens of these.
(3) The criticism that the song fits Hannah's situation "only in a very general way"
is simply untrue. Every line of it fits Hannah's situation perfectly. (See below.)
(4) "The details indicate a knowledge of the weapons of war, and neither Elkanah
nor Hannah had any military experience." This ridiculous criticism is founded upon
a single word, the word `bows' in 1 Samuel 2:4. This mention of such a weapon
cannot possibly be construed as "a knowledge of military weapons, tactics, and
warfare." In that age, there was not a dummy on earth who was ignorant of the fact
that a bow, used to shoot arrows, was a very important military weapon.
(5) The reference to the Lord's "king" in 1 Samuel 2:10 is said to assume a time
AFTER the monarchy was established. Such a conclusion is a gross error. Hannah
was familiar with the Pentateuch, and Moses had specifically prophesied that Israel,
in time, would have a king (Deuteronomy 13:14ff and Deuteronomy 28:36ff), and
7](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-7-320.jpg)
![Hannah's words here are a prophesy that God would give power and strength to
such a king. The real trouble that unbelieving critics have with this song is the
prophetic element in it, but their wicked unbelief is of no significance whatever.
(6) 1 Samuel 2:6 here has an undeniable reference to God's raising the dead to life,
and this is dubbed by critics as an example of, "theological ideas that reflect a later
period." This type of nonsense is founded on the false notion that faith in the
resurrection of the dead did not arise in Israel until a far later time than that of
Samuel. However, Abraham, the ancestor of all Israel, believed in the resurrection,
that being the sole and absolute reason for his obedience when God commanded him
to offer Isaac as a sacrifice on mount Moriah (Hebrews 11:17-19). The inspired
author of Hebrews could not have been wrong about that. The critical dictum that
faith in the resurrection belongs to a later period than that of Abraham is merely a
prejudiced and ignorant falsehood!
So much for critical efforts to get rid of this song of Hannah, their sole objective
being that of nullifying the Messianic import of it.
"The refusal of modern critics to admit the genuineness of this song is founded upon
an "a priori" and utter denial of the supernatural saving revelations of God, and
upon a consequent inability to discern the prophetic illumination of the pious
Hannah, and a complete misinterpretation of the contents of her song of praise."[2]
The genuineness of the song is attested by the following reflections of the conduct of
Peninnah in Hannah's song.
(1) Proud talking and arrogance are mentioned in 1 Samuel 2:3.
(2) The barren woman bears a child in 1 Samuel 2:5.
8](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-8-320.jpg)
![(3) The critical woman that had many children is forlorn in 1 Samuel 2:5.
(4) The poor are made rich; the lowly are exalted, etc., appear in 1 Samuel 2:8.
No more appropriate words pertaining to that situation between Hannah and
Peninnah could possibly have been written. Note especially the honor that was said
to be reserved for the poor and needy who would sit among "princes." As the
mother of the distinguished prophet and judge of Israel and the great king-maker of
Israel, Hannah fulfilled this perfectly.
"There is no rock like our God." This line indicates that Hannah was familiar with
Genesis 49:24, which records Jacob's blessing of Joseph, wherein he referred to God
as the "Rock of Israel." There are many other reflections of the Pentateuch in the
books of Samuel.
In the first chapter of Luke, we find that the Magnificat and the song of Zacharias
are both written within the influence of the song of Hannah, indicating dramatically
that the Messianic import of Hannah's song was recognized by the pious Israelites of
all subsequent ages.[3]
Prior to the arrogant, unjustified criticisms that originated in the 19th century, the
accepted translations of the entire Christian period, until that time, reflected the
prophetic nature of this song.
Adam Clarke, for example, translated 1 Samuel 2:10, as follows:
"Jehovah shall bruise them who contend with him;
Upon them shall he thunder in the heavens.
9](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-9-320.jpg)
![Jehovah shall judge the ends of the earth;
And he shall give strength to his King,
And shall exalt the horn of his Messiah."[4]
In the words of F. C. Cook:
"The song of Hannah is a prophetic psalm; it is poetry, and it is prophecy. It
takes its place by the side of the songs of Moses, Miriam, Deborah, the Virgin Mary,
David, and Hezekiah."[5]
That the Bible indeed is filled with predictive prophecy was affirmed by Willis in
these words:
"God can reveal coming events before they occur. Several passages in Isaiah
44-55 affirm that one thing that distinguishes God from the false gods is that He
predicts what will come to pass and then causes it to happen as he had said (Isaiah
41:23,26; 42:9; 44:7; 45:21; 46:10-11; and Isaiah 48:3-8). Isaiah often referred to
predictions that the Lord had made in the past which had already come to pass, and
it seems unlikely that He would have made such arguments if His hearers did not
know that they came to pass as prophesied."[6]
We should add that such evidences of fulfilled prophecies are by no means restricted
to Isaiah. The Bible is literally filled with them. Who can deny that Micah
prophesied that Christ would be born in Bethlehem?
In this light, therefore, we declare unequivocally that the Song of Hannah is
10](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-10-320.jpg)
![authentic, and that the interpretation of it as Messianic, both by Jewish and
Christian scholars, for thousands of years should by no means be abandoned
because of Satan's being uncomfortable with it!
Like the Magnificat, Hannah's hymn of thanksgiving begins with the temporal
mercies accorded to herself, but rises immediately into the realms of prophecy,
foretelling Christ's kingdom and the triumphs of his Church."[7]
"The barren has borne seven, but she who has many children is forlorn." This was
interpreted by R. Payne Smith as, "A typical reference to the long barrenness of the
Gentile world, to be followed by a fruitfulness far exceeding that of fleshly
Israel."[8] The text supports this view because "seven" is a number standing for
perfection, completeness, or infinity, and this did not apply to Hannah who bore six,
(not seven) children.
"The Lord will judge the ends of the earth." This definitely is not a reference to the
islands or to the ends of the Mediterranean Sea, but a reference to the final
judgment of the Last Day when God shall judge all mankind. "`Ends of the earth'
means the whole earth up to its remotest quarters."[9]
"He will give strength to his king, and exalt the power of his anointed." We are
delighted to find in the Interpreter's Bible the following regarding this verse:
"This verse seems to envisage the miraculous discomfiture (defeat) of the enemies of
Israel, followed by the judgment of the nations and the coming of the Messiah."[10]
Of course, the term anointed was applied especially to the kings of Israel from the
times of Saul and afterward, especially to the Davidic dynasty; but "The `King' here
is the Ideal Son of David (The Christ)."[11] (We do not agree with the reason for
this interpretation by Caird, but his analysis of what the passage says is exactly
correct).
11](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-11-320.jpg)
![It is not necessary to suppose that Hannah herself knew the full meaning of her
prophecy (See 1 Peter 1:10-12). As Fraser expressed it, "Whether or not it was clear
to Hannah's mind, the Spirit who rested upon her signified a King greater than
David and a more illustrious kingdom."[12]
Concerning this tenth verse, F. C. Cook declared that, "This is a most remarkable
passage, containing a clear and distinct prophecy of the Kingdom and Glory of the
Christ of God (Compare Luke 1:69,70)."[13]
By her mention of the Final Judgment here, "Hannah's prayer rises to a prophetic
glance at the consummation of the kingdom of God."[14]
ELLICOTT, "EXCURSUS A: ON THE SONG OF HANNAH (1 Samuel 2).
The song of Hannah belongs to that group of inspired hymns of which examples
have been preserved in most of the earlier books. Genesis, for instance, contains the
prophetic song of the dying Jacob, Exodus the triumph hymn of Miriam, Numbers
the glorious prophet song of Balaam, Deuteronomy the dying prayer and prophecy
of Moses; Judges preserves for us the war song of Deborah.
The Book of the Psalms was a later collection of the favourite sacred hymns and
songs of the people, written mostly in what may be termed the golden age of Israel,
when David and Solomon had consolidated the monarchy.
Each of the greater songs embedded in the earlier books seems to have marked a
new departure in the life of the chosen people.
This is especially noticeable in the prophetic song of Jacob, which heralded the
period of the Egyptian slavery, and pointed to a glorious future lying beyond the
days of bitter oppression. Miriam sung of the triumphs of the Lord; her
impassioned words introduced the free desert life which succeeded the slavery days
12](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-12-320.jpg)
![successors, David and Solomon.
During the lifetime of Samuel, Saul, and David, though shorn of its old proportions
and exposed to many vicissitudes, the high priesthood continued in the family of Eli,
who was succeeded by his grandson, Ahitub, the son of Phinehas. In the days of
Saul, Ahijah, or Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub, gave David the shewbread to eat at
Nob, and was for this act murdered by King Saul, together with all the priests then
doing duty at the national sanctuary. His son, Abiathar, escaped the massacre, and
was allowed to assume his father’s office. During the reign of David this Abiathar
continued to be high priest, but was arbitrarily deposed by Solomon, who restored
Zadok, of the old high priestly line of Eleazar. The descendants of Zadok continued
to hold the office as long as the monarchy lasted.
The annexed table shows the double line of high priests to the reign of Solomon:—
[image]
Verse 1
(1) And Hannah prayed, and said.—“Prayed,” not quite in the sense in which we
generally understand prayer. Her prayer here asks for nothing; it is rather a song of
thanksgiving for the past, a song which passes into expressions of sure confidence
for the future. She had been an unhappy woman; her life had been, she thought, a
failure; her dearest hopes had been baffled; vexed, tormented, utterly cast down,
she had fled to the Rock of Israel for help, and in the eternal pity of the Divine
Friend of her people she had found rest, and then joy; out of her own individual
experience the Spirit of the Lord taught her to discern the general laws of the Divine
economy; she had had personal experience of the gracious government of the kind,
all-pitiful God; her own mercies were a pledge to her of the gracious way in which
the nation itself was led by Jehovah—were a sign by which she discerned how the
Eternal not only always delivered the individual sufferer who turned to Him, but
would also at all times be ever ready to succour and deliver His people.
15](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-15-320.jpg)
![There is a great deal of the spirit of prophecy, as well as the spirit of prayer and
praise, in this hymn of Hannah's, and therefore demands our attention the more.
Though it is called a prayer, yet it contains subject also of information to the
Church. The special mercy Hannah had received, gives occasion to her, to comfort
the people of God in all ages with an assurance of the Lord's mercies to others. But
principally I would call upon the Reader to observe, how much gospel is contained
in it, and how evidently the Holy Ghost must have been shedding his sweet
influences upon the mind of Hannah, when speaking as she doth in this verse, of
rejoicing in God's salvation. Is not this plainly referring to the Lord Jesus? Did not
the dying patriarch say the same? Genesis 49:18. And is not Jesus expressly called,
Jehovah's salvation? Isaiah 49:6.
CONSTABLE, "2. Hannah's Song of Solomon 2:1-10
Some commentators have seen Hannah's prayer as a non-essential song of praise
included in the text for sentimental reasons. But this magnificent prayer provides
the key to interpreting the rest of 1 and 2 Samuel. In this prayer, which contains no
petition, Hannah articulated her belief that God rewards trust with blessing. He
turns barrenness into fertility, not just in her case but universally. Mary, the mother
of Jesus, incorporated some of Hannah's song in her own "Magnificat" (Luke
1:46-55).
"The Song of Hannah appears near the beginning of 1 Samuel, and the Song of
David appears near the end of 2 Samuel. These two remarkably similar hymns of
praise thus constitute a kind of inclusio, framing the main contents of the books and
reminding us that the two books were originally one. Both begin by using 'horn' (1
Samuel 2:1; 2 Samuel 22:3) as a metaphor for 'strength,' referring to God as the
'Rock,' and reflecting on divine 'deliverance/salvation' (1 Samuel 2:1-2; 2 Samuel
22:2-3). Both end by paralleling 'his king' with 'his anointed' (1 Samuel 2:10; 2
Samuel 22:51)." [Note: Youngblood, p. 579.]
Hannah praised God because He had provided salvation for His people (1 Samuel
2:1-2). She had learned that God will humble people who view themselves as self-
sufficient (1 Samuel 2:3-4), but He will help those who cast themselves on Him,
asking Him to provide what they need (1 Samuel 2:5-8). Therefore the godly and the
wicked will experience vastly different fates (1 Samuel 2:9-10). The Old Testament
17](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-17-320.jpg)
![writers spoke of Sheol (1 Samuel 2:6), the abode of the dead, as though it were a
huge underground cave where judgment takes place (cf. Deuteronomy 32:22;
Psalms 88:3-6; et al.). The whole point of this inspired poetic prayer is that people
should trust in the Lord. Hannah had done this, and God had blessed her
miraculously.
Hannah's song contains a reference to a king that God would raise up as His
anointed representative to lead Israel (1 Samuel 2:10). This is one of a few such
references made by an ordinary Israelite that God recorded in Scripture (cf. Judges
8:22-23). God had revealed through Moses that in the future He would provide a
king for His people (Deuteronomy 17). God revealed His purpose to set up a king
over His people as early as Genesis (Genesis 17:6; Genesis 17:16; Genesis 35:11;
Genesis 49:10; cf. Genesis 1:26-28). Hannah's reference to this king shows that the
people of Israel looked forward to the fulfillment of that promise. Shortly after this
the people demanded a king from God (1 Samuel 8:4-7).
"This is the first reference in the OT to the king as the anointed of the Lord. Later,
in the eschatological thought of Judaism, this expression became the characteristic
title of the expected Deliverer, the Messiah or the Christ, who would alleviate world
troubles in a Messianic era." [Note: Fred E. Young, "First and Second Samuel," in
The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 276.]
The motif of God making the barren fertile in response to their trust and obedience
runs through the rest of 1 and 2 Samuel (cf. Samuel). So does the corollary truth
that God will make the "powerful," who are not trusting and obedient, infertile and
ultimately dead (cf. Saul). Likewise the motif of the Lord's anointed king is a major
one in 1 and 2 Samuel (cf. David). Thus this prayer prepares the reader for the rest
of the book.
In 1 Samuel 1:1 to 1 Samuel 2:10 we also find for the first time the reversal of
fortune motif that is a major theme in 1 and 2 Samuel. [Note: Longman and Dillard,
p. 159.] People apparently unimportant become important, and those who appear to
be important become unimportant (cf. Matthew 19:30). The crucial factor for them
as Israelites was their response to the will of God as contained in the Mosaic
18](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-18-320.jpg)
![Covenant.
God will bless people who want to further His program in the world by making it
possible for them to do that. He may even do supernatural things to enable them to
do so. Natural limitations do not limit God. Knowledge of what God has revealed
about Himself and His program is what God uses to inspire trust in Himself and
interest in His program. God may even reverse the fortunes of people in response to
their response to His will.
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:1. The superscription, “and Hannah prayed,” does not suit
precisely the contents of the following Song of Solomon, which is not exactly a
prayer (ָהלּ ִפ ְ)תּ but a thanksgiving-testimony to the Lord and the revelation of His
glory. Clericus: “Hannah rather sings praises to God than asks anything of Him.”
So the word “prayers” )וֹתִלּ ִפ ְתּ ) in Psalm 72:20, includes all the Pss. from 1 to72, in
the broad sense of thinking and speaking of God and in God’s presence, when the
heart is most thoroughly concentrated and deeply immersed in Him, though the
form of thinking and speaking to God may be lacking. The “thou,” however,
referring to God, appears in two places ( 1 Samuel 2-2:1 ). [Chald.: “H. prayed in the
spirit of prophecy.”—Tr.].
The content of the Song is: 1) The manifestation of deep joy in the Lord at the
deliverance vouchsafed by Him over against enemies ( 1 Samuel 2:1). With lofty
flight the four-membered strophe rises from the depth of the heart’s joyful emotion
on high, where the source of salvation and help in the living God is seen and praised.
The heart (as elsewhere the soul) is the central organ of all painful and joyful
feelings. The “horn” is the symbol—derived from horned beasts, which carry the
head high in consciousness of power—of vigorous courage and consciousness of
power, of which the Lord is the source, (comp. Deuteronomy 33:17; Psalm 75:5;
Psalm 89:18; Psalm 89:25).[FN11] The repetition of the “in the Lord” emphasizes
the fact that the joyous frame of mind and lofty consciousness of power has its root
in the Lord, and presupposes the most intimate communion with the living God.
The “mouth opened wide over my enemies,” intimates that the joy and courage that
filled her soul had found utterance, partly in exulting over adversaries, as
contrasted with the silence of subjection to them, partly in proclaiming the glory of
the Lord in thanks and praise for the help received from Him in the attacks of foes.
The ground of her joy in the Lord is His salvation, His help against enemies2) The
praise of the majesty of God in His holiness and His faithfulness, which is as firm as
19](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-19-320.jpg)
![a rock ( 1 Samuel 2:2). The “holy” indicates here in the broad sense the infinite
superiority of God to everything earthly and human, His isolation from the world,
but at the same time His absolute completeness of life in contrast with the
nothingness and perishableness of everything in the sphere of the creaturely, as in
Psalm 99:2-5; comp. 1 Kings 8:27. This is evident from the double negation: “none is
holy as the Lord; for there is none beside thee.” The ground of this exclusive
holiness is the aloneness and absoluteness of God; there is no God beside Him, He
shares the divine being [Germ. Sein und Wesen] with none; therefore He is apart
from everything human and earthly, and lifted up above it.[FN12]—The words
“there is no rock like our God,” express the aloneness and exclusiveness of God’s
character as set forth by the name rock. This superiority of God to all earthly and
worldly being, this absolute glory beyond everything finite and human does not
exclude, but is the ground of His self-revelation as the Fixed, Unchangeable,
Immovable amid everything earthly and human. The “our God” presupposes the
revelation of God by which Hebrews, as the Holy One, has chosen His people to be
His possession, announced Himself to this people as their God, and made a covenant
with them. The symbolical designation of this covenant-God by Rock, which occurs
frequently, was suggested naturally by the configuration of the ground in Palestine,
where masses of rock surrounded by steep precipices offered an image of solid and
sure protection. God is a rock in His firm unshakable faithfulness; and it is the more
necessary to suppose this attribute to be here set forth, because His relation to His
people as covenant-God is assumed in the words “our God.” This term has the
signification of faithfulness and indestructible trustworthiness in Deuteronomy 32:4,
also; where it is clearly the same as ָהנמוֱּא “faithfulness,” Psalm 18:3, (2) sq.; Psalm
92:16.[FN13]—The presupposition is the declaration “there is none beside Thee.”
Jehovah, as the Holy One who has revealed Himself to His people as their God in
His lofty elevation above the earthly and human, and is alone the truly existing
living God, is for this very reason the Rock also in the absolute sense, the
unchangeable, unshakably faithful, trustworthy God, and therefore claims from
men, to whom He has revealed Himself as their God, and is known as such,
unconditioned complete confidence, as it is expressed in this brief sentence, “none is
a rock like our God.”[FN14]
3) The manifestations of the holy and faithful God in His conduct, as it is
determined by His omniscience and omnipotence, partly towards the ungodly,
partly towards the godly, 1 Samuel 2:3; 1 Samuel 2:8).
PETT, "Introduction
20](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-20-320.jpg)
![1. The power and holiness of God—
[God does not always interpose in this world to display his hatred of sin, or to
vindicate the oppressed; because there is a day coming, when he will rectify all the
present inequalities of his moral government: but he does not leave himself
altogether without witness, that he is a righteous Governor, and a powerful
Avenger. His effectual interposition on this occasion was, in Hannah’s eyes, a
decisive proof, yea and a glorious exhibition too, of his holiness and power; and gave
her an assurance, that as these perfections were essential to his nature, and
unbounded in their extent, so they should ever be called forth into activity in behalf
of all who should trust in him — — —]
2. His wisdom and equity—
[Great was her consolation, that whilst she was judged uncharitably by her fellow-
creatures, she had One to whom she could commit her cause; One who was privy to
every thought of her heart, and would put a just construction upon the whole of her
conduct: and, in the contemplation of this truth, she exulted over those who had so
proudly and so arrogantly condemned her. And truly this is one of the richest
sources of consolation that any person can have, when suffering under
misrepresentations or calumnies of whatever kind: yea, it is quite sufficient to
tranquillize the mind, and to raise it above all those feelings which oppression is
calculated to produce [Note: 1 Corinthians 4:3-5.] — — —]
II. The dispensations of his providence—
[Here the pious Hannah extends her views from herself to the world at large; and
declares, that the change thus produced in her state, is illustrative of what is done by
God throughout the whole creation. In the events of war — in the enjoyment of
plenty — in the increase of families — in the continuance of life — in the possession
of wealth — and in advancement to honour — who does not see that the greatest
changes take place, even when least expected [Note: ver. 4–8.]? and who therefore
28](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-28-320.jpg)
![must not be convinced of the folly of indulging either presumptuous confidence, on
the one hand, or desponding fears on the other? None can say, “I am so strong, I
shall never be moved;” nor ought any one to say, “There is no hope;” the afflicted
should “weep, as though they wept not;” and the prosperous “rejoice, as though
they rejoiced not;” each being aware that their condition may soon be altered, and
shall be, if God see it on the whole conducive to their good.]
III. The purposes of his grace—
From a view of temporal concerns, she rises to those which are spiritual and eternal:
indeed here her words are evidently prophetic, and relate,
1. To the Church—
[She had found to her joy what care God takes of his people: and she confidently
declared, that that care should be extended to all his saints, even to the end of time.
Their adversaries might lay snares for their feet; but he would “keep their feet;” he
would “keep them from falling, and present them faultless before the presence of his
glory with exceeding joy [Note: Jude, ver. 24.]” — — — On the other hand, his
adversaries should assuredly be confounded by him: however they might vindicate
themselves now, they should soon “be silent in darkness;” and though now they
might defy him, as it were, to his face, he would thunder upon them out of heaven,
and utterly, yea eternally, destroy them — — —]
2. To the Church’s King, the Messiah himself—
[As yet there had been no king in Israel; nor was there for fifty years afterwards:
and therefore it is reasonable to think that she spake of Him, whose throne was in
due time to be erected in the hearts of men, even the Lord Jesus Christ. This further
appears from her characterising him by the very name Messiah, a name never
before assigned to the king of Israel, but henceforth intended to designate him
before all others; the Messiah, the Anointed, and the Christ, being all terms of
29](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-29-320.jpg)
![precisely the same import. That she spake of Him, yet further appears by the
marked resemblance between this song, and that which the blessed Virgin poured
forth at the prospect of the Saviour’s birth [Note: Luke 1:46-55.]. His triumph then
she firmly predicts; and declares that his kingdom shall be extended even to “the
ends of the earth.” Many efforts will be made to prevent its establishment in the
world; but none shall prevail: “his horn shall be exalted,” and all his enemies shall
perish.
It may be asked, What had this to do with the particular occasion of Hannah’s
thanksgiving? I answer, It is this very thing which constitutes in a very great degree
the beauty of this song, and that marks the effects of ardent piety upon the soul: a
single mercy, like a stream, leads the soul up to the Fountain-head: and it is then
only improved aright, when we take occasion from it to contemplate the fulness that
is treasured up there, and that is diffusing all possible blessings, temporal and
spiritual, throughout the world: and, inasmuch as the universal reign of Christ is
that which will bring most glory to God and most good to men, it ought ever to be
uppermost in our minds; and every mercy we enjoy should lead us ultimately to the
contemplation of it.]
We may learn then from hence,
1. The benefit of prayer—
[See how successful she was, though she uttered no words, but only importuned God
in her heart [Note: 1 Samuel 1:10; 1 Samuel 1:12-13.]! And what will God refuse to
those who seek him in sincerity and truth? — — — The Saviour’s promise to us all
is this, “Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, I will do it;” “Ye shall ask what ye
will, and it shall be done unto you.”
Let all the sons and daughters of affliction bear this in mind. Here is a sure remedy
for all their griefs, and an infallible supply for all their wants [Note: Psalms
40:1-3.].]
30](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-30-320.jpg)
![2. The blessedness of true religion—
[Exceeding heavy were Hannah’s trials [Note: 1 Samuel 1:6-7.]: and they were not a
little aggravated by the uncharitable surmises of Eli himself [Note: 1 Samuel
1:13-16.]. But into what holy joy were they turned at last! Thus, when true religion
occupies the soul, will even the most afflictive dispensations be overruled for good:
our night of sorrow may appear long; but the morning of joy shall soon arise: our
seed-time of tears shall be followed with a blessed harvest. Only let us delight in
heavenly contemplations, and every perfection of God’s nature, every dispensation
of his providence, and every purpose of his grace, shall swell, as it were, our tide of
joy, till it becomes “unspeakable and glorified.”]
PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:1
And Hannah prayed and said. Like the Magnificat, Hannah's hymn of thanksgiving
begins with the temporal mercies accorded to herself, but rises immediately into the
realms of prophecy, foretelling Christ's kingdom and the triumphs of the Church.
From this prophetic element, common more or less to all the hymns of the Bible,
most of them have been used in Christian worship, and still merit a place in it,
though we in the liturgy of the Church of England now use only two, taken both
from the New Testament. In 1 Samuel 2:1, in four strophes of equal length, Hannah
declares how, first, her heart, the centre with the Hebrews, not merely of the
physical, but also of the moral and intellectual life, rejoices in Jehovah; while the
exaltation of her horn, the symbol of strength and vigour, signifies that this inward
joy is accompanied, or even occasioned, by the changed circumstances of her
outward lot. Her mouth, therefore, is opened wide over her enemies, yet not for
cursing and in bitterness, but for joyful praise of the God who has answered her
prayers. It is his salvation, the being delivered by him, that makes her thus burst
forth into thanksgiving. It is a proof too of her faith and spirituality that she thus
refers all to Jehovah.
PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:1-10
Salvation.
31](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-31-320.jpg)
![V. INVOLVING GREAT REVERSIONS. Providence vindicated itself for former
apparently unequal and undesirable distributions of favour by breaking the bows of
the strong and giving strength to the feeble; by causing the self-satisfied Peninnah to
feel the lack of a satisfaction not to be obtained by the cruel, and the yearning
Hannah to want for nothing more. The once proud mother of many children, from
causes in the home life, fails in her joys, while the unfruitful attains to the perfection
of earthly bliss. In the one case hopes and joys are smitten; in the other, created. The
rich in home delights becomes poor, by possibly erring sons, or enfeebled health; the
poor and sorrowful is enriched with a treasure for the use of all ages. Thus does
Hannah see in outline the reversions ever occurring in the working out of God's
salvation in the individual, the nation, or the Church.
1. In the human soul saved by Christ, forces of evil once strong and self-satisfied,
lacking nothing, and usurping authority, are brought low, enfeebled, made
conscious of their impotence, and finally killed; while the poor, faint, struggling
spirit of love and faith is, when once "made alive," girded with strength, satisfied
with good, and made finally dominant over the entire nature. Doubts, fears, and
mighty temptations are laid low. Hopes, joys, and victories of faith are called forth;
and, as a final issue, the once outcast, unhappy soul is enriched with the full bliss of
a child of God.
2. In national affairs. The strength of Egypt sinks in the sea; the helplessness of
Israel puts on the strength of God. The boastful nations that in pride of their
resources set aside the practice of righteousness, one by one are brought low by the
corruption concealed beneath their material splendour; while the feeble people who
live in the fear of God go from strength to strength, and "delight themselves in the
abundance of peace."
3. In the Church. The wealth, power, and wisdom of Rome and Greece fell before
the rising power and spiritual know]edge of poor fishermen. The mighty evils of an
age are at length brought down, and the despised "things that are not" are caused
to be the most potent and blessed of all agencies.
36](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-36-320.jpg)
![punished, yet Jehovah is cognisant of them, and in due time will requite.
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:3. The negative particle is omitted before “come out” (אֵֵצי) as
before “speak”[FN15] (רוּ ְבּ ַד ְ,)תּ and the sense requires that it be supplied (Gesenius, §
152, 3). Partly by the “more,” [Heb. literally, “do not increase to speak.”—Tr.],
partly by the doubling of the noun [הָהֹב ְגּ “pride;” in Eng. A. V. the intensive
doubling is rendered by “exceeding,”—TR.], the boastful vaunting character, the
haughty soul of the ungodly is characterized, showing itself, as it often does, in
arrogant words, and becoming, as it were, a second nature. The warning, “talk not
so proudly, proudly,” stands in contrast with the praise of God’s grandeur in His
holiness, and brings out the more sharply the contrast between human pride and the
humility which is appropriate towards the holy God. Herder’s reference of the word
(Geist d. ebrהisch. Poesie 2, 282) to the “heights, which were used for defence, and in
which pride was felt” is untenable, the Heb. not permitting it. The talking with so
many proud and arrogant words stands in contrast with the expression of humility
and gratitude in 1 Samuel 2:2 : “My mouth is opened wide, etc., there is none
holy.”.......” ק ָתָﬠ “arrogance” specially marks the haughty talk as the expression of a
bold defiant soul, which will not bend, and manifests itself particularly towards the
pious and God fearing by bold words, comp. Psalm 75:6; Psalm 94:4; Psalm 31:19.
Sins of word, corresponding to the proud nature, are here emphasized, because
what the heart is full of the mouth will speak.
His warning is supported by pointing to God’s omniscience and omnipotence, in
which the relation of His holiness to earthly and human things is shown. “For
Jehovah is a God of omniscience.” The plu. “knowledges” )עוֹת ֵדּ ) indicates that God
knows and is acquainted with every individual thing, that, as He is raised above
every created thing, and thus present with all things and creatures, so they are
present and known to Him; and thus it expresses the thought that the concrete
content of God’s omniscience is everything finite and created.[FN16] The proud and
bold men, who speak so haughtily, must recollect that God knows all their deeds
and hears their words, that therefore they cannot withdraw from His rule.—
Secondly, reference is made to God’s power, which controls all things according to a
fixed unchangeable plan. We must first inquire whether the “actions” (לוֹתֲִלﬠ) is to
be understood of human or divine deeds, and then whether we are to read “not” )ֹאל )
or the Qeri “by him” )לוֹ ). The first question can be decided only by the connection.
The preceding context speaks not of the deeds, but of the words of ungodly men. In
what follows it is similarly not works and deeds of men that are treated of, but the
conditions and relations of human life, with which divine agency has to do; in 1
Samuel 2:4, sq., the thought expressly confines itself to divine deeds. We cannot
47](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-47-320.jpg)
![therefore with Bצttcher (Aehrenlese, in loco) suppose a question, and, retaining the
Kethib, render, “and are not deeds measured?” that Isaiah, “ is not care taken that
human deeds shall not become immoderate, insolent?” nor, with Thenius, adopting
the Qeri, “and by Him actions are measured,” that Isaiah, “He determines how far
human doing may go;” nor, with Luther, paraphrase “the Lord does not suffer such
conduct to prosper.” But, if we have to suppose only divine deeds, then the
translation “to him or by him actions are weighed or measured” is certainly to be
preferred to the other—“are not actions weighed or measured, that Isaiah,
determined?”—because of the vagueness of the thought in the latter. The thought,
then, is this: God’s actions are weighed, measured, fixed; He proceeds, in His
working, by unchangeable paths established by Himself, so that none can free
himself from His omnipotence, as none can withdraw from His all-pervading
omniscience. Against the explanation “by Him the actions of men are weighed”
(Bunsen: according to their essential worth), Keil properly urges: “God weighs the
spirits, the hearts of men indeed ( Proverbs 16:2; Proverbs 21:2; Proverbs 24:12),
but not their deeds. This expression is never found.” It is without ground, however,
that he introduces the idea of righteousness, since we have here to do with nothing
but the free, unrestricted activity of the divine omnipotence, to which, as to His
omniscience, men are absolutely subject. [The correctness of this interpretation is
open to doubt. The conception of God weighing His own actions, acting with
prudence and forecast, is not, I believe, found elsewhere in the Bible; the higher
conception of immutable wisdom is every where presented. On the other hand, that
God weighs the actions of men, if not (as Keil says) explicitly stated, is yet involved
in many passages, in all, for example, which set forth His righteous retribution; as,
“Thou renderest to every man according to his work” ( Psalm 62:12); “God shall
bring every work into judgment” ( Ecclesiastes 12:14); and comp. Psalm 10:18;
Psalm 11:5; Psalm 14:2; Proverbs 15:3; Job 34:21; Job 34:23; Jeremiah 9:23-24;
Joel 3:12. And this interpretation agrees very well with the context. The word
“actions” may well include all exhibitions of human character, and the antithesis
throughout the Song is between the wicked and the righteous. The thought,
therefore, may be: Jehovah is holy and immutable. Give ho exhibition of pride, for
He knows and weighs your actions. He reverses human conditions, bringing down (i.
e. the wicked), and setting up (i. e. the righteous). Expositors are about equally
divided between these interpretations. With Erdmann are Targum, Sept, Theodoret,
Patrick, Keil; in favor of the other, Syr, Clarke, Henry, Ewald; doubtful, Vulg,
Synop. Crit, Gill, “Wordsworth. Deuteronomy 32:4 does not seem to bear on the
decision, for it is Jehovah’s righteousness that is there emphasized.—Tr.]
48](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-48-320.jpg)
![sent empty away. While on the contrary the Lord satisfieth the hungry with good
things; and poor barren souls are satiated with the bread of life,
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:4-8 further carry out the thought of God’s almighty working
in human life by a series of sharply contrasted changes of fortune. In this it is
assumed that God’s omnipotent working is just, but it is not explicitly declared till
afterwards. “The preceding thought is carried further: Every power which will be
something in itself is destroyed by the Lord; every weakness, which despairs of
itself, is transformed into power” (O. v. Gerlach).
1 Samuel 2:4. As in Isaiah 21:17 we have bows of heroes instead of heroes of the
bow, so here the symbol of human power and might is poetically put first instead of
the personal subject. [Dr. Erdmann translates: “the heroes of the bow are cast
down,” which Isaiah, however, giving up the poetical form. Better: “the bows of
heroes are broken.” So in Isaiah 21:17 : “the residue of the bows of the heroes shall
become small.”—Tr.] The “broken” (ים ִתַּ)ח refers, according to the sense, to the
latter (since “heroes” is the logical subject) instead of to “bows,” the breaking of
which indicates the broken power of those who, like heroes of the bow, trust to their
might. The strong are overcome by God, as a hero loses his power when his bow is
broken. The antithesis: “And they that stumbled [or, stumble] are girded with
strength.” As stumbling, tottering indicates weakness and powerlessness, so “being
girded” with strength denotes fitness for battle, power prepared for battle. The
strong He deprives of strength, the powerless He makes strong—according to the
free working of His power.
PULPIT 4-8, "In 1 Samuel 2:4-8 Hannah illustrates the working of this attribute of
the Deity by enumerating the vicissitudes of human events, which are not the result
of chance, but of that omniscience combined with holiness which she has claimed for
Jehovah in 1 Samuel 2:2, 1 Samuel 2:3. She begins with the vicissitudes of war; but
these are not more remarkable than those of peace, by which the full, the rich and
wealthy, have to descend to the position of a hireling; while those previously hungry
have ceased, i.e. from labour, and keep holiday. In a nation of small proprietors,
where the land was tilled by the owner and those "born in his house," the position
of the hireling, the "mean white" of the southern States of America, was lower than
that of the slave, especially in Judaea, where the slave was more in the position of a
vassal than of a serf or forced labourer. In the next clause the translation may either
be, "She that was long barren hath borne seven," or, "Until the barren" etc.; i.e.
these vicissitudes may even reach so far as to make a barren woman the mother of
seven, i.e. of a perfect number of children, happily generalised in Psalms 113:9 into
52](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-52-320.jpg)
![grow barren when God pleaseth.
COKE, "1 Samuel 2:5. And they that were hungry, ceased— Houbigant renders
this, they that were oppressed with famine, shall no longer be so; whilst the barren
shall bring forth seven, and she who had many children shall be deprived of
strength. All the expressions in this and the other verses are designed to humble the
pride of man, and to set forth the greatness, wisdom, and uncontrollable power of
God.
ELLICOTT, " (5) They that were full.—Another image to illustrate the vicissitudes
of human affairs is sketched, one very familiar to the dwellers among the cornfields
and vineyards of Canaan.
The barren hath born seven.—Here the thought of the inspired singer reverts to
herself, and the imagery is drawn from the story of her own life. Seven children are
mentioned as the full number of the Divine blessing in children (see Ruth 4:15;
Jeremiah 15:9). There is a curious Jewish legend which relates how for each boy
child that was born to Hannah, two of Peninnah’s died.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:5. The “full,” who in the abundance of their wealth had no
need, have hired themselves out for bread, that Isaiah, must earn their bread in
order to appease their hunger. On the other hand, the hungry “cease” (לוּ ֵדָ)ח either
“to be hungry,” or, “to work for bread.” The latter is preferable on account of the
contrast with “hire themselves out for bread” in the first clause; so Herder (“they
now have holiday”) and Bunsen (“they no longer need work for bread”). Clericus:
“Hannah here rightly attributes to divine providence what the heathen wrongly
attribute to fortune, of whose instabilitv they speak ad nauseam.” See J. Stobזi,
florileg. tit. 105[FN17] The דַﬠ [“till,” rendered in Eng. A.V. “so that”] is taken by
some expositors in the sense “even” [Germ. sogar]. Clericus explains it as a sort of
ellipsis “as if she said that all experienced the vicissitudes of human affairs, even to
the barren woman, who,” etc. Similarly Keil explains it as a brachylogy: “it goes so
far that”..… This adverbial construction, with the presupposed logical zeugma,
would have as much in its favor as the view of Thenius, who asks: “Might not דַﬠ be
an adverb: the long barren?” But there are passages in which דַ,ﬠ from its sense of
continuance, must be taken simply as a conjunction, meaning “in that or while”
( Jonah 4:2; Job 1:18; 1 Samuel 14:19); in the two last passages it is followed as here
by ְו [“and”], and introduces an occurrence contemporaneously with which, or
following on which, something else occurred. Here then: “while the barren bears
seven.” “Seven children” Isaiah, according to Ruth 4:15, the “complete number of
58](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-58-320.jpg)
![the divine blessing in children” (Keil). Comp. Psalm 113:9 : “he makes the barren
woman dwell in the house, the joyful mother of children.” [Erdmann translates: “he
makes the barren woman of the house dwell as a joyful mother of children.”—Tr.]
[ Psalm 113:7-9 resembles 1 Samuel 2:5; 1 Samuel 2:7-8 so closely as to suggest an
imitation. It would be very natural in a later writer, in composing a Psalm
celebrating Jehovah’s majesty and power, to take such general expressions from a
well-known Song of Solomon, which we may suppose was committed to writing by
Hannah herself, and through Samuel transmitted to the prophetic students, among
whom, no doubt, were many psalmists. The Book of “Samuel” itself was probably in
circulation soon after Rehoboam’s time.—Tr.] “And she who had many children
languishes away.” Clericus remarks: “being exhausted before the end of the, usual
bearing-time of women, and perhaps left solitary by the death of her children.” As
to this last point comp. Jeremiah 15:9.[FN18] [The view held by some that in
Hannah’s barrenness and subsequent fruitfulness there is a mystical or typical
meaning, deserves consideration. It is advocated by Jerome, Augustine, Patrick,
Gill, Wordsworth, and the Bib. Comm. Hannah is said to be the type of the
Christian Church, at first barren and reviled, afterwards fruitful and rejoicing. As
to such a typical character we must be guided, not by outward resemblances, but by
fixed principles of biblical interpretation. If Hannah’s late fruitfulness is typical, it
must be because it sets forth a spiritual element of the spiritual kingdom of God.
These facts may guide us to a decision: 1) God’s relation to His people is set forth
under the figure of marriage; He is the husband, His people the wife ( Isaiah 54;
Jeremiah 3; Hosea 1-3); 2) Isaiah ( 1 Samuel 54:1) describes God’s spiritual people
as barren, yet with the promise of many children; 3) Paul ( Galatians 4:27) quotes
this passage of Isaiah, refers it to the Church of Christ as distinguished from the
Jewish dispensation, and declares that this antithesis is given in Sarah and Hagar.
The barren Sarah is the new dispensation, the fruitful Hagar the old. Besides Sarah,
other barren women in the Bible become the mothers of remarkable sons: Rebecca,
Rachel, Samson’s mother, Hannah, Elizabeth. Are these all typical of the new
dispensation or the Church of Christ? The answer is to be found in Paul’s treatment
of Sarah’s history. What he declares Isaiah, that Sarah is the mother of the child of
promise, while Hagar’s child was the product of natural fruitfulness. Thus Sarah
sets forth the dispensation which is based on promise or free grace and faith; Hagar
represents the dispensation of works. Paul quotes Isaiah 54:1, to show simply that
the spiritual Jerusalem, the Church of Christ, is our mother. Throughout his
argument it is the spiritual element of promise and faith on which Sarah’s typical
position is based. Only, therefore, where we can show such spiritual element are we
justified in supposing a typical character. There must be involved the truth that the
origination and maintenance of God’s people depend on His promise and not on
human strength. This is not necessarily involved in the history of every barren
59](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-59-320.jpg)
![woman who becomes fruitful—certainly not in that of Rachel, probably in that of
Rebecca, probably not in the others. These histories teach indeed that fruitfulness is
the gift of God; and, as an encouragement to faith, He has in some instances granted
to the barren to be the mothers of sons to whom He has assigned important
positions in the development of His kingdom. But this fact does not in itself show
that these mothers sustained to the kingdom of God the relation which Sarah
sustained. Hannah seems to be simply a pious mother whose prayer for a Song of
Solomon, contrary to human probabilities, is granted.—Tr.].
1Sa_2:5-8
ים ִע ֵב ְשׂ are the rich and well to do; these would become so poor as to be obliged to hire
themselves out for bread. ל ֵד ָ,ח to cease to be what they were before. The use of דַע as a
conjunction, in the sense of “yea” or “in fact,” may be explained as an elliptical
expression, signifying “it comes to this, that.” “Seven children” are mentioned as the full
number of the divine blessing in children (see Rth_4:15). “The mother of many children”
pines away, because she has lost all her sons, and with them her support in her old age
(see Jer_15:9). This comes from the Lord, who kills, etc. (cf. Deu_32:39). The words of
1Sa_2:6 are figurative. God hurls down into death and the danger of death, and also
rescues therefrom (see Psa_30:3-4). The first three clauses of 1Sa_2:8 are repeated
verbatim in Psa_113:7-8. Dust and the dunghill are figures used to denote the deepest
degradation and ignominy. The antithesis to this is, sitting upon the chair or throne of
glory, the seat occupied by noble princes. The Lord does all this, for He is the creator and
upholder of the world. The pillars (י ֵקֻצ ְ,מ from צוּק = קַָצי) of the earth are the Lord's;
i.e., they were created or set up by Him, and by Him they are sustained. Now as Jehovah,
the God of Israel, the Holy One, governs the world with His almighty power, the
righteous have nothing to fear. With this thought the last strophe of the song begins:
6
“The Lord brings death and makes alive;
he brings down to the grave and raises up.
60](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-60-320.jpg)
![(Zechariah 13:9), ‘And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine
them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried; they shall call on my
name, and I will hear them.’ It is of them Hannah said (1 Samuel 2:6), ‘The Lord
killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to hell, and bringeth up.’”—Treatise
Bosh Hashanah, fol. 16, Colossians 2.
HAWKER, "(6) The LORD killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to the
grave, and bringeth up. (7) The LORD maketh poor, and maketh rich: he bringeth
low, and lifteth up. (8) He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the
beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the
throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the LORD'S, and he hath set the
world upon them.
These are all so many beautiful repetitions of the same important doctrine, in
asserting God's sovereignty over all things, both in the kingdoms of providence, and
of grace. And it is sweet when the heart finds a cordial assent, in all the
circumstances of our own warfare. Reader! what can afford more solid joy, than the
contemplation of the Lord Jesus, in the character which John saw him in, and which
corresponds to what is here said: He hath the keys of hell and death. Revelation
1:18.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:6. This Keil connects with the preceding, explaining: This
comes from the Lord, who kills, etc. But here, as in the remaining members of the
Song of Solomon, we must suppose a logical asyndeton. The contrast of death and
life, killing and making alive demands even a wider extension of these conceptions
than is indicated in the last clause of 1 Samuel 2:5. Killing denotes (with a departure
from the ordinary sense) bringing into the extremest misfortune and suffering,
which oppresses the soul like the gloom of death, or brings it near to death—making
alive is extricating from deadly sorrow and introducing into safety and joy. This is
confirmed by the second member: “He brings down to Sheol and brings up.” The
same contrast is found in Deuteronomy 32:39, “I kill and I make alive; I wound and
I heal;” Psalm 30:4 (3), “Thou hast brought up my soul from Sheol, Thou hast made
me alive,” etc.; Psalm 71:20, “Thou, who hast showed us great and sore trouble, wilt
quicken us again, and wilt bring us up again from the depths of the earth,” [Eng. A.
V. reads, with Qeri, me; Kethib, us.—Tr.]. Psalm 86:13 : “Great is Thy mercy
towards me, and Thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest Sheol,” (comp. Job
5:18, and Psalm 88:4-6). So also in Psalm 66:9, misfortune is conceived of as death,
salvation as revival. Calvin: “in the word ‘death’ Hannah properly embraces
everything injurious, and whatever leads step by step to death, as, on the other
63](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-63-320.jpg)
![hand, the word ‘life’ includes everything happy and prosperous, and whatever can
make a fortunate man contented with his lot.” [As is apparent from the above
exposition, there is no reference in this verse to the doctrine of the resurrection. The
word אוֹל ְשּׁ “Sheol,” improperly rendered in Eng. A. V. “hell” and “the grave,”
means “the underworld,” (Erdmann, the same, “unterwelt”), the gloomy abode of
all the dead, conceived of by the Hebrews as the negation of all earthly activity. It
thus became an image of darkness and suffering, only here and there illumined and
soothed (as in Psalm 16) by the conviction that God’s love would maintain and
develop into fulness of joy the life which He had bestowed on His servants.—The
word is usually supposed to mean a “hole,” “cleft” like, Eng. hell (=“hole,”
“hollow,” German hצlle.—Tr.].
PETT 6-8, "This now turns her thoughts to YHWH’s overall sovereignty both in life
and death, and in regard to wealth and poverty. She is very much aware of this
because of the life that God has given her in her son. There is no reference here to
resurrection. The thought is rather that life and death are in His hands. Some die,
others are ‘given life’, or revive after illness. But all depend on YHWH. Some are
brought down to the grave world (Sheol), others are raised up from their beds of
sickness. And in the same way it is He Who makes men poor or rich, Who brings
men low, or raises them up. This indeed is what has happened to her, She herself
feels that she has been lifted out of a living death, and has been made rich and
exalted in her bearing of a son.
For she has come by it to recognise that YHWH is the One Who lifts the poor and
needy from the dust and from the dunghill (the place of misery and humiliation. See
Isaiah 47:1; Lamentations 4:5), and makes them enjoy the privilege of being princes,
and of sitting on a glorious throne (a total contrast to the dust and the dunghill). No
doubt at that moment she felt that she, who had spiritually been mourning on a
dunghill, was indeed now enthroned in glory at her joy over Samuel’s birth. The
picture in general is, of course, idealistic, although examples can certainly be found
from history. Perhaps Jephthah sprang to mind. And it would certainly be true of
David. But she has in mind what will happen ultimately when the ideal king who
has been promised has come. And all this will be so because YHWH controls
creation itself and is Lord over it all. Its very continuance is dependent on His
provision, as is demonstrated by the fact that ‘the pillars of the earth are YHWH’s,
and He has set the world upon them’. This vivid description pictures the world as
being like a house or temple (see Judges 16:26). If He were to pull the pillars away
the house would come crashing down.
64](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-64-320.jpg)
![fates of men: “for the pillars of the earth are Jehovah’s, and He hath set the earth
upon them.”[FN19] The control and government of God here portrayed is founded
on the fact that He is the creator and sustainer of the earth, and therefore by His
omnipotence exercises unrestricted rule over the earth-world. Here we have clear
and plain the highest point of view, from which all that is said from 1 Samuel 2:4 on
is to be looked at: the all-embracing power of the Lord. Clericus: “Hannah,
therefore, means to say that God easily effects any change in human affairs, since
He is creator and lord of the earth itself.”
8
He raises the poor from the dust
and lifts the needy from the ash heap;
he seats them with princes
and has them inherit a throne of honor.
“For the foundations of the earth are the Lord’s;
on them he has set the world.
CLARKE, "To set them among princes - There have been many cases where, in the course
of God’s providence, a person has been raised from the lowest and most abject estate to the
highest; from the plough to the imperial dignity: from the dungeon to the throne; from the
dunghill to nobility. The story of Cincinnatus is well known; so is that of the patriarch Joseph;
but there is one not less in point, that of Roushen Akhter, who was brought out of a dungeon, and
exalted to the throne of Hindustan. On this circumstance the following elegant couplet was
made: -
67](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-67-320.jpg)
![author of the Observations remarks, that dried dung being usually burnt in the
East, heaps of this sort of turf were commonly laid up in their cottages. Hence he
thinks the present expression is elucidated; "He raiseth a beggar from a dunghill,
out of a cottage, that is, in which heaps of dried dung are piled up for fuel, as some
of the worst accommodated of the poor practise with respect to the turf of this
country: or rather, he raiseth up a poor exile, forced to beg his bread in his
wanderings, and to lodge in some out-house where dung is laid up, out of the city, in
order to set him on the throne of a royal palace, built in the midst of it." When
Hannah says, that the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, she urges a strong reason
in proof of all she had advanced; namely, that GOD, being the founder, supporter,
and upholder of the earth itself, could certainly do with the inhabitants of it as he
pleased. The true meaning of the word rendered pillars, מצקי metzukei, is somewhat
doubtful. It seems to express those grand instruments, whatever they be, of
supporting and retaining in its orbit the globe of the earth. But did it signify pillars,
as we have rendered it, every one sees that the word must be understood in a
figurative sense.
ELLICOTT, " (8) The pillars of the earth.—And the gracious All-Ruler does these
things, for He is at once Creator and Upholder of the universe. The words of these
Divine songs which treat of cosmogony are such as would be understood in the
childhood of peoples. The quiet thinker, however, is tempted to ask whether after
3,000 or 4,000 years, now, with the light of modern science shining round us, we
have made much real progress in our knowledge of the genesis and government of
the universe.
The pillars.—Or columns—Jerome, in the Vulgate, translates this unusual word by
“hinges”—cardines terrœ.
Gesenius prefers the rendering “foundations.” On the whole, the word used in the
English Version, “pillars,” is the best.
LANGE, "4. The Song culminates ( 1 Samuel 2:9-10) in the prophetic testimony to
the omnipotent rule of the holy God in the manifestation of His justice towards the
godly and the ungodly, and in conducting His kingdom to glorious victory over the
world, a) To the godly the Lord will grant His protection and salvation, and will
guard them from misfortune, comp. Psalm 56:13 (14): “Wilt Thou not deliver my
feet from falling, that I may walk before God in the light of life [Germ, as Eng. A.
V.: ‘the living’]?” So Psalm 116:8; Psalm 121:3; “he suffers not thy foot to fall.” The
70](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-70-320.jpg)
![tottering [or falling] of the feet is not to be taken here in an ethical sense; the
preservation of the feet from slipping, tottering, stumbling, often denotes
deliverance from long-continued misfortune and suffering, so Psalm 15:5; Psalm
55:23; Psalm 66:9. “His saints” points to the intimate association between God and
His people, and its correlative is “my God,” “our God.” b) The godless will be the
objects of His punitive justice. They will perish in darkness. The darkness is the
symbol of misfortune and misery, as light of safety and life, Job 15:22; Psalm
107:14. Godlessness is voluntary remoteness from the light of salvation, which God
sheds abroad; and so its walking in darkness must end in destruction. For, not by
strength, that Isaiah, by his own strength, shall a man prevail; “shall a man be
strong” (ישׁ ִר־אַבּ ְגִ)י is an allusion perhaps to the “mighty men” )ים ִרֹבּ ִג ) in 1 Samuel
2:4. The godless rely on their own strength with which to help themselves in the
darkness. But it is universally true that “we do nothing by our own strength.” Psalm
33:16-17. He who leans on his own strength (which cannot be without turning away
from the Lord, who alone can help) will receive his just reward, he will perish in
darkness. Clericus: “No one can avoid calamity by his own strength, unhelped by
divine providence.”—Human weakness is here specially brought out by the order of
the words; on man [Heb. ישׁ ִא last word in 1 Samuel 2:9] follows immediately
Jehovah [in the Hebrews, first word in 1 Samuel 2:10], which further stands as
absolute subject (comp. Psalm 11:4) and thus in sharper contrast. As “prevail” in 1
Samuel 2:9 alludes to 1 Samuel 2:4, so here the “broken” to the “broken” in that
verse.—The thought, that God’s justice is shown in the punishment of the godless, is
first very strongly and sharply expressed by the immediate collocation of the two
verbs after Jehovah: “broken are his opposers,”[FN20] and then illustrated by the
allusion to a judicial process which ends with the carrying out of the sentence. The
ungodly strive with God as in a judicial contest (יוָיב ִר ְמ [Qeri]), but they are
confounded in the presence of the process of law to which the Lord comes. The
thunder, the sign of His fear-inspiring and destructive power, is the announcement
of His proximity lo the tribunal. The “judge” )ין ִָדי ) denotes the holding of the court.
The judicial work of God is the outflow of His holiness, justice and almightiness,
which three attributes of God have been celebrated up to this point. The object of
the judicial interposition of God is not only the members of the chosen people, but
the ends of the earth, that Isaiah, all peoples, the whole world. As before the whole
earthly creation, founded and maintained by God’s power, was brought before us in
order to establish God’s almighty control over the earth, so here our view is
extended from punitive justice as it shows itself in the sphere of God’s people to
God’s judgment as it stretches over the whole earth, to the all-embracing world-
judgment. The prophetic view often rises to this universality of God’s judicial
control as the judge of the whole world ( Genesis 18:25), which corresponds to the
idea of the universal salvation embracing all the nations of the earth; Song of
71](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-71-320.jpg)
![priest's servant would come, while the meat was boiling, with a three-pronged fork
in his hand, and he would thrust it into the pan, or kettle, or cauldron, or pot; all
that the fork brought up the priest would take for himself. So they did at Shiloh to
all the Israelites who came there. Moreover, before the fat was burned, the priest's
servant would come and say to the man who was sacrificing, "Give meat for the
priest to roast; for he will not accept boiled meat from you, but raw." And if the
man said to him, "Let them burn the fat first, and then take as much as you wish,"
he would say, "No, you must give it now; and if not, I will take it by force." Thus,
the sin of the young men was very great in the sight of the Lord, for the men treated
the offering of the Lord with contempt.
"Samuel was ministering before the Lord, a boy girded with a linen ephod. And his
mother used to make for him a little robe and take it to him each year, when she
went up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice. Then Eli would bless
Elkanah and his wife, and say, "The Lord give you children by this woman for the
loan which she lent to the Lord"; so then they would return to their home."
The Law of Moses defined exactly what was to be the priest's portion of every peace
offering (Leviticus 7:31-35), as it also gave express directions about the burning of
the fat (Leviticus 7:23-25,31). It was therefore a gross act of lawlessness and
disobedience on the part of Hophni and Phinehas to take more than the Law
allowed them. Evidence is afforded by this passage of the existence of the Levitical
Law (the Pentateuch) at this time.[15]
It is perfectly evident here that, "The people were well acquainted with the words of
the Law of Moses, and were indignant because the priests, its proper guardians, did
not obey them."[16]
The children of Israel in the passages just cited were forbidden, absolutely, to eat
the fat of animals. Furthermore, the priests were restricted to the breast and the
thigh of animals sacrificed, and the sons of Eli brazenly disobeyed all these
prohibitions. They did not heed the admonition that violators would be "cut off"
from among God's people.
90](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-90-320.jpg)
!["A boy girded with a linen ephod." "This ephod which Samuel wore was probably
like that worn by the Levites, for that of the priests was richer both in material and
color."[17]
There are a number of special interests in this passage. Hannah's return to the
tabernacle each year with a little robe for Samuel is a touching event. She loved her
son and cherished these annual visits.
Also, Eli was evidently impressed and thankful for the service provided by the
young Samuel, and, as a consequence of his appreciation, he customarily blessed
Elkanah and Hannah with a prayer that God would give other children to Hannah,
which, of course, God surely did.
Of great interest is the refusal of Eli to do anything about his reprobate sons and
their illegal, wicked and immoral behavior in the sacred precincts of the tabernacle
itself. Oh yes, we learn a little later that he "rebuked them," but that was by no
means the type of treatment that those evil men deserved.
PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:11
The child did minister. Left by his parents at Shiloh, Samuel ministered unto the
Lord; that is, certain duties were allotted him to perform suited to his age; but few
at first, when he was but three years old, but increasing in importance as time went
on; for the words refer to the whole period of his service, until Eli's death. At first
Samuel would be but a scholar, for, as we have mentioned on 1 Samuel 1:21, there
were, no doubt, regulations for the training of children devoted to the service of the
sanctuary. The peculiarity about Samuel was that he was devoted for life, for
possibly it was a not uncommon practice for young persons to receive some training
at Shiloh; just as we find that Samuel himself subsequently gathered youths round
him at Naioth in Ramah for educational purposes. Learning practically was
confined to the priesthood, and we can scarcely imagine that the knowledge which
Phinehas and the family of Aaron brought with them out of Egypt would be allowed
to perish. Samuel certainly had himself received careful instruction (see on 1 Samuel
10:25), and this could scarcely have happened if the training of young persons had
not been part of the priests' duties at Shiloh. This then explains why Samuel was
91](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-91-320.jpg)
![positions of great power in society." [Note: Payne, p. 18.]
"Their sin was particularly egregious since they were supposed to be teaching
morality and representing the people of God (1 Samuel 2:22-25; cf. 2 Chronicles
17:7-9)." [Note: Heater, p. 120.]
Verses 11-36
B. The Contrast between Samuel and Eli's Sons 2:11-36
Samuel's innocence and the godlessness of Eli's sons contrast strongly in this
pericope (section of text). Samuel would succeed and become a channel of God's
blessing. Eli's sons would fail, would become a source of frustration to Eli and the
Israelites, and would ultimately perish.
"The section [1 Samuel 2:11 to 1 Samuel 4:1] poignantly illustrates the theme of
'Hannah's Song' as it is epitomized in 1 Samuel 2:7 b, 'he brings low, and also
exalts'. For it is under the auspices of God who has determined the ruin of Hophni
and Phinehas that Samuel makes his mark." [Note: Robert P. Gordon, I & II
Samuel: A Commentary, p. 81.]
LANGE, "Samuel’s Service before the Lord in Contrast with the Abominations of
the Degenerate Priesthood in the House of Eli
1 Samuel 2:11-26
I. The conduct of the sons of Eli In contrast with Samuel, the “servant of the Lord.”
Vers.‚ 11–17.
11And Elkanah went to Ramah to his house. And the child did minister
[ministered12] unto the Lord [Jehovah] before Eli the priest. Now [And] the sons of
93](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-93-320.jpg)
![Eli 13 were sons of Belial [wicked men]; they knew not the Lord [Jehovah].
And[FN22] the priest’s custom [the custom of the priests] with the people was that,
when any man offered sacrifice, the priest’s servant came, while the flesh was in
seething, with 14 a[FN23] flesh-hook of three teeth in his hand; [,] And he (om. he)
struck it into the pan, or kettle, or cauldron or pot; all that the flesh-hook brought
up the priest took for himself.[FN24] So they did in Shiloh unto all the Israelites that
came thither 15 Also [Even] before they burnt the fat, the priest’s servant came, and
said to the man that sacrificed, Give flesh to roast for the priest; for he will not have
sodden 16 flesh of thee, but raw. And if any [the] man said unto him, Let them not
fail to burn[FN25] the fat presently, and then take as much as thy soul desireth; [,]
then he would answer [say] him. [om. him[FN26]], Nay, but thou shalt give it me
[om. me] now; and if not, I will take it by force. Wherefore [And] the sin of the
young men 17 was very great before the Lord [Jehovah]; for men abhorred the
offering of the Lord [Jehovah].
II. Samuel as minister before the Lord. 1 Samuel 2:18-21
18But [And] Samuel ministered before the Lord [Jehovah], being [om. being] a 19
child, girded with a linen ephod. Moreover [And] his mother made him a little coat
[tunic], and brought it to him from year to year, when she came up with her 20
husband to offer the yearly sacrifice. And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife, and
said, The Lord [Jehovah] give thee seed of this woman for the loan which is lent to
the Lord [in place of the gift which was asked for Jehovah[FN27]]. And they went
unto their own home [to his[FN28] place]. And the Lord [Jehovah] visited Hannah,
so that [and] she conceived, and bare three sons and two daughters. And the child
Samuel grew before the Lord [Jehovah].
III. Eli’s conduct towards his worthless sons. 1 Samuel 2:22-26
22Now [And] Eli was very old, and [ins. he] heard all that his sons did unto all
Israel, and how [that] they lay with the women that assembled [served[FN29]] at the
23 door of the tabernacle of the congregation [meeting (or assembly)]. And he said
unto them, Why do ye such things? for I hear of your evil dealings [deeds]
by24[from] all this people. Nay, my sons; for it is no good report that I hear; ye 25
94](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-94-320.jpg)
![make the Lord’s people [Jehovah’s people are made] to transgress. If one man sin
against another [If a man sin against a man], the judge [God[FN30]] shall
judge[FN31] him; but if a man sin against the Lord [Jehovah], who shall intreat10
for him ? Notwithstanding [And] they hearkened not unto the voice of their father,
because 26 the Lord would slay them [for it was Jehovah’s will to slay them]. And
the child Samuel grew on and was in favour [grew in stature and favour[FN32]]
both with the Lord [Jehovah] and also [om. also] with men.
LANGE, "1. 1 Samuel 2:11-16. In 1 Samuel 2:11 the Sept. again clearly shows the
effort to combine explanations with the translation of the Heb. text, rendering:
“ and they left him there, and they went away.” [The Vat. MS. reads in both
instances “she” instead of “they.”—Tr.]. There is the less need to change the Heb.
text to accord with this, because, as Bצttcher (ubi sup. p69) rightly remarks, “the
Elkanah” of the former is quite sufficient, since this name would suggest to every
reader Elkanah and his household, and the only one that remained behind is
mentioned immediately afterwards. From 1 Samuel 1:21 Elkanah can be thought of
only together “with his whole house.”—The child “was ministering to the Lord,” or
“serving the Lord.” These words express the whole work which the growing boy
Samuel, conformably to his consecration, had to perform, certain duties connected
with the service of God being laid upon him. “Before Eli,” that Isaiah, under his
supervision, and according to his appointment. 1 Samuel 2:12. The sons of Eli were
sons of worthlessness;[FN33] their character and conduct forms the sharpest
contrast with what they ought to have been before the whole people as highest in
position, as children of the High-priestly House. Observe the sharp asyndeton in this
short sentence: they knew not the Lord, that Isaiah, they did not live in the fear of
the Lord, they did not trouble themselves about Him; comp. Job 18:21. This
godlessness and irreligiousness is the source of their moral worthlessness, which is
afterwards described. The two together give the religious-moral characteristics of
Eli’s sons.
K&D, "Samuel the servant of the Lord under Eli. Ungodliness of the sons of Eli. -
1Sa_2:11 forms the transition to what follows. After Hannah's psalm of thanksgiving,
Elkanah went back with his family to his home at Ramah, and the boy (Samuel) was
serving, i.e., ministered to the Lord, in the presence of Eli the priest. The fact that
nothing is said about Elkanah's wives going with him, does not warrant the
interpretation given by Thenius, that Elkanah went home alone. It was taken for granted
that his wives went with him, according to 1Sa_1:21 (“all his house”). ָהוֹחְת־י ֶא ת ֵרֵ,שׁ
which signifies literally, both here and in 1Sa_3:1, to serve the Lord, and which is used
interchangeably with יי ֵינ ְת־פּ ֶא ת ֵרֵשׁ (1Sa_2:18), to serve in the presence of the Lord, is
used to denote the duties performed both by priests and Levites in connection with the
95](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-95-320.jpg)
![dogs that can never have enough, Isa_56:11. [1.] They robbed the offerers, and seized
for themselves some of their part of the sacrifice of the peace-offerings. The priests had
for their share the wave-breast and the heave shoulder (Lev_7:34), but these did not
content them; when the flesh was boiling for the offerer to feast upon religiously with his
friends, they sent a servant with a flesh-hook of three teeth, a trident, and that must be
stuck into the pot, and whatever that brought up the priest must have (1Sa_2:13, 1Sa_
2:14), and the people, out of their great veneration, suffered this to grow into a custom,
so that after awhile prescription was pleaded for this manifest wrong. [2.] They stepped
in before God himself, and encroached upon his right too. As if it were a small thing to
weary men, they wearied my God also, Isa_7:13. Be it observed, to the honour of Israel,
that though the people tamely yielded to their unwarrantable demands from them, yet
they were very solicitous that God should not be robbed: Let them not fail to burn the fat
presently, 1Sa_2:16. Let the altar have its due, for that is the main matter. Unless God
have the fat, they can feast with little comfort upon the flesh. It was a shame that the
priests should need to be thus admonished by the people of their duty; but they regarded
not the admonition. The priest will be served first, and will take what he thinks fit of the
fat too, for he is weary of boiled meat, he must have roast, and, in order to that, they
must give it to him raw; and if the offerer dispute it, though not in his own favour (let
the priest take what he pleases of his part) but in favour of the altar (let them be sure to
burn the fat first), even the priest's servant had grown so very imperious that he would
either have it now or take it by force, than which there could not be a greater affront to
God nor a greater abuse to the people. The effect was, First, That God was displeased:
The sin of the young men was very great before the Lord, 1Sa_2:17. Nothing is more
provoking to God than the profanation of sacred things, and men serving their lusts with
the offerings of the Lord. Secondly, That religion suffered by it: Men abhorred the
offerings of the Lord. All good men abhorred their management of the offerings, and too
many insensibly fell into a contempt of the offerings themselves for their sakes. It was
the people's sin to think the worse of God's institutions, but it was the much greater sin
of the priests that gave them occasion to do so. Nothing brings a greater reproach upon
religion than ministers' covetousness, sensuality, and imperiousness. In the midst of this
sad story comes in the repeated mention of Samuel's devotion. But Samuel ministered
before the Lord, as an instance of the power of God's grace, in preserving him pure and
pious in the midst of this wicked crew; and this helped to keep up the sinking credit of
the sanctuary in the minds of the people, who, when they had said all they could against
Eli's sons, could not but admire Samuel's seriousness, and speak well of religion for his
sake.
JAMISON, "the priests’ custom with the people — When persons wished to
present a sacrifice of peace offering on the altar, the offering was brought in the first
instance to the priest, and as the Lord’s part was burnt, the parts appropriated
respectively to the priests and offerers were to be sodden. But Eli’s sons, unsatisfied with
the breast and shoulder, which were the perquisites appointed to them by the divine law
(Exo_29:27; Lev_7:31, Lev_7:32), not only claimed part of the offerer’s share, but
rapaciously seized them previous to the sacred ceremony of heaving or waving (see on
Lev_7:29); and moreover they committed the additional injustice of taking up with their
fork those portions which they preferred, while still raw. Pious people revolted at such
rapacious and profane encroachments on the dues of the altar, as well as what should
have gone to constitute the family and social feast of the offerer. The truth is, the priests
115](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-115-320.jpg)
![having become haughty and unwilling in many instances to accept invitations to those
feasts, presents of meat were sent to them; and this, though done in courtesy at first,
being, in course of time, established into a right, gave rise to all the rapacious keenness
of Eli’s sons.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:13. When any man offered sacrifice — Brought his peace-
offerings to be offered at the altar. While the flesh was in seething — Or boiling. As
the Lord’s part of the peace-offerings was burned upon the altar, so the priests’ and
offerers’ parts were to be boiled. And when the temple was built, there were certain
rooms in the court of the people, wherein they had liberty to boil the flesh, in order
that they might feast with God at his own house. And the like rooms, no doubt, there
were in the outward court of the tabernacle.
HAWKER, "(13) And the priests' custom with the people was, that, when any man
offered sacrifice, the priest's servant came, while the flesh was in seething, with a
fleshhook of three teeth in his hand; (14) And he struck it into the pan, or kettle, or
caldron, or pot; all that the fleshhook brought up the priest took for himself. So they
did in Shiloh unto all the Israelites that came thither. (15) Also before they burnt the
fat, the priest's servant came, and said to the man that sacrificed, Give flesh to roast
for the priest; for he will not have sodden flesh of thee, but raw. (16) And if any man
said unto him, Let them not fail to burn the fat presently, and then take as much as
thy soul desireth; then he would answer him, Nay; but thou shalt give it me now:
and if not, I will take it by force. (17) Wherefore the sin of the young men was very
great before the LORD: for men abhorred the offering of the LORD.
I include all these verses within one point of view, and a sad view they exhibit of the
horrible state of the sons of Eli in their conduct before the Lord. Alas, alas! what a
wretched mind must these young men have possessed, by which their sin was not
only great before the Lord, but even the minds of the people were led away thereby
to abhor the offering of the Lord. I would have the Reader observe, how the Lord
speaks of such awful characters, Malachi 2:8-9.
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:13. This is not to be rendered: “And the custom of the priests
with the people was this”—this would certainly require simply טַפּ ְשׁ ִ[מFN34] ֶחז ְו
without יםֲִנהֹכַּה [“this is the custom” without “ the priests”], comp. Genesis 11:6
(Bצttcher); nor is it: “the right (that Isaiah, the assumed right) of the priests in
respect to the people was as follows” (Keil), for טַפּ ְשׁ ִמ [“right”] alone cannot be so
understood; but the words are to be connected with the preceding: they troubled
116](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-116-320.jpg)
![themselves not about God, nor about the real, true right of the priests in respect to
the people, that Isaiah, “about what was the legal due of the priests from the people”
(Thenius).
[The construction of this difficult clause adopted by Erdmann (with Vulg, Cahen,
Wellhausen, Thenius, and perhaps Sept.) is open to grave objections. The reply to
Keil is correct; טָפּ ְשׁ ִמ cannot well mean “assumed right.” The objection to Bצttcher’s
translation (where read םָטָפּ ְשׁ ִמ ֶהז instead of Erdmann’s טַפּ ְשׁ ִמ ֶהז) is forcible in so far
as we should expect ְהז to introduce the clause (comp. Deuteronomy 18:3); but the
possibility of the omission of the pronoun, and of an apposition of the two clauses
must be admitted. To the translation of מ׳ by “legal right” Wellhausen properly
objects that the ַםגּ (even) in 1 Samuel 2:15 introduces a graver outrage, and
therefore the proceeding described in 1 Samuel 2:13 must be illegal.—But against
Erdmann’s rendering it is to be said that the meaning assigned to ידע (know)
“trouble one’s-self about” is rare and difficult; it is found only in poetical passages.
The phrase “to know the Lord” occurs, and always in the sense of intimate
sympathetic apprehension; but this sense will not suit the .מ׳ Moreover, if מ׳ here
means “right” we should expect the prep. ת ֵא ֵ“מfrom” (as Deuteronomy 18:3) instead
of ת ֵא “ with ” the latter must be retained here, though the former is read in9 MSS.
and in LXX, Syr, Chald. Further, the narrative Isaiah, in this construction,
introduced very abruptly (“when any Prayer of Manasseh, etc.” .(טָפּ ְשׁ ִמ means not
only “right,” but also “ custom, manner;” see 2 Kings 11:14; Judges 13:12. The
“custom” here described was not the legal right, but was in force under, apparently
introduced by, the sons of Eli, the priests )הכ׳(;1 Samuel 2:13 details one imposition
of the priests, and a more serious imposition is properly introduced ( 1 Samuel 2:15)
by “even” )ַםגּ ).—We retain, therefore, the rendering of Eng. A. V. (with Philippson,
Bib. Comm, and others).—Tr.].
Then follows the statement of the priests’ legal right.—The connection required that
the people’s part in the offering should now be distinctly set forth, in order to put
the unseemly conduct of Eli’s sons in its true light. Therefore the participle
“sacrificing” in connection with the indefinite subject “every Prayer of Manasseh,”
stands first in absolute construction, like the Lat. Abl. absolute (comp. Gesen. § 145,
2, Rem.), = “when any man offered, then came, etc.” Ewald, § 341 e.: “ If the subject
of the circumstantial sentence is wholly undefined, then the mere combination of the
participle with the subject suffices to express a possible case ( Genesis 4:15).” Here
is vividly portrayed the grasping selfish conduct of the priests in the preparation of
117](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-117-320.jpg)
![the sacrificial meal after the offering was presented, which had already become the
rule (“so they did to all the Israelites”.(—But still further. 1 Samuel 2:15. Even
before the offering, before (in accordance with the law, Leviticus 3:3-5) the fat was
burned that it might be offered to the Lord as the best portion, they committed a
robbery on the meat, which they wanted only יַ,ה that Isaiah, raw, fresh, full of juice
and strength, in order to roast it. [Bib. Comm. points out that 1 Samuel 15-2:13
repeat the Language of the Law, and thus give evidence to its existence. See
Leviticus 35-7:31 ; Leviticus 25-7:23 ; Leviticus 7:31; Leviticus 17:5; also Exodus
29:28; Deuteronomy 18:3. Philippson: “Roast was common in heathen sacrifices,
and even now the Orientals do not like to eat boiled meat.”—Tr.]. 1 Samuel 2:16.
The remonstrance of the offerer based on the legal regulation, of which they should
be the guardians, is set aside. יּוֹםַכּ = “at this time, now,” as in Genesis 25:31; 1 Kings
22:5. The Qeri “not” is preferable to the Kethib “to him:” “no, but now thou shalt
give it;” threats were combined with violent seizure. Rude force was added to
lawlessness.
1 Samuel 2:17. The “young men ” are not the servants of the priests (Keil) but the
priests themselves, the sons of Eli. Their arbitrary conduct was “a very great sin
before the Lord,” because the fat burned on the altar pertained to the Lord, and
their legal portion of the sacrifice-meat fell to them only after the burning of the fat.
What made their sin so great was the fact that they brought the offerings into
contempt with the people, in so far as the wicked conduct of the priests took away in
the eyes of the people their true significance as offerings to the Lord. Minchah (הָחְנ ִ)מ
“means here not the meat-offering as the adjunct to the bloody offerings, but the
sacrificial gift in general as an offering to the Lord” (Keil). In the succeeding
narrative Samuel’s “service before the Lord” is contrasted with this wicked conduct
of Eli’s sons in relation to the offering.
PETT, "1 Samuel 2:13-14
‘And the custom of the priests with the people was, that, when any man offered
sacrifice, the priest’s servant came, while the flesh was boiling, with a flesh-hook of
three teeth in his hand, and he struck it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot.
All that the flesh-hook brought up the priest took for himself. So they did in Shiloh
to all the Israelites who came there.’
118](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-118-320.jpg)
![their management of the offerings, and too many insensibly fell into a contempt of the
offerings themselves for their sakes. It was the people's sin to think the worse of God's
institutions, but it was the much greater sin of the priests that gave them occasion to do
so. Nothing brings a greater reproach upon religion than ministers' covetousness,
sensuality, and imperiousness. In the midst of this sad story comes in the repeated
mention of Samuel's devotion. But Samuel ministered before the Lord, as an instance of
the power of God's grace, in preserving him pure and pious in the midst of this wicked
crew; and this helped to keep up the sinking credit of the sanctuary in the minds of the
people, who, when they had said all they could against Eli's sons, could not but admire
Samuel's seriousness, and speak well of religion for his sake.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:16-17. Nay, but thou shalt give it me now, &c. — This was
the very height of haughty impiety. That such submissive language did not prevail
with them to have so much respect for God, as to permit his portion to be presented
to him in the first place, especially as they offered to the priest more than his share
afterward, manifested excessive profaneness and contempt of things sacred. To what
pitch of wickedness may not a man arrive who has shaken off the fear of God, and
all sense of his presence and power! Men abhorred the offering of the Lord —
Nothing brings religion so much into contempt with the people as the open
profaneness of those that are ministers of it. The validity, however, and efficacy of
God’s ordinances, do not depend altogether on the piety of those that minister in
them. So that it was a sin in the people to neglect divine institutions because of the
wickedness of the priests. But it was a still much greater sin in the priests to give
them occasion so to do.
17 This sin of the young men was very great in the
Lord’s sight, for they[b] were treating the Lord’s
offering with contempt.
BARNES, "The offering of the Lord - Minchah, here in the general sense of “gift
or offering” to God (compare Mal_1:10-11; Mal_3:3). In its restricted sense, it is used of
125](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-125-320.jpg)
![takes occasion in this place to remark how Samuel was annually clothed from the
attention of his mother. The linen ephod he wore was the distinction of the Levites.
CONSTABLE, "2. Hannah's godly influence on Samuel and its effect 2:18-21
In the previous paragraphs two statements about the main characters described
them and framed the paragraph: they did not regard the Lord, and they despised
the Lord's offerings (1 Samuel 2:12; 1 Samuel 2:17). Likewise in this one the writer
described Samuel as "before the Lord" at the beginning and at the end (1 Samuel
2:18; 1 Samuel 2:21). Even though he was very young and his service was probably
menial at this time (cf. 1 Samuel 3:15), Samuel lived sensitively before God. The
writer did not stress this sensitive spirit here; he only hinted at it. However it comes
out clearly later (e.g., ch. 4).
In the central part of this section (1 Samuel 2:18-19) the writer documented the
support and encouragement to serve the Lord that Samuel received from his
parents. The linen ephod was a priestly garment, as was the robe (cf. Exodus 28:31;
2 Samuel 6:14). [Note: N. L. Tidwell, "The Linen Ephod: 1 Sam. II 18 and 2 Sam.
VI 14," Vetus Testamentum 24:4 (October 1974):505-7.] Hannah dressed Samuel as
a little priest showing that she respected this office and wanted her son to grow up
valuing it. Similarly, today, sometimes parents buy things for their children that will
give them a love for those things and encourage them to pursue interest in them
(e.g., a football, a child's cooking set, etc.).
Hannah's obedience resulted in God blessing Elkanah and Hannah even more (1
Samuel 2:20-21). Among other blessings, God gave Hannah five additional children
by overcoming her barrenness and making her fertile (cf. Exodus 1:21; Psalms
127:3). Furthermore, Samuel continued to develop in a promising manner (cf. Luke
2:40; Luke 2:52).
LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:18. The “Ephod” can mean nothing but a garment resembling
in form the High-priest’s ephod, consisting of two pieces which rested on the
shoulders in front and behind, were joined at the top and held about the body by a
girdle. Therefore it is said also: Samuel was girded with the ephod, comp. Exodus
28:7-8. In distinction from the material of the High-priest’s ephod, it was made of
the same material as the other priestly garments, white linen (דַ.)בּ That the priests
130](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-130-320.jpg)
![then all wore this ephod appears from 1 Samuel 22:18. It was the sign of the priestly
calling, and was worn during the performance of the priestly functions. David was
thus clothed, according to 2 Samuel 6:14, when he brought back the Ark, and in
connection with this ceremony performed quasi-priestly functions. As the mention
of this priestly dress of Samuel is connected expressly and directly with the
reference to his calling as minister in the Sanctuary before the Lord, it is thus
intimated that Hebrews, called to this life-long service, received therewith an
essentially priestly calling. [Bib. Comm.: The word minister is used in three senses
in Scripture: 1) Of the service of both Priests and Levites rendered unto the Lord,
Exodus 28:35, etc.; 2) of the ministrations of the Levites as rendered to the Priests,
Numbers 3:6; Numbers 3) of any service, as that of Joshua to Moses, that of Elisha
to Elijah, that of the angels in heaven, 2 Samuel 13:17; Psalm 103:21, etc. The
application of it to Samuel accords most exactly with his condition as a Levite.—
Tr.]. 1 Samuel 2:19. While the ephod was the High-priestly dress, which the boy
received on the part of the Sanctuary (Thenius), the little meןl[FN35](יל ִﬠ ְ)מ was his
every-day dress, which his mother renewed for him once a year, when she came with
her husband to the Sanctuary to present the annual offering. The unbroken
connection which the household thus maintained with the Sanctuary prevented any
estrangement between the child Samuel and the house of his parents.—The Impf.
“made” ()תּעשה indicates a continued customary action, and thus answers to the
Latin tense which is so called in a stricter sense.
PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:18
But Samuel ministered. While the misconduct of Eli's sons was thus bringing
religion into contempt, and sapping the nation's morals, Samuel was advancing in
years and piety, and was gaining that education which made him fit to retrieve the
evil of their doings. He is still styled na'ar, a boy; for the word, according to the
Rabbins, may be used up to fifteen years (1 Samuel 1:24). In the sense of servant
there is no limit of age; and as it is the word translated "young men" in 1 Samuel
2:17, it probably means there not Eli's sons, but the servants by whose
instrumentality their orders were actually carried out. Samuel's dress, an ephod of
white linen, was probably that worn by the Levites in their ordinary ministrations;
for the ephod of the priests was richer both in material and colour (Exodus 28:6-8).
As being thus the simplest ministerial garment, it was apparently worn also by
laymen when taking part in any religious service, as by David when he danced
before the ark (2 Samuel 6:14).
131](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-131-320.jpg)
![The small יל ִע ְמ also (Angl. “coat”), which Samuel's mother made and brought him
every year, when she came with her husband to Shiloh to the yearly sacrifice, was
probably a coat resembling the meןl of the high priest (Exo_28:31.), but was made of
course of some simpler material, and without the symbolical ornaments attached to the
lower hem, by which that official dress was distinguished.
20 Eli would bless Elkanah and his wife, saying,
“May the Lord give you children by this woman
to take the place of the one she prayed for and
gave to[c] the Lord.” Then they would go home.
CLARKE, "Eli blessed Elkanah - The natural place of this verse seems to be
before the 11th; after which the 21st should come in; after the 21st, perhaps the 26th
should come in. The subjects in this chapter seem very much entangled and confused by
the wrong position of the verses.
GILL, "And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife,.... Not only the first time they
brought Samuel to him, and left him with him; but every year they came to worship, as
the Jewish commentators mostly interpret it:
and said, the Lord give thee seed of this woman; children by her, year after year:
for the loan which is lent to the Lord; instead of Samuel, who was asked of the
Lord and given to him again; and as they were thereby in some measure deprived of him,
and could not always enjoy him, and be delighted with him, Eli prayed for them, and
gave them his benediction as a priest, that they might be favoured with other children,
who might be of delight and service to them when in old age:
and they went unto their own home; at Ramah, as in 1Sa_2:11 or to his place (r),
Elkanah's; hence Kimchi concludes that Hannah was of another city originally; but the
Targum is,"to their place;''and indeed, what was now the place or home of the one, was
of the other.
145](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-145-320.jpg)
![LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:20. Eli’s blessing[FN36] refers to two things: to the act of
consecrating the son to the service of the Lord, and to the compensation which Eli
wished the Lord to make for the son who was offered to the Lord. Keil explains the
ל ַא ָשׁ (asked [Eng. A. V. “lent”]) as 3 pers. singular instead of 2 pers. singular or
plural “from the indefinite form of speech (comp. Ewald, § 249 b with § 319 a)
which the narrator chose because, though it was Hannah who in Eli’s presence had
obtained Samuel from the Lord by prayer, yet Eli might assume that the father,
Elkanah, had shared the wish of his pious wife.” But the circumstance which alone
permits such change of person, or rather of gender, in the subject, namely, the
indefiniteness of the subject as indicated by the context, does not exist here, since
such indefiniteness is undoubtedly excluded by 1 Samuel 1:27-28. Bצttcher properly
takes the verb form with altered points as 3 sing. fem. “she asked.”[FN37]—The
sing. pronoun in “his place” (for which we should expect “their place”) does not
require the change of “they went” into “the man went,” as Bצttcher and Thenius
prefer, following the Sept. ךבὶ ἀנῆכטום ὁ ἄ;םטסשנןע the singular suffix (after the
plural verb) is explained “by the fact that the place of residence is determined by the
husband or owner of the house.”
PETT, "1 Samuel 2:20
‘And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife, and said, “YHWH give you seed of this
woman for the petition which was asked of YHWH.” And they went to their own
home.
It would seem that Eli watched out for Samuel’s parents and gave them his personal
attention. No doubt Samuel had won his heart, and he was undoubtedly thankful to
have him ministering in the Sanctuary. Thus when he offered sacrifice on their
behalf he blessed Elkanah and his wife, and prayed that God would continue to
answer her petition by giving her more children. And with that blessing they went to
their own home.
PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:20, 1 Samuel 2:21
The Lord give thee seed, etc. The manner in which Eli blesses Elkanah shows that
this surrender of a very young child to religious service was not looked upon as
imposing a burden upon the sanctuary, but as the bestowal of a valued gift. Loan
and lent by no means give the whole sense, which is in fact beyond the power of our
language to express; for the Hebrew is remarkable for its manner of saying a great
147](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-147-320.jpg)
![GILL, "And the Lord visited Hannah,.... In a way of mercy, approving and
confirming the blessing of Eli; or rather granting the blessing he prayed for, by giving
her power to conceive, bear, and bring forth children, as the following words explain it:
so that she conceived and bare three sons and two daughters; whereby the
prophecy of Hannah was fulfilled, 1Sa_2:5, and was no doubt matter of great joy to her,
though of these children we nowhere else read, nor even of their names. Josephus (s)
says, Elkanah had other sons by Hannah, and three daughters; which agrees not with the
text:
and the child Samuel grew before the Lord: in age and stature, in grace and
goodness, and improved much in the worship and service of God, both in the theory and
practice of it; or became great with him, high in his esteem and favour, and was blessed
with much of his presence, and with large gifts of his grace.
COFFMAN, "HANNAH'S OTHER CHILDREN
"And the Lord visited Hannah, and she conceived and bore three sons and two
daughters. And the boy Samuel grew in the presence of the Lord."
We like the Good News Bible's rendition of the last sentence here, "And Samuel
grew up in the service of the Lord."
COKE, "1 Samuel 2:21. And the child Samuel grew before the Lord— See 1 Samuel
2:26 and Luke 2:52. As he increased in stature, he increased in wisdom; as parents
may be assured will always be the case with those children whom they dedicate early
to the Lord, and into whose young minds they carefully instill the divine precepts of
religion and truth.
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:21. י ִכּ is neither with Bunsen to be translated: “When now
Jehovah visited Hannah she conceived,” nor with Thenius to be complemented by
“it came to pass,” nor to be referred to “ and Eli blessed” )1 Samuel 2:20),
according to the view of Keil, who inserts a sentence (“Eli’s word was fulfilled,” or
“they went home blessed”) in order to retain the causal meaning, but it is to be
considered as strengthening the following assertion, with reference to the blessing in
1 Samuel 2:20, and = “indeed,” “in fact,” immo [German, ja, in der that]. See
Ewald, § 310 c and § 330 b. Comp. Isaiah 7:9; Isaiah 32:13; Job 8:6.[FN38]—
Samuel’s growth “before the Lord” indicates not only that he remained in the
Sanctuary, but also that (as the condition of his calling) he grew in fellowship of
heart and life with God.
149](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-149-320.jpg)
![by these understand new mothers, who came with their offerings for purification,
attended with many other women, their relations, friends, and neighbours, and which
especially, when several met together on such an occasion, made a crowd at the door of
the tabernacle; and some are of opinion that these men did not lie with them, or debauch
them, according to the literal sense of the word; but that they delayed the offering of
their nests of doves they brought, so that they were forced to stay all night, and could not
return home; and because by this means they were restrained from their husbands, it is
reckoned as if these men had lain with them (t); and which they think is confirmed, in
that the man of God sent to Eli, after mentioned, takes no notice of this lewdness of
theirs, only of their ill behaviour as to sacrifices, but the text is so express for their
debauchery, that it cannot be denied.
HENRY, "(2.) They debauched the women that came to worship at the door of the
tabernacle, 1Sa_2:22. They had wives of their own, but were like fed horses, Jer_5:8. To
have gone to the harlots' houses, the common prostitutes, would have been abominable
wickedness, but to use the interest which as priests they had in those women that had
devout dispositions and were religiously inclined, and to bring them to commit their
wickedness, was such horrid impiety as one can scarcely think it possible that men who
called themselves priests should ever be guilty of. Be astonished, O heavens! at this, and
tremble, O earth! No words can sufficiently express the villany of such practices as these.
2. The reproof which Eli gave his sons for this their wickedness: Eli was very old
(1Sa_2:22) and could not himself inspect the service of the tabernacle as he had done,
but left all to his sons, who, because of the infirmities of his age, slighted him, and did
what they would. However, he was told of the wickedness of his sons, and we may well
imagine what a heart-breaking it was to him, and how much it added to the burdens of
his age; but it should seem he did not so much as reprove them till he heard of their
debauching the women, and then he thought fit to give them a check. Had he rebuked
them for their greediness and luxury, this might have been prevented. Young people
should be told of their faults as soon as it is perceived that they begin to be extravagant,
lest their hearts be hardened. Now concerning the reproof he gave them observe,
(1.) That it was very just and rational. That which he said was very proper. [1.] He tells
them that the matter of fact was too plain to be denied and too public to be concealed: “I
hear of your evil dealings by all this people, 1Sa_2:23. It is not the surmise of one or
two, but the avowed testimony of many; all your neighbours cry out shame on you, and
bring their complaints to me, expecting that I should redress the grievance.” [2.] He
shows them the bad consequences of it, that they not only sinned, but made Israel to sin,
and would have the people's sin to answer for as well as their own: “You that should turn
men from iniquity (Mal_2:6), you make the Lord's people to transgress, and corrupt the
nation instead of reforming it; you tempt people to go and serve other gods when they
see the God of Israel so ill served.” [3.] He warns them of the danger they brought
themselves into by it, 1Sa_2:25. He intimates to them what God afterwards told him,
that the iniquity would not be purged with sacrifice nor offering, 1Sa_3:14. If one man
sin against another, the judge (that is, the priest, who was appointed to be the judge in
many cases, Deu_17:9) shall judge him, shall undertake his cause, arbitrate the matter,
and make atonement for the offender; but if a man sin against the Lord (that is, if a
priest profane the holy things of the Lord, if a man that deals with God for others do
himself affront him) who shall entreat for him? Eli was himself a judge, and had often
made intercession for transgressors, but, says he, “You that sin against the Lord,” that
153](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-153-320.jpg)
![God. At the door of the tabernacle — The place where all the people, both men and
women, waited when they came up to the service of God, because the altar on which
their sacrifices were offered was by the door.
COFFMAN, "ELI WAS UNWILLING OR UNABLE TO CORRECT HIS SONS
"Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons were doing to all Israel, and how
they lay with the women who served at the entrance to the tent of meeting. And he
said to them, "Why do you do such things? For I hear of your evil dealings from all
the people. No, my sons; it is no good report that I hear the people of the Lord
spreading about. If a man sins against a man, God will mediate for him; but if a
man sins against the Lord, who can intercede for him"? But they would not listen to
the voice of their father; for it was the will of the Lord to slay them."
With regard to whether or not Eli was able to control his sons, it is likely that, in his
advanced age, control would have been impossible, and yet, when the unnamed
prophet came and pronounced judgment against him, it was evident that there was
indeed some element of blame on Eli's part. Porter commented that, "The
indignation of Eli at this point was ineffectual following a lifetime of disciplinary
inaction."[18]
Of course, the result of Eli's son's wickedness was a widespread public scandal that
was disastrous in its effect upon God's people.
"At the entrance to the tent of meeting." It should be noted that the words "temple"
(1 Samuel 1:9) and "tent of meeting" (1 Samuel 2:22) are used interchangeably in
this part of 1Samuel. The temple of Solomon was not constructed until long
afterward; nevertheless, the tabernacle was often called "the temple."
For it was the will of the Lord to slay them. Keil pointed out that, "This means that
Hophni and Phinehas were already given up to the judgment of hardening."[19]
ELLICOTT, " (22) Now Eli was very old.—The compiler of these Books of Samuel
was evidently wishful to speak as kindly as possible of Eli. He had, no doubt,
155](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-155-320.jpg)
![for I hear of your evil doings by all this people; the inhabitants of Shiloh, or who
came thither to worship, who were continually making their complaints to Eli; which
still shows his backwardness to reprove them in the manner he did until he was obliged
to it by the continual remonstrances of the people against the practices of his sons; he
did not attend to the information he had from a few persons, until it became general.
HENRY, "(1.) That it was very just and rational. That which he said was very proper.
[1.] He tells them that the matter of fact was too plain to be denied and too public to be
concealed: “I hear of your evil dealings by all this people, 1Sa_2:23. It is not the surmise
of one or two, but the avowed testimony of many; all your neighbours cry out shame on
you, and bring their complaints to me, expecting that I should redress the grievance.”
[2.] He shows them the bad consequences of it, that they not only sinned, but made
Israel to sin, and would have the people's sin to answer for as well as their own: “You
that should turn men from iniquity (Mal_2:6), you make the Lord's people to
transgress, and corrupt the nation instead of reforming it; you tempt people to go and
serve other gods when they see the God of Israel so ill served.” [3.] He warns them of the
danger they brought themselves into by it, 1Sa_2:25. He intimates to them what God
afterwards told him, that the iniquity would not be purged with sacrifice nor offering,
1Sa_3:14. If one man sin against another, the judge (that is, the priest, who was
appointed to be the judge in many cases, Deu_17:9) shall judge him, shall undertake his
cause, arbitrate the matter, and make atonement for the offender; but if a man sin
against the Lord (that is, if a priest profane the holy things of the Lord, if a man that
deals with God for others do himself affront him) who shall entreat for him? Eli was
himself a judge, and had often made intercession for transgressors, but, says he, “You
that sin against the Lord,” that is, “against the law and honour of God, in those very
things which immediately pertain to him, and by which reconciliation is to be made, how
can I entreat for you?” Their condition was deplorable indeed when their own father
could not speak a good word for them, nor could have the face to appear as their
advocate. Sins against the remedy, the atonement itself, are most dangerous, treading
under foot the blood of the covenant, for then there remains no more sacrifice, Heb_
10:26.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:23-24. And he said, Why do ye do such things? — He
reproved them, but far too gently, as these and the following words manifest. This
might proceed partly from the coldness of old age, but it arose chiefly from his too
great indulgence to his children. I hear of your evil dealings by all this people —
Their wickedness was so notorious that there was a general complaint of it, which
should have moved him to much greater severity than merely to reprove and chide
them. He ought to have restrained them, and if he could not otherwise have done it,
to have inflicted those punishments upon them which such high crimes deserved,
according to God’s law, and which he, as high-priest and judge, was in duty bound
to inflict without respect of persons. Nay, my sons, for it is no good report that I
hear — This is the language of a father, not of a zealous judge. Ye make the Lord’s
160](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-160-320.jpg)
![people to transgress — By causing them to neglect and despise the service of God,
and tempting them to lewdness.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:23. The question: Why do ye such things? is but a feeble
rebuke of their gross misdoings. It cannot be translated: “Why do ye according to
the words which I hear” (Keil)? for the Heb. word (יכֶם ֵר ְב ִ)דּ cannot mean “reports
about you,” nor could these reports be termed “evil,” since they would be true
reports of evil deeds; but the proper rendering is: “Why do ye as these things?” that
Isaiah, such things.[FN39] “For I hear of your evil dealings from all this people,”
that Isaiah, those who came to the Sanctuary, and there saw the wickedness.
PETT, "1 Samuel 2:23-24
‘And he said to them, “Why do you do such things? For I hear of your evil dealings
from all this people. No, my sons, for it is no good report that I hear. You make
YHWH’s people to transgress. If one man sin against another, God will arbitrate for
him, but if a man sin against YHWH, who will arbitrate for him?”
Eli challenges his sons on their behaviour, but it was something that he should have
done long before. He points out that he is hearing about their bad behaviour from
everywhere. All are talking about it. (Possibly previously he had closed his ears to
the ‘rumours’. But now they could be ignored no longer). And he reproves them
because the report he is receiving is not good. Why, he asks, are they doing such
things? Do they not realise that they are making YHWH’s people transgress? This
was serious indeed, because, if a man sins against another, God will step in as
arbitrator and judge, but when a man sins directly against YHWH who is there to
arbitrate for him? And the answer is, no one. For there is no one whose plea would
be sufficient in view of the greatness of the sin.
“YHWH”s people’ may refer to the fact that the women with whom they had been
sinning were specifically set apart to YHWH. Or it may simply mean ‘Israel’ as
YHWH’s people. Either way it was to be seen as a serious matter.
BI 23-24, "Nay, my sons: for it is no good report that I hear.
161](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-161-320.jpg)
![ye make the Lord's people to transgress: by causing them to forbear to bring their sacrifices,
being used in such an injurious and overbearing way; and by decoying the women into
uncleanness, and by setting examples to others: or, "to cry out"; as in the margin of our Bibles, to
exclaim against them for their exorbitant and lewd practices; so the Targum,
"the people of the Lord murmur because so ill used by them:''this clause may be read in
connection with the former, "it is no good report that I hear, which ye cause to pass through the
Lord's people"; ye occasion the people to speak ill of you everywhere, in the camp of Israel,
throughout the whole nation; the report as it is bad, it is general, is in everyone's mouth; so
Maimonides (u) interprets it; with which Jarchi and others agree (w).
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:24. “Do not so (ל ַ)א my sons.” Not good is the “report,” or
objectively “the thing heard;” this answers to the “evil dealings (or things).” The “I
hear” )ַﬠ ֵמֹשׁ ) corresponds to the “report,” “thing heard” )הָﬠֻמ ְשׁ ) and [being a
particip.—Tr.] shows that it constantly came to his ears. What follows is the
explanation of the words: “it is no good report.”
The words: “Jehovah’s people are made to transgress” (ים ִר ֲִבﬠ ַמ etc.), express the
guilt which the sons of Eli incurred by their misdoing towards “the Lord’s people.”
The difficulties in the explanation of the particip. (מ׳ “are causing to transgress”)
have give occasion to attempts at alteration, which, however, are unsatisfactory.
“Michaelis’ alteration (into ים ִר ְבֹע ֵ:)מ ‘the report which I hear incidentally (from
people passing by) from God’s people.’ is against grammar;” so says Thenius.
“But,” says Bצttcher rightly, “Thenius’ own reading (made from Sept. and Arab,
and therefore insecure): ‘you plague, oppress the people of Israel’ )י׳ םַﬠ ם ֶתּ ַא ים ִד ֲִבﬠ ַמ )
is wholly without ground. For יד ֱִבﬠֶה means only ‘make to serve,’ ‘enslave,’ or ‘make
to work,’ plague with work ( Exodus 1:13; Exodus 6:5). From the last in the later
prophetic style ( Isaiah 43:23) has developed the meaning ‘weary,’ ‘burden,’ just as
German: schaffen machen [‘to give trouble,’ lit. ‘to make to do’], נסנבס דלבפבקוים
[‘to cause trouble’], and so always with the idea of ‘work’ as fundamental. Eli’s
sons, it is true, robbed and dishonored the people ( 1 Samuel 2:13 sqq, 22); but they
did not burden them in such a way that our term ‘give trouble’ would suit. The
expression does not come up to the reality, for it is too narrow for the rebuke. And
the addition of ‘ye’ )ם ֶתּ ַא ) here is both violent, and cannot be inferred from the Arab.
text, where it was a necessity of Shemitic construction.” The view thus opposed by
Bצttcher is maintained by Thenius (in his 2 d ed. also) to suit the connection
perfectly, though, on the other hand, he declares that Ewald’s explanation, in which
there is no change of text, must be accepted; this latter is held by Bצttcher to be the
only one permitted by the language and matter, and he gives it thus: “to send forth a
cry (קוֹל ,)ה׳ thence to cause to be called out, and to cause to trumpet forth (רָשׁוֹפ )ה׳
165](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-165-320.jpg)
![does not prove that this meaning is inadmissible in the passage before us, since the
further definition is actually to be found in the context.
25 If one person sins against another, God[d] may
mediate for the offender; but if anyone sins
against the Lord, who will intercede for them?”
His sons, however, did not listen to their father’s
rebuke, for it was the Lord’s will to put them to
death.
BARNES, "The sense seems to be, If one man sin against another, the judge shall
amerce him in the due penalty, and then he shall be free; but if he sin against the Lord,
who shall act the part of judge and arbiter for him? His guilt must remain to the great
day of judgment.
Because the Lord would slay them - There is a sense in which whatever comes to
pass is the accomplishment of God’s sovereign will and pleasure, and all the previous
steps, even when they involve moral causes, by which this will and pleasure are brought
about, are in this sense also brought about by God. How this truth, which reason and
revelation alike acknowledge, consists with man’s free will on the one hand; or, when the
evil deeds and punishment of a sinner are some of the previous steps, with God’s infinite
mercy and love on the other, is what cannot possibly be explained. We can only firmly
believe both statements,
(1) that God hath no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, and that He willeth not
the death of a sinner, but rather that he should be converted and live;
(2) that the sins and the punishments of sin are accomplishments of God’s eternal
purpose (compare the marginal references, and Isa_6:9-10; Mar_4:12; Rom_9:15). It
may be explained by saying that in the case of Hophni and Phinehas God’s will to kill
them was founded upon His foreknowledge of their impenitence; while from another
168](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-168-320.jpg)
![what is done below, nor angels, only the Lord Jesus Christ; he is the only Mediator
between God and men, who has engaged his heart to approach unto God, and interpose
between him and sinful men, and has made peace and reconciliation by his blood, and is
become the propitiation for sin, and ever lives to make intercession for transgressors,
and is always prevalent and successful in his mediation and intercession; excepting him,
there is none to entreat for those that have sinned against the Lord, see 1Jo_2:1. In
answer to this question, who shall entreat for him? the Jews say (x) repentance and good
works; but these are insufficient advocates for a sinner, without the atoning sacrifice of
Christ, who is propitiation for sin, and upon which a plea can only be founded:
notwithstanding, they hearkened not unto the voice of their father; to his
reproofs and counsels, his reasonings and expostulations; though his rebukes were so
gentle, and this last reasoning of his so close and strong, so nervous and striking:
because the Lord would slay them; it was his purpose and decree, his will and
pleasure, to cut them off for their wickedness; wherefore he gave them up to a judicial
blindness, and hardness of heart, as he did Pharaoh, so that they were proof against all
advice, admonitions, and arguments used with them: some choose to read the words,
"therefore the Lord would slay them" (y), because they were disobedient to the voice of
their father; but the former sense is best; for his will to destroy them was not so much
for their disregard to the reproofs of their father in which he himself was culpable, as for
their breach of his laws.
HENRY, "He shows them the bad consequences of it, that they not only sinned, but
made Israel to sin, and would have the people's sin to answer for as well as their own:
“You that should turn men from iniquity (Mal_2:6), you make the Lord's people to
transgress, and corrupt the nation instead of reforming it; you tempt people to go and
serve other gods when they see the God of Israel so ill served.” [3.] He warns them of the
danger they brought themselves into by it, 1Sa_2:25. He intimates to them what God
afterwards told him, that the iniquity would not be purged with sacrifice nor offering,
1Sa_3:14. If one man sin against another, the judge (that is, the priest, who was
appointed to be the judge in many cases, Deu_17:9) shall judge him, shall undertake his
cause, arbitrate the matter, and make atonement for the offender; but if a man sin
against the Lord (that is, if a priest profane the holy things of the Lord, if a man that
deals with God for others do himself affront him) who shall entreat for him? Eli was
himself a judge, and had often made intercession for transgressors, but, says he, “You
that sin against the Lord,” that is, “against the law and honour of God, in those very
things which immediately pertain to him, and by which reconciliation is to be made, how
can I entreat for you?” Their condition was deplorable indeed when their own father
could not speak a good word for them, nor could have the face to appear as their
advocate. Sins against the remedy, the atonement itself, are most dangerous, treading
under foot the blood of the covenant, for then there remains no more sacrifice, Heb_
10:26.
JAMISON, "they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because - it
should be therefore.
170](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-170-320.jpg)
![correction; and for Eli's sinful indulgence of them, God will visit him when he takes
vengeance on them: for, having resolved to slay them, God had given them up to the
blindness and hardness of their own hearts; and therefore they hearkened not to
their father, but went on in their iniquities. Note; (1.) There is not a more hopeless
character, than a disobedient child. (2.) Parents have often much reason to blame
their sinful lenity and indulgence, and not only are chargeable with guilt before God
for withholding the rod of correction, but are made here to smart for it by their
children's undutifulness and sufferings. (3.) There is a sin unto death, for which
there is no entreating: let us tremble at every approach to this unpardonable state.
III. Samuel's character closes the narrative. His piety served to remove that disgust
which Eli's sons had given, and his behaviour the more conciliated the regard of
God's people, as it appeared more eminent and exemplary in the midst of such bad
company. Note; It is some comfort, when great impiety and wickedness have crept
into the church of God, that some burning and shining lights continue to be raised
up in it, that we may not be as Sodom, nor become like unto Gomorrah.
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:25. Pillel (ֵללּ ִ)פּ is used, in connection with wicked actions, in
the sense “to give a decisive judgment,” and so between two contending parties, “to
compose a strife by judgment;” comp. Ezekiel 16:52; Psalm 106:30. The elohim,
however, cannot here mean the Judges, or the authority that Judges, but God is
described as He who composes by judging. The sense of Eli’s discourse is: “When
men sin against men, it is God (of course through the appointed human organs),
who restores the disturbed relations by composing the strife; but when we have to
do with the relation, not between man and Prayer of Manasseh, but between man
and God, when a man sins against God, offends against God’s honor, who will
interpose to arrange the matter?” Eli sets two things therefore before his sons: 1)
that their sin is a sin immediately against God, from which point of view it has been
regarded in the whole preceding narration ( 1 Samuel 2:12; 1 Samuel 2:17); 2) that
the consequent guilt is so great, that divine punishment therefor is certain.
[Wordsworth: A man may intercede with God for remission of a penalty due for
injury to himself; but who shall venture to entreat for one who has outraged the
majesty of God?—Tr.]—Eli’s weakly mild words were too indefinite and general to
check the bold wickedness of his sons. It was too late. They sinned against the Lord
“with a high hand” (ה ָמ ָר ָדי ְ,)בּ as it were, with hardened hearts.—And they
hearkened not to the voice of their father.—As reason of this (י ִ,כּ “because”) is
stated, “that it pleased God, was God’s will, to slay them;” that Isaiah, they were in
a state of inner hardening, which excluded the subjective condition of salvation from
destruction, and so they had already incurred God’s unchangeable condemnation.
175](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-175-320.jpg)
![As hardened offenders, they were already appointed by God to death; therefore the
word of instruction had no moral effect on them.
1 Samuel 2:26. In contrast with them, Samuel is now again presented, as he
developed in his childhood as well physically as morally; while the sons of Eli were a
horror to God and men, he was well-pleasing to God and men. On ַלָה comp. Ges, §
131, 3, Rem3. It is used frequently to express continuance in the sense “advance,”
“continue,” and then also expresses advancing increase, the participial construction
being not seldom employed in such cases, as here: “The child Samuel grew
constantly in stature and goodness.” [See Luke 2:52.—Tr.]
SIMEON, "THE DANGER OF NEGLECTING THE GREAT SACRIFICE
1 Samuel 2:25. If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a
man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him?
THE consideration of an earthly tribunal is of great use to restrain the wickedness
of ungodly men. But as there are innumerable offences which can neither be proved
by human testimony, nor defined by human laws, it is necessary that men should be
reminded of another tribunal, to which they shall be shortly summoned, and before
which they shall be called to a strict account. Long before the deluge this was a topic
much enforced by the preachers of religion [Note: Jude, ver. 14, 15.]; and Eli
adverted to it, as well calculated to enforce his exhortations, and to dissuade his sons
from their impieties. His sons were transgressors of no common stamp: they are
justly reprobated as sons of Belial. Their father being advanced in years, the
administration of the priestly office had devolved to them. This office they abused to
the purposes of oppression and debauchery. The interposition of their father
became highly necessary: as God’s vicegerent, he should have vindicated the honour
of God, and the rights of his subjects. He should have interposed, not only with
parental but judicial authority. He should not only have manifested his detestation
of their lewdness and rapacity, but should have punished them with degradation. He
however, either from a timidity and supineness incident to age, or from a shameful
partiality for his own children, forbore to inflict the punishment they deserved; and
contented himself with expostulations and reproofs. He said to them, “Why do ye
176](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-176-320.jpg)
![such things? for I hear of your evil doings by all this people. Nay, my sons: for it is
no good report that I hear; ye make the Lord’s people to transgress. If one man sin
against another, the judge shall judge him; but if a man sin against the Lord, who
shall entreat for him?” With less hardened criminals these words might have
produced a good effect: for if it be awful to be summoned before an earthly judge,
how much more so to be called into the presence of God, laden with iniquities, and
destitute of any advocate or intercessor!
May our minds be impressed with reverence and godly fear, while we consider the
import of this admonition, and deduce from it some suitable and important
observations!
The words of the text do not at first sight appear to need much explanation: but we
cannot well understand the antithesis, or see the force of the interrogation, without
adverting particularly to the circumstances, which occasioned the reproof. The
sense is not, That, if a man violate an human law, he shall be condemned by an
earthly judge; and, that if he violate the divine law, he shall be condemned by God
himself: this is far short of its real import.
The sin which the sons of Eli had committed was of a peculiar nature. They, as
priests, had a right to certain parts of all the sacrifices that were offered: but,
instead of being contented with the parts which God had allotted them, and of
burning the fat according to the divine appointment, they sent their servants to
strike their flesh-hooks of three teeth into the pot or caldron where the meat was
seething, and to take whatsoever the flesh-hook might bring up. If they came before
the flesh was put into the caldron, they demanded it raw, together with all the fat
that was upon it. If the people objected to such lawless proceedings, or reminded
them that they must not forget to burn the fat, the servants were ordered to take
away the meat immediately, and by force [Note: ver. 16.]. To these enormities, the
young men added others of a most malignant nature: they, who, from their office,
should have been ministers of justice, and patterns of all sanctity, availed themselves
of their situation to seduce the women, when they came to worship at the door of the
tabernacle of the congregation [Note: ver. 22.]. Thus they discouraged the people
from even coming to the house of God, and caused them to “abhor the offering of
the Lord.”
177](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-177-320.jpg)
![Now it should be recollected that sacrifices were the instituted means of
reconciliation with God: there was no other way in which any offence, whether
ceremonial or moral, could be purged, but by the offering of the appointed sacrifice
before the door of the tabernacle: without shedding of blood there was to be no
remission [Note: Hebrews 9:22.].
It should be remembered further, that these sacrifices were typical of the great
sacrifice which Christ was in due time to offer upon the cross. The whole Epistle to
the Hebrews was written to establish and illustrate this point. “The blood of bulls
and of goats could never take away sin:” they had no efficacy at all, but as they
typified him who was to “appear in this last dispensation to put away sin by the
sacrifice of himself [Note: Hebrews 9:25-26; Hebrews 10:1; Hebrews 10:4; Hebrews
10:14.].”
In causing therefore the offerings of the Lord to be thus abhorred, the young men
sinned in a peculiar manner against God himself: they poured contempt upon the
very means which God had provided for their obtaining of pardon and
reconciliation with him. Thus they rendered their situation desperate: had they only
committed some heinous offence against man, a judge, intrusted with the execution
of the laws, might have arbitrated between the parties: he might have punished the
delinquents, and obtained satisfaction for the injured person: and, the offenders, if
truly penitent, might have brought their offering to God, and thus, through the
blood of their sacrifice and the intercession of the priest, have obtained the
remission of their sin. But they had sinned immediately against God himself; so that
there was no third person to redress the grievance or settle the dispute. Moreover
they had despised the only atonement that could be offered for them: yea, in
despising the typical, they had, in fact, disclaimed all trust in the real atonement.
What hope then remained for them? Having provoked God, they had no person of
authority sufficient to arbitrate between them: and having rejected the only
Sacrifice, the only Advocate, the great High-priest, they had none to make
atonement for them, they had none to intercede: they must therefore be left to their
fate, and reap the bitter fruits of their iniquities. In confirmation of this, God
declared that “their sin should not be purged by sacrifice or offering for ever [Note:
1 Samuel 3:14.].”
178](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-178-320.jpg)
![With this explanation we see at once the force and emphasis of the words before us.
They were intended to express the exceeding heinousness of the sins that had been
committed, and to deter the offenders from persisting in such fatal conduct. While
they intimate the danger to which a violation of human laws will expose us, they
insinuate the infinitely greater danger we incur by contemning the only means of
forgiveness with God.
With the additional light which the New Testament reflects on this passage, we may
see that we are as much interested in this admonition, as the very persons were, to
whom it was first given: for, though we have not run to their excess of riot, or
caused the offering of the Lord to be so abhorred, yet we have too much disregarded
the sacrifice of the Son of God. If we have not openly opposed the atonement of
Christ, we have been, perhaps still are, too indifferent about it. The censure
therefore in the text, how severe soever it may appear, lies in full force against us.
To neglect the Saviour is in a most fatal manner to sin against God: it is, at the same
time, to provoke the Majesty of heaven, and to reject the only Advocate, the only
Propitiation for sin. Hence the Apostle asks with such tremendous energy, “How
shall ye escape if ye neglect so great salvation [Note: Hebrews 2:3.]?” Which
question, both in import and expression, accords with that in our text, “If a man sin
against the Lord, who shall entreat for him?”
In this application of the passage we are countenanced by a parallel passage in the
Epistle to the Hebrews [Note: Hebrews 10:26-29.], “If we sin wilfully after that we
have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall
devour the adversaries.” Here the writer states the reason why an apostate from the
truth has nothing to expect but wrath and fiery indignation; the reason is the same
as in our text; he has turned his back on the sacrifice of Christ, and there will be no
other sacrifice for sin to all eternity: there is therefore no hope of salvation for him.
The Apostle then adds, “He that despised Moses’ law, died without mercy, under
two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be
thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the
blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done
despite to the Spirit of grace?” Thus may we ask, in reference to the text, If the
infraction of human laws, when substantiated by sufficient evidence, be ever
179](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-179-320.jpg)
![punished with the loss of life, how much more shall a neglect and contempt of Christ
meet with due recompence from an holy and omniscient God?
The text being thus explained, we may proceed to deduce from it some important
observations.
The solemnity of the present occasion [Note: An Assize Sermon at Cambridge.]
requires us to take some notice of human judicatures: we shall not however restrict
our observations to them: there is a future judgment to which we must look
forward; nor should we satisfy your expectations any more than our own
conscience, if we did not principally advert to that. The text affords us a proper
opportunity for discharging our duty in both respects.
We observe then,
I. That the dispensing of justice by persons duly qualified and authorized, is an
unspeakable blessing to a nation.
The institution of judges is a necessary part of every well-ordered government.
When God called his people Israel, and formed them into a distinct nation by his
servant Moses, he gave this command; “Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in
all thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee throughout all thy tribes; and they
shall judge the people with just judgment [Note: Deuteronomy 16:18.].” When
Jehoshaphat set himself to restore the political and religious welfare of his kingdom,
he paid immediate attention to this point: “he set judges in the land throughout all
the fenced cities of Judah, city by city; and said to the judges, Take heed what ye do;
for ye judge not for man, but for the Lord, who is with you in judgment [Note: 2
Chronicles 19:5-6.].” After the Babylonish captivity also, when the Persian monarch
gave commandment respecting the re-establishment of the Jews in their own land,
he particularly enjoined Ezra to be mindful of this matter: “Thou, Ezra, after the
wisdom of thy God that is in thine hand, set magistrates and judges, which may
judge all the people that are beyond the river: and whosoever will not do the law of
thy God, and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily upon him,
180](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-180-320.jpg)
![whether it be unto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to
imprisonment [Note: Ezra 7:25-26.].” Indeed, without such an institution, the laws
themselves would be altogether vain and useless: the weak would sink under
oppression; and the strong tyrannize with impunity. The bonds of society would be
broken asunder; and universal anarchy would prevail. We have witnessed the
destruction of all constituted authorities, and the utter annihilation of all established
laws. We have beheld licentiousness stalking with the cap of liberty, and ferocious
despotism, under the name of equality, spreading desolation with an
undiscriminating hand [Note: At the time of the French Revolution.]. But, blessed be
God, it is not thus with Britain: I pray God it never may be. The laws, with us, are
respected; and they, who superintend the execution of them, are reverenced. If one
man sin against another, we have judges, who are competent, and not afraid, to
judge him. If existing laws are not sufficient to check the progress of conspiracy and
treason, we have a legislature, that will deliberate with coolness, and enact with
wisdom. If the necessary restraints be violated by presumptuous demagogues, we
have magistrates, that will call the offenders to trial; juries, that will bring in their
verdict with conscientious truth; and judges, that, while they declare the sentence of
the law with firmness, know how to temper judgment with mercy. Yes, to their
united efforts, under the care of Providence, we owe it, that faction and sedition
have been disarmed of the power, would to God I might also add, the inclination, to
disturb the realm.
However the opinions of many were shaken for a time by specious arguments and
groundless cavils, there are but few, it is hoped, at this time, whose eyes have not
been opened to discern the excellence of our constitution. Who, that has seen
insulted majesty proclaiming pardon to mutiny and sedition; who that, when the
contemners of that pardon were brought to trial, has seen the very judges becoming
counsel for the accused; who, that has seen to what an amazing extent lenity has
been carried (not from partiality or supineness, as under Eli’s administration, but
from a love of mercy, and a desire to win the offenders to a sense of duty) who, that
reflects how forbearance has been exercised, insomuch that not a single execution
even of the most daring traitors took place, till lenient measures absolutely defeated
their own ends; who, I say, that has seen these things, must not acknowledge the
equity and mildness of our government? And who, that knows the value of such a
government, would not uphold it to the utmost of his power?
While we are speaking upon this subject, it is impossible to omit the mention of one,
181](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-181-320.jpg)
![who with unexampled fortitude has stemmed the torrent of iniquity in this country,
and has made the most opulent to know, that if they will tempt the chastity of
individuals, and destroy the peace of families, they shall do it at their peril. I do not
hesitate to say, that every father of a family, and every lover of virtue in this
kingdom, stands indebted to him, and has reason to bless God, that such integrity
and power are combined in one person [Note: The name of Lord Kenyon will
necessarily occur to the mind of every reader. He awarded 10,000l. damages in a
case of adultery.].
There is one other point worthy to be noticed in the judicatories of this country; I
mean, a freedom from political or religious prejudice. If a man be known to
disapprove the measures of government, he is not the less likely on that account to
obtain justice in any cause in which he may be engaged: if he dissent from the
established mode of worship, he is not the less protected in the right of serving God
according to his conscience: nor, if on account of superior zeal and piety, he be
branded with an ignominious name, will prejudice be suffered to bias the decisions
of our courts against him. Every member of the community, of whatever
denomination or description, is sure to have his cause attentively heard, and
impartially determined.
These things cannot but create a love to our constitution in the mind of every man,
who rightly appreciates the blessings of civil and religious liberty. And I pray God
that the laws of our country may ever continue to be thus respected, and to be thus
dispensed.
The observation now made, has been suggested by the first part of Eli’s admonition.
Another observation we may offer, arising from the obvious connexion which
subsists between that and the latter member of the text; namely,
II. That there are many things, not cognizable by human laws, which will be
brought to trial before the Judge of quick and dead.
Man’s tribunal is erected principally for judging things which particularly affect
182](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-182-320.jpg)
![the welfare of society; and, in criminal causes, respect is had to actions rather than
to thoughts, or at least to actions as the evidences of our thoughts. But at the
tribunal of God, every thing which affected the divine government will be brought
forward, the sins against God, as well as sins against our fellow-creatures; the sins
of omission, as well as of commission; the sins of thought and desire, as well as those
of purpose and of act. There is not any one action of our lives that will not then be
weighed in the balance of the sanctuary; there is not a word of our lips, which will
not then bear its proper stamp of piety, or transgression: there is not so much as a
thought of our hearts, that will not receive its just mark of approbation or
displeasure. We are expressly told, that “God in that day will judge the secrets of
men; that he will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and make manifest
the counsels of the heart;” and that “he will then reward every man according to
what he hath done, whether it be good or evil;” “to them, who by patient
continuance in well-doing have sought for glory and honour and immortality, he
will give eternal life: but to them that were contentious, and obeyed not the truth,
indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, even upon every soul of man that
doeth evil.” At that day, we are informed, “the Judge will come in the clouds of
heaven with power and great glory;” and he shall send his angels with a great sound
of a trumpet, even “with the voice of the archangel, and the trump of God.” “Then
shall the sea give up the dead which were in it, and death and hell deliver up the
dead that were in them, and all, small and great, shall stand before God.” “The
Ancient of days, whose garment is white as snow, and the hair of whose head is like
pure wool, will sit upon his fiery throne; and while a fiery stream issues from before
him, and ten thousand times ten thousand minister unto him, he will open the books
[Note: Daniel 7:9-10.]; the book of life [Note: Revelation 20:12.], wherein the names
of his people are written; the book of his remembrance [Note: Malachi 3:16.],
wherein the most secret imaginations of men’s hearts were registered; the book of
conscience too [Note: Matthew 22:12.], which, however illegible now through our
ignorance and partiality, will be found to correspond with his records in every
particular; and lastly, the book of his law [Note: Romans 2:12.], according to which
he will pass his judgment. Ah! who can reflect on the solemnities of that day, and
not be filled with awe? Who amongst us can endure so strict a scrutiny? “Who can
abide the day of his coming?” We may easily conceive the feelings of a prisoner,
who, being to be tried for a capital offence, hears the trumpet announce the coming
of his judge. Let us endeavour to realize the thought, and to apply it to our own
case. We are sure that such a criminal would lose no time in preparing for his
defence. He would engage his counsel, summon his witnesses, and employ every art
in order to obtain a favourable sentence. Let us go and do likewise: our “time is
short; the Judge is at the door,” and if we be unprepared to meet him, woe be unto
us; our sentence will be awful indeed: the very terms, in which it will be expressed,
183](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-183-320.jpg)
![are already told us; “Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil
and his angels [Note: Matthew 25:41.].” In one respect indeed we differ widely from
such a criminal: if he escape, it must be through want of evidence to convict him:
whereas the only way for us to escape is, to confess our guilt, and plead the
atonement offered for us by the Son of God.
This leads me to my last observation, namely,
III. That a neglect of Christ will be found in that day to have been the most fatal of
all offences.
Sins of any other kind, how heinous soever they may have been, yea, though they
may have brought us to an ignominious end, may yet be pardoned of our God,
provided we turn to him with unfeigned sorrow and contrition, and rely on the
atonement which Christ has offered. The Scriptures are extremely full and strong
upon this subject. They declare that “all who believe, shall be justified from all
things;” that “the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin;” that “though our
sins be as scarlet they shall be as wool, though they be red like crimson they shall be
white as snow.” So undoubted is this truth, and so suited to the condition of fallen
man, that it has been often and well proclaimed in our very courts of justice;
proclaimed, I say, to criminals condemned, at the very time of condemnation, and
that too, by those very persons who pronounced the sentence of death against them.
Yes, thanks be to God, there are judges, even in this degenerate age, who are not
ashamed to unite the balm of Christian counsel with the severity of a penal sentence.
But let us suppose that we have neither violated the laws of man, nor, in any
flagrant instances, the laws of God; shall we therefore be acquitted at God’s
tribunal? Shall we need none to entreat for us, none to plead our cause in that day?
May we safely neglect the sacrifice of Christ, because we have abstained from gross
iniquities? Let us not deceive ourselves with any such dangerous imagination: “We
all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;” “every mouth therefore must
be stopped, and all the world must become guilty before God.” None can stand upon
the footing of his own righteousness. Having transgressed the law, we are cursed by
the law; as it is written, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that
184](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-184-320.jpg)
![that there will not be an old man in your house. Then in distress you will look with
envious eye on all the prosperity which shall be bestowed upon Israel; and there
shall not be an old man in your house forever. The man of you which I shall not cut
off from my altar shall be spared to weep out his eyes and grieve his heart; and all
the increase of your house shall die by the sword of men. And this which shall befall
your two sons Hophni and Phinehas, shall be the sign to you: both of them shall die
on the same day. And I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who shall do
according to what is in my heart; and I will bring him a sure house, and he shall go
in and out before my anointed forever. And everyone who is left in your house shall
come to implore him for a piece of silver or a loaf of bread, and shall say, "Put me, I
pray you, in one of the priest's places, that I may eat a morsel of bread."'"
The International Critical Commentary has a remarkably excellent summary of
what these verses say. "An unnamed prophet comes to Eli and rehearses the benefits
he and his house have received from Yahweh. The ingratitude with which he has
treated his benefactor is pointed out, and the removal of his house from the
priesthood is foretold, with the consequent impoverishment of his descendants.[20]
"I revealed myself to the house of your father when they were in Egypt." In fact,
God revealed himself to all Israel while they were still slaves in Egypt under
Pharaoh, but this does not say that he chose Aaron and the Levites at that time,
because those choices occurred after the revelation at Sinai.
"Why then look with greedy eyes at my sacrifices?" This statement and the words
that follow clearly make Eli himself blameworthy.
"I promised ... but now, Far be it from me" (1 Samuel 2:30). All of God's promises
are conditional absolutely upon the fidelity of the one to whom the promise came.
Jeremiah spelled this out dramatically in Jeremiah 18:7-10.
1 Samuel 2:32, above, is an exceedingly obscure and doubtful passage, and the RSV
rendition of it here is the result of extensive emendation,[21] a necessary procedure
at times in order to come up with some likely meaning.
"All the increase of your house shall die by the sword of men." This prophecy was
dramatically fulfilled by Doeg's massacre of the priests at Nob (1 Samuel 22:17,18).
The prophecy that Hophni and Phinehas would die on the same day (1 Samuel 2:34)
was fulfilled when the Philistines defeated Israel and captured the ark of the
covenant (1 Samuel 4:11).
"The ark was not restored to Israel during the times of Samuel; and the tabernacle
199](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-199-320.jpg)
![itself was moved from Shiloh to Nob, probably in the time of war. And when Saul
had all the priests put to death, it was removed to Gibeon, where it necessarily fell
more and more into contempt."[22]
"I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, etc." It is usually agreed among scholars
that this is a reference to Zadok. However:
"It also refers to all the priests whom the Lord would raise up as faithful servants
of his altar, and only receives its complete and final fulfillment in Christ, the true
and eternal High Priest."[23]
ELLICOTT, " (27) There came a man of God.—Of this messenger of the Highest,
whom, from his peculiar title, and also from the character of his communication, we
must regard as one of the order of prophets, we know nothing. He appears suddenly
on the scene at Shiloh, nameless and—as far as we know—homeless, delivers his
message of doom, and disappears.
The term “man of God” we find applied to Moses and to different prophets some
forty or more times in the Books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings. It occurs, though
but rarely, in Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, and in the prophetical books only
once.
Until the sudden appearance of this “man of God,” no mention of a prophet in the
story of Israel had been made since the days of Deborah.
Did I plainly appear . . .—The interrogations in this Divine message do not ask a
question with a view to a reply, but simply emphatically appeal to Eli’s conscience.
To these questions respecting well-known facts the old man would reply with a
silent “Yes.” The “house of thy father” refers to the house of Aaron, the first high
priest, from whom, through Ithamar, the fourth son of Aaron, Eli was descended.
The Talmud has a beautiful note on this passage:—Rabbi Shimon ben Yochi said,
“Come and see how beloved Israel is by the Holy One! Blessed be He! Wherever
they are banished, there the Shekinah is with them; as it is said (1 Samuel 2:27):
‘Did I (God) plainly appear unto the house of thy fathers when they were in Egypt?’
&c. When they were banished to Babylon, the Shekinah was with them; as it is said
200](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-200-320.jpg)
![God's judgment on Eli and his sons was that He would dishonor them. God had
promised that Levi's descendants would serve Him forever as priests, namely, as
long as Israel existed as a sovereign nation (Exodus 29:9; Numbers 25:13). Now God
revealed that He would cut off Eli's branch of the Levitical family tree. Eli was a
descendant of Levi through Levi's son Ithamar. His descendants ceased to function
as priests when Solomon dismissed Abiathar as high priest. Abiathar escaped the
slaughter of the priests at Nob (1 Samuel 22:17-20), but Solomon defrocked him
because he supported Adonijah (1 Kings 2:27; 1 Kings 2:35).
The faithful priest God promised to raise up (1 Samuel 2:35) was initially Samuel (1
Samuel 3:1; 1 Samuel 3:20; 1 Samuel 7:9; 1 Samuel 9:2-13). Zadok, a descendant of
Levi's son Eleazar, replaced Abiathar as high priest in Solomon's day (1 Kings
2:35). [Note: Segal, p. 40; et al.] The Lord's anointed (1 Samuel 2:35) was the king of
Israel. One of his descendants would be Messiah. Ezekiel 44:15; Ezekiel 48:11 refer
to the continuing ministry of Zadok's descendants when Messiah reigns in His
future millennial kingdom. [Note: See Ronald L. Rushing, "Phinehas' Covenant of
Peace," Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1988.] 1 Samuel 2:36
evidently continues to describe the fate of Eli's descendants after God deposed
Abiathar. [Note: For another study of 1 Samuel 2:27-36, see Tsevat, "Studies in the
Book of Samuel," Hebrew Union College Annual 32 (1961):191-216.]
Notice the chiastic (crossing) structure of chapter 2 that focuses on Eli's blessing of
Samuel's parents.
"A. The song of Hannah, concluding with reference to the Lord's anointed (1
Samuel 2:1-10)
B. Samuel ministers before the Lord (1 Samuel 2:11)
C. The sins of Eli's sons (1 Samuel 2:12-17)
202](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-202-320.jpg)
![D. Samuel ministers before the Lord (1 Samuel 2:18-19)
E. Eli blesses Samuel's parents (1 Samuel 2:20-21 a)
D.' Samuel grows in the Lord's presence (1 Samuel 2:21 b)
C.' The sins of Eli's sons (1 Samuel 2:22-25)
B.' Samuel grows in the Lords' presence (1 Samuel 2:26)
A.' The oracles of the man of God, concluding with reference to the Lord's
anointed (1 Samuel 2:27-36)" [Note: Youngblood, p. 588.]
This section reveals the importance and power of parental influence, though this is
not the primary lesson. Eli had placed more importance on his sons' personal
preferences than he had on God's preferences; he had honored them more than Him
(1 Samuel 2:29). Consequently they became worthless men (1 Samuel 2:12) whom
God finally killed prematurely. Hannah, on the other hand, encouraged her son,
Samuel, to value the service of God. Consequently he developed into a godly man
whom God and other people honored and respected (1 Samuel 2:26). Eli's sons
despised God and abused other people (1 Samuel 2:17; 1 Samuel 2:22). Samuel
feared God and became a great blessing to other people.
This chapter also shows that godly influence can be more powerful than ungodly
influence and can overcome many natural obstacles. God enabled Hannah to
influence Samuel for good even though she seldom saw him, lived miles from him,
and could not prevent the daily wicked influence of Eli's sons over him. Her
previous dedication of him to the Lord was undoubtedly a factor in her success.
Other important factors were her continuing encouragement to serve God and her
203](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-203-320.jpg)
![prayers for Samuel.
God has not blessed with godly offspring all parents who have had the same desires
for their children that Hannah did. Children are responsible for their own decisions
as they grow up (Ezekiel 18:4; Ezekiel 18:20). Some choose to turn away from the
Lord. Nevertheless this story shows what can happen. Children can grow up in an
ungodly environment away from their parents' personal supervision and still
become godly. The influence of a wise and godly parent can overcome many other
ungodly influences in a child's life.
LANGE, "The prophecy of a Man of God of the divine judgment on Eli’s house and
of the calling of a faithful priest
1 Samuel 2:27-36
27And there came a man of God[FN41] unto [to] Eli and said unto [to] him, Thus
saith the Lord [Jehovah], Did I plainly appear [reveal myself] unto [to] the house of
thy father when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh’s house [in servitude[FN42] to the
house 28 of Pharaoh]? And did I choose [I chose[FN43]] him [it] out of all the tribes
of Israel to be my priest [to do priestly service to me], to offer[FN44] upon my altar,
to burn incense, to wear an ephod before me? [om.?], and did I give [I gave] unto
[to] the house of thy father all the offerings made by fire [the fire-offerings] of the
children 29 of Israel? [om.?]. Wherefore kick ye at [trample ye under foot] my
sacrifice and at [om. at] mine [my] offering which I have commanded in my
habitation,[FN45] and honorest thy sons above me to make yourselves fat with the
chiefest of all the 30 offerings [the best of every offering] of Israel my people?[FN46]
Wherefore [Therefore] the Lord [Jehovah] God of Israel saith, I said indeed[FN47]
that thy house and the house of thy father should walk before me for ever; but now
the Lord saith [saith Jehovah], Be it far from me; for them that honor me I will
honor, and they that 31 despise me shall be lightly esteemed. Behold, the days come
that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father’s house, [ins. so] that there
shall not be an 32 old man in thine house. And[FN48] thou shalt see an enemy in my
habitation in all the wealth which God shall give Israel [thou shalt see distress of
house in all that does 33 good to Israel]; and there shall not be an old man in thy
house for ever. And the man of thine whom I shall not cut off [And I will not cut off
every man of thine[FN49]] from my altar shall be [om. shall be], to consume thine
204](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-204-320.jpg)
![eyes, and to grieve thine [thy] heart; and all the increase of thine [thy] house shall
die in the flower 34 of their age.[FN50] And this shall be a [the] sign unto [to] thee,
that [ins. which] shall come upon thy two sons, Hophni and Phinehas: in one day
they shall die both of 35 them. And I will raise me up a faithful priest, that [who]
shall do according to that which is in my heart and in my mind [soul], and I will
build him a sure[FN51] 36house, and he shall walk before my anointed for ever.
And it shall come to pass that every one that is left in thy house shall come and
crouch to him for a piece[FN52] of silver and a morsel of bread, and shall say, Put
me, I pray thee, into one of the priests’ offices, that I may eat a piece of bread.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1 Samuel 2:27. The “man of God” (for the expression comp. Deuteronomy 33:1;
Judges 13:6) who appears here is undoubtedly to be regarded as a prophet, both
from this title, which marks him as standing in a specific relation to God, and from
the introduction of his address: “Thus saith the Lord.” This Isaiah, however, not the
first mention of a prophet after Moses (Thenius); against this are Judges 4:14;
Judges 6:8.—[Bib. Comm.: “The term (man of God) is applied to Moses in
Deuteronomy 33:1; Joshua 14:6; and to different prophets upwards of forty times in
Judges, Sam. and Kings, most-frequently in the latter. In the Prophets it occurs only
once ( Jeremiah 35:4). It occurs six or seven times in Chron, Ezra and Nehemiah,
and in the inscription of Psalm 90, and nowhere else in the Old Testament. The
sudden appearance of a man of God, the only prophet of whom mention is made
since Judges 6:8, without name, or any notice of his country, is remarkable.”—
Tr.]—Thus saith the Lord.—Called and commissioned hereto by the Lord, he is
nothing but His instrument; what he says is the very word of the Lord.—Did I
reveal myself?—The interrog. particle (ֲה) stands here to strengthen the reality of the
fact treated of, a question being introduced to which an affirmative reply is a matter
of course, where in German [and in English] a not must be inserted. Comp.
Jeremiah 31:20; Job 20:4; Ges. § 153, 2. The Inf. Abs. (ה ְגִ)נ shows the feeling of the
question, and strengthens the assurance or assertion contained in it. By Eli’s
father’s house we cannot understand Ithamar and his family, since a divine
revelation to them in Egypt is out of the question; it is rather the family of Aaron
(from whom Eli descended through Ithamar), as the high-priestly house. Aaron and
his four sons, Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, when they were in Egypt,
“belonged to Pharaoh’s house,” were its subjects, property (פּ׳ יתֵבְ;)ל the suffix ָם־
(when they were) refers not to the children of Israel, but to “the house of thy
205](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-205-320.jpg)
![father.”
During the Egyptian bondage Aaron received the divine revelations by which he
was called along with Moses to be God’s instrument for the redemption of His
people; and with Moses he received the command to institute the feast of the
Passover ( Exodus 4:14 sqq, Exodus 4:27; Exodus 12:1; Exodus 12:43). These
revelations were the preparation and foundation for the calling of Aaron and his
house to the high-priesthood.—[So far as the calling was concerned, the house of
Aaron and the house of Eli were identical. Hence Eli is in this discourse identified
with Aaron as to his privileges, but distinguished from the whole house as to his sin
and its Punishment.—TR.]
[Erdmann renders: “I chose it (the house of thy father) to perform priestly
service.”—TR.][FN53]
How that house (Aaron and his sons) were formally called and appointed to the
priestly office is circumstantially related in Exodus 28, 29. Comp. especially Exodus
28:1; Exodus 29:9; Exodus 29:30; Exodus 29:44, with Leviticus 8:1 sq. and Numbers
18—The priestly service is described in three grades, corresponding to the three
divisions of the Sanctuary: 1) “to offer[FN54] on my altar,” where the altar of
burnt-offering with its service is meant; 2) “to burn incense.” Incense had to be
burned daily. The incense-offering alone is named, and represents the other
offerings as the indication of the priestly service in the Holy Place, Exodus 30:8;
Exodus 3) “to wear the ephod before me.” The high-priest wore the ephod[FN55]
when he went officially into the Most Holy place to represent the people before God,
Exodus 28:12; Exodus 28:29-30.—And I gave to the house of thy father, etc.—The
divine wages for these priestly services is the maintenance which the priests derived
from the offerings. The “firings” (fire-offerings, ב׳ י ֵשּׁ ִ)א are the same as “the firing
and the firings of the Lord” ( Leviticus 1:9; Leviticus 2:10; Deuteronomy 18:1) in
the offerings, and so are the things offered. According to Numbers 18:20;
Deuteronomy 10:9; Deuteronomy 18:1, the Levites, and therefore the whole
priesthood, received no inheritance in land; their support was provided for by the
portions of the offerings appointed them by law, that Isaiah, all sacrificial gifts, so
far as they were not burnt in offering the sacrifice, Leviticus 6:7; Numbers 18.
206](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-206-320.jpg)
![1 Samuel 2:29. In the preceding verses (27, 28) reference is made to the favor which
had been shown the family of Eli in their selection and calling to the service of
priests in the Sanctuary, and their maintenance with the offerings is mentioned as
proof of the Lord’s care for His servants; there the question ( 1 Samuel 2:27) was
introduced by the simple interrog. sign (ֲה); here the more sharply toned question
with “why” )ה ָָמּל ) portrays in distinct contrast the wicked conduct of the priests:
Why do ye trample under foot? etc.—“Sacrifice and offering” (הָחְנ ִוּמ חֶַבז) is a
“general designation for all altar-offerings” (Keil). טַﬠָבּ “is in Aram. first tread (Heb.
,)דרך and might thence (as בום,דרך , Judges 5:23; Proverbs 27:7) like ‘tread’ in many
languages figuratively mean to treat with contempt” (Bצttcher). עוֹן ָ,מ the
“dwelling,” in pregnant sense is the Tabernacle, as the Lord’s dwelling-place in the
midst of His people. Though the word has not elsewhere in itself this meaning, yet it
follows here and in 1 Samuel 2:32 from the connection, which without difficulty
permits the same addition that we find in Psalm 26:8, “of thy house.” There is no
need therefore here to suppose (with Thenius) either a wrong reading or in general
anything superfluous, particularly not the latter, because the Lord’s abode with His
people was in fact the scene of the priests’ enormities, and their guilt thus appeared
so much the greater. עוֹן ָמ is Accus. of place “in the dwelling” =)תִיַבּ “in the house”).
Bצttcher proposes as a “faultless text” וֹןָﬠ ים ִית ִוּ ִצ ,א׳ “why do ye trample under
foot,… what I commanded them, sinfully,” where the suffix “them” refers to the
Israelites ( 1 Samuel 2:28), and וֹןָﬠ “sin,” is taken in the sense of וֹןָﬠ ְ,בּ “in sin,” which
is found in Psalm 51:7. But according to the preceding explanation there is no need
for such a change, apart from the fact “that the ‘sinfully’ precisely speaking is
already contained in the ‘trample under foot’ ” (Thenius). He says: “why do ye
trample,” etc, because Eli was partaker in the guilt of his sons; because Hebrews,
not only as father towards sons, but also as high-priest towards them as priests, was
weakly lacking in the proper chastisement and in the enjoined holy strictness. Eli
ought to have opposed his sons as a zealous contender for the Lord’s honor; since he
did not do this, he not only made himself partaker of their guilt, but honored his
sons before the Lord, more than the Lord, because he spared them, and showed
unseasonable paternal gentleness. In the plu. pron. “make yourselves fat,” Eli’s guilt
is again referred to; what they did, namely, that they took ( 1 Samuel 2:15) the first
(ית ִאשׁ ֵ)ר of the offering before the best of the offering (הָחְנ ִ)מ was presented to the
Lord by burning it in the fire of the altar, that he did along with them; they made
themselves fat. The wickedness of Eli and his sons in connection with the offering is
also put here in two-fold form, namely, against God (“my offering”), and against the
people as the people of the Lord (all the offerings of Israel, my people).[FN56] After
the reference to the guilt follows now the judgment, the announcement of
207](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-207-320.jpg)
![29 Why do you[e] scorn my sacrifice and offering
that I prescribed for my dwelling? Why do you
honor your sons more than me by fattening
yourselves on the choice parts of every offering
made by my people Israel?’
BARNES, "Wherefore kick ye - See the marginal reference. The well-fed beast
becomes unmanageable and refractory, and refuses the yoke, and bursts the bonds Jer_
5:5. So the priests, instead of being grateful for the provision made for them, in their
pampered pride became dissatisfied, wantonly broke the laws of God which regulated
their share of the offerings, and gave themselves up to an unbridled indulgence of their
passions and their covetousness.
Honourest thy sons above me - What restrained Eli from taking vigorous action
to vindicate God’s honor, was his unwillingness to lose for his sons the lucrative office of
the priesthood. He was willing to rebuke them, he was grieved at their misdeeds, but he
was not willing to give up the wealth and plenty which flowed into his house from the
offerings of Israel.
CLARKE, "Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice - They disdained to take the part
allowed by law; and would take for themselves what part they pleased, and as much as
they pleased, 1Sa_2:13-16 : thus they kicked at the sacrifices.
Honourest thy sons above me - Permitting them to deal, as above, with the
offerings and sacrifices, and take their part before the fat, etc., was burnt unto the Lord:
thus they were first served. At this Eli connived, and thus honored his sons above God.
GILL, "Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice, and at mine offering, which I have
commanded in my habitation,.... To be offered in the tabernacle, where the Lord
had his dwelling; which they might be said to kick and spurn at, despising them, as if
there were not enough of them, nor the best of them given to them for their
maintenance; a metaphor taken from cattle well fed and fat, which kick and spurn with
their feet at even the owners and feeders of them. The Targum is,"why do ye use force
with the holy offerings?''that is, take them away by force, when there was such a
sufficient quantity allowed them for their support. Some understand this of their driving
215](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-215-320.jpg)
![This will be best learned from a review of the context. Eli being far advanced in age,
his sons performed the priestly office in his stead. But they abused their power to
such a degree as to “make the offerings of the Lord to be abhorred.” Eli heard of
their proceedings, and reproved them for their wickedness: but he neglected to exert
that authority with which God had invested him; and manifested more regard for
the feelings of his sons, than he did for the honour of his God. This was Eli’s fault,
and the occasion of God’s heavy displeasure against him. From hence then we see
what God requires of us: he expects us,
1. To have a supreme regard for his glory—
[The honour of God ought to be dear to every one of us: for though we cannot
augment or diminish his essential glory, we may greatly affect the regards of men
towards him, and be an occasion of his being either honoured or blasphemed by
multitudes around us. In truth, there is not any thing we do, but has considerable
influence of this kind. How careful then should we be, and how watchful, not to do
any thing which may lower him in the esteem of men! The thought that should be
ever uppermost in our minds, is this; “What aspect will such or such conduct have
upon religion; and what effect will it produce in advancing or retarding its influence
in the world? — — —]
2. To promote it to the utmost of our power—
[To exemplify religion in our own conduct must be our first labour, and to shew all
possible respect to every thing that relates to God. His word, his Sabbath, his name,
his Gospel, his cause and interest in the world, must be exceeding high in our
estimation. But we must not content ourselves with honouring God in our own
persons; we must exert all our influence that he may be honoured by all around us.
Some are invested with magisterial power; and they must use it for God, and not
bear the sword in vain. To others is committed the ministry of the Gospel; and they
must boldly reprove sin of every kind, and commend themselves to every man’s
conscience in the sight of God. To others is parental authority intrusted; and they
must not content themselves with gently rebuking the wickedness of their children,
225](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-225-320.jpg)
![but must exert themselves to the uttermost to restrain it. Here was Eli’s defect. He
did well to begin with mild reproof: but he should have proceeded to severer
measures, when he saw that they were not to be reclaimed by gentler means. In a
word, we should be so intent on advancing the honour of God in the world, as to
esteem nothing too much to do, nor any thing too great to suffer, for the attainment
of our object: relations, interests, or life itself, should be of no account with us in
comparison of this [Note: Luke 14:26 with that expression in the verse before the
text, “Thou honourest thy sons above me.”].]
Such being the conduct which God requires, let us consider,
II. In what light he will view it—
He will account himself “honoured” by our observance of it—
[Often does he speak to us to this effect: and in what sense we must understand the
expression, has been before explained. Though “our goodness cannot extend to
him,” or profit “him,” if he esteem himself glorified by it, it is quite sufficient for us:
nor can we have any greater stimulus to exertion than such a consideration as this.
To form a just estimate of it, let us only reflect on the zeal which is manifested by all
the hosts of heaven to honour God: how do they all vie with each other in their songs
of praise! And if an opportunity were afforded them to advance his honour by any
offices on earth, how readily would they leave their blest abodes, and fly hither to
execute his high commands! They are represented as “doing his commandments,
and hearkening to the voice of his word,” to obey the first intimation of his will.
Such is the zeal that should animate us; and God will assuredly consider himself as
glorified by it: indeed he is glorified, inasmuch as our obedience proclaims to all
around us, that he is, in our estimation at least, worthy of all the love that we can
manifest, and of all the service that we can render him.]
But where such conduct is wanting, God accounts himself treated with contempt—
226](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-226-320.jpg)
![[Is there no medium between an honouring of God and a despising of him? I
answer, No: if he be not honoured, something else is honoured above him, and the
creature is set above the Most High God. It is said of Eli, that he “honoured his sons
above God:” and this was considered by God as an instance of direct and absolute
contempt. The same is true respecting every act of disobedience, and every neglect
of duty; which necessarily implies an attention to our own ease, interest, or pleasure,
in preference to the will of God. What a contempt of the Divine Majesty does it
argue, when we resist his will! What a contempt of his love and mercy, when we
neglect his salvation! What a contempt of his justice, his holiness, and his truth,
when we entertain the idea that such conduct can pass with impunity! This is the
very construction that God himself puts upon such conduct: “Wherefore doth the
wicked contemn God, while he doth say in his heart, Thou, God, wilt not require
it?”
If then we, poor, ignorant, guilty creatures, feel so keenly when we are treated with
contempt, let us consider how indignantly the Most High God will resent such
conduct at our hands.]
He himself has told us,
II. What notice he will take of it—
He will honour his faithful and obedient servants—
[This he has promised [Note: John 12:26.]: and he will perform it. Men may treat
them as if they were “the filth of the earth and the offscouring of all things;”
(though they cannot help reverencing them in their hearts [Note: Mark 6:20.]:) but
God will honour them with the most distinguished tokens of his love. He “will give
them a name better than of sons and of daughters,” and will enrich them with the
inestimable blessings of grace and peace. Through their whole lives he will admit
them to the nearest fellowship with himself: and what will he not do for them in the
hour of death? — — — Yet all this falls infinitely short of the glory he will confer
upon them in the future world. Read what testimonies of his approbation he will
227](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-227-320.jpg)
![give them before the assembled universe, and with what honours he will invest them
at his own right hand [Note: Matthew 25:34; Malachi 3:17.]: verily they shall never
have reason to complain that their fidelity to God has not been adequately
rewarded.]
But those who have despised him shall be despised by him—
[Though they may be exalted among men, God will hold them in the utmost
contempt. He will not vouchsafe to them so much as one kind look: but, on the
contrary, in the hour of their greatest extremity, “he will laugh at their calamity,
and mock when their fear cometh.” No consolations will he administer to them in a
dying hour; but will rather hide his face from them, and shut his ear at the voice of
their cry. And when they stand at his judgment-seat, he will bid them “depart
accursed into everlasting fire,” regarding them no more than the chaff that is cast
into the oven — — — They will then indeed “be lightly esteemed;” for they will
“awake to shame and everlasting contempt.”]
Here then we may see,
1. What estimate we should form of lukewarm religion—
[That religion is most pleasing to men, which is regulated by the opinions of the
world: but that alone is acceptable with God, which is agreeable to the standard of
his revealed will. He requires our whole hearts; and looks with utter abhorrence
upon the lukewarmness of a Laodicean state [Note: Revelation 3:15-16.] — — —
Let us then not be contented with serving God in our closets; but let us confess him
in the world: and let us not only serve him ourselves, but use all our influence to
bring others also to a submission to his will. Yea, if all others should determinately
reject his yoke, let us say, “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”]
2. What alone we are to regard as the great object of our desire—
228](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-228-320.jpg)
![[“The honour that cometh of man” should be no further of any account with us,
than it may augment our influence in serving God. It is the honour which cometh of
God that alone deserves our concern. To have the witness of his Spirit and the
testimony of our own conscience that we are pleasing God, is worthy of our most
diligent pursuit. That will comfort us, when all other sources of consolation are cut
off. Moreover, the approbation of God will continue, millions of ages after that the
breath of man’s applause has vanished away. Let us then act to God, and live for
God, and endeavour so to walk with him, that we may enjoy the light of his
countenance: for “in his favour is life, and his loving-kindness is better than life
itself.”]
K&D, "1Sa_2:30
For this reason, the saying of the Lord, “Thy house (i.e., the family of Eli) and thy father's
house (Eli's relations in the other lines, i.e., the whole priesthood) shall walk before me for ever”
(Num_25:13), should henceforth run thus: “This be far from me; but them that honour me I will
honour, and they that despise me shall be despised.” The first declaration of the Lord is not to be
referred to Eli particularly, as it is by C. a Lapide and others, and understood as signifying that
the high-priesthood was thereby transferred from the family of Eleazar to that of Ithamar, and
promised to Eli for his descendants for all time. This is decidedly at variance with the fact, that
although “walking before the Lord” is not a general expression denoting a pious walk with God,
as in Gen_17:1, but refers to the service of the priests at the sanctuary as walking before the face
of God, yet it cannot possibly be specially and exclusively restricted to the right of entering the
most holy place, which was the prerogative of the high priest alone. These words of the Lord,
therefore, applied to the whole priesthood, or the whole house of Aaron, to which the priesthood
had been promised, “for a perpetual statute” (Exo_29:9). This promise was afterwards renewed
to Phinehas especially, on account of the zeal which he displayed for the honour of Jehovah in
connection with the idolatry of the people at Shittim (Num_25:13). But even this renewed
promise only secured to him an eternal priesthood as a covenant of peace with the Lord, and not
specially the high-priesthood, although that was included as the culminating point of the
priesthood. Consequently it was not abrogated by the temporary transfer of the high-priesthood
from the descendants of Phinehas to the priestly line of Ithamar, because even then they still
retained the priesthood. By the expression “be it far from me,” sc., to permit this to take place,
God does not revoke His previous promise, but simply denounces a false trust therein as
irreconcilable with His holiness. That promise would only be fulfilled so far as the priests
themselves honoured the Lord in their office, whilst despisers of God who dishonoured Him by
sin and presumptuous wickedness, would be themselves despised.
This contempt would speedily come upon the house of Eli.
BI, "For them that honour Me I will honour, and they that despise Me shall be lightly
esteemed.
The reward of honouring God
229](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-229-320.jpg)
![BARNES, "I will cut off thine arm ... - A strong phrase for breaking down the strength and
power, of which the arm is the instrument in man (compare Zec_11:17). See 1Sa_2:33.
CLARKE, "I will cut off thine arm - I will destroy the strength, power, and influence of thy
family.
GILL, "Behold, the days come,.... Or, are coming (g); and will quickly come, in a very little
time the things, after threatened, began to take place, even in the days of Eli's sons, and the whole
was accomplished in about eighty years after:
that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father's house: that is, the strength of him
and them, as the Targum, the strength of a man for doing business lying in his arm; meaning by it
not long life, as Kimchi, who concludes this sense from what follows; but rather power and
authority, or the exercise of the office of high priest, which gave him and his family great esteem
and power; or it may be best of all, his children, which are the strength of a man, and the support
of his family, see Gen_49:3
that there shall not be an old man in thine house; as there were none when he died, and his
two sons, the same day; and the children they left were very young, and Ahitub, who was one of
them, could not die an old man, since Ahimelech his son was priest in the time of Saul, who with
eighty five priests were slain by his order; and Abiathar his son was deprived of his priesthood in
the time of Solomon; though some understand this not of an elder in years, but in office; and that
the sense is, that there should be none of his family a senator, or a member of the great
sanhedrim, or court of judicature; and so it is interpreted in the Talmud (h); with which agree
Ben Gersom and Abarbinel.
HENRY, " That their power should be broken (1Sa_2:31): I will cut off thy arm, and the arm
of thy father's house. They should be stripped of all their authority, should be deposed, and have
no influence upon the people as they had had. God would make them contemptible and base. See
Mal_2:8, Mal_2:9. The sons had abused their power to oppress the people and encroach upon
their rights, and the father had not used his power, as he ought to have done, to restrain and
punish them, and therefore it was justly threatened that the arm should be cut off which was not
stretched out as it should have been.
JAMISON, "I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father’s house — By the
withdrawal of the high priesthood from Eleazar, the elder of Aaron’s two sons (after Nadab and
Abihu were destroyed, [Num_3:4]), that dignity had been conferred on the family of Ithamar, to
which Eli belonged, and now that his descendants had forfeited the honor, it was to be taken
from them and restored to the elder branch.
247](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-247-320.jpg)
![affliction of God’s house from the loss of the Ark remained, while under the lead of
Samuel there came blessing to the people. This is the fulfilment of this prophecy in
reference to the affliction of God’s dwelling. “Not an old man” is repetition of the
threat in 1 Samuel 2:31, and return of the discourse to the judgment on Eli’s house.
“All the days” [Eng. A. V. for ever], for ever, that Isaiah, as long as his family
existed. [Both text and translation of 1 Samuel 2:32 offer great difficulties. Vat.
Sept. omits it. Al. Sept. and Theod.: “Thou shalt see strength” (ךסבפב,)שלב etc. The
Syr. and Arab.: “and (not) one who holds a sceptre in thy dwelling,” which involves
a totally different text. Targ. has “thou shalt see the affliction which will come on a
man of thy house in the sins which ye have committed in the house of my
sanctuary.” The omission in Vat. Sept. was probably occasioned by the similar
endings of 1 Samuel 2:31-32; the other versions and all the MSS. contain the verse,
one MS. only of De Rossi giving עוֹז ָ,מ “strength,” instead of עוֹן ָ,מ “dwelling.” We
must therefore retain the Heb. text, and explain the repetition of the last clause as
intended to give emphasis to the statement in question. But, as רָצ frequently means
“distress,” and as the course of thought here suggests affliction for Eli’s house
rather than for God’s, it is better to render: “thou shalt see distress of dwelling in all
that brings prosperity to Israel,” the contrast being between the national prosperity
and his personal affliction, which would thus exclude him from the national
rejoicing, and so from the evidence of the divine favor. And we may regard the
latter clause of the verse: “there shall not be an old Prayer of Manasseh,” etc, as
defining the “affliction” which is here brought out as a punishment additional to the
“weakness” of 1 Samuel 2:31.—TR.]
PETT, "1 Samuel 2:31
“Behold, the days come, that I will cut off your arm, and the arm of your father’s
house, so that there will not be an old man in your house.”
To cut off the arm meant to remove the strength. Thus the point was being made
that no male of his house would in future grow to be an old man, because YHWH
would not permit it.
1 Samuel 2:32
250](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-250-320.jpg)
![being used even of the dens of wild beasts (Jeremiah 9:10; Nahum 2:12), the
rendering an "enemy of dwelling" gives no sense. Hence the violent insertion of the
pronoun my, for which no valid excuse can be given. But narrowness of dwelling,
means distress, especially in a man's domestic relations, and this is the sense
required. In the growing public and national prosperity which was to be Israel's lot
under Samuel, Saul, David, and Solomon, Eli was to see, not in person, but
prophetically, calamity attaching itself to his own family. His house was to decay in
the midst of the progress of all the rest. Upon this denunciation of private distress
naturally follows the repetition of the threat that the house of Ithamar should be left
without an old man to guide its course onward to renewed prosperity.
K&D, "1Sa_2:32
“And thou wilt see oppression of the dwelling in all that He has shown of good to
Israel.” The meaning of these words, which have been explained in very different ways,
appears to be the following: In all the benefits which the lord would confer upon His
people, Eli would see only distress for the dwelling of God, inasmuch as the tabernacle
would fall more and more into decay. In the person of Eli, the high priest at that time,
the high priest generally is addressed as the custodian of the sanctuary; so that what is
said is not to be limited to him personally, but applies to all the high priests of his house.
ן ע ָמ is not Eli's dwelling-place, but the dwelling-place of God, i.e., the tabernacle, as in
1Sa_2:29, and is a genitive dependent upon רַ.צ יב ִיט ֵ,ה in the sense of benefiting a
person, doing him good, is construed with the accusative of the person, as in Deu_
28:63; Deu_8:16; Deu_30:5. The subject to the verb יב ִֵיטי is Jehovah, and is not
expressly mentioned, simply because it is so clearly implied in the words themselves.
This threat began to be fulfilled even in Eli's own days. The distress or tribulation for the
tabernacle began with the capture of the ark by the Philistines (1Sa_4:11), and continued
during the time that the Lord was sending help and deliverance to His people through
the medium of Samuel, in their spiritual and physical oppression. The ark of the
covenant - the heart of the sanctuary - was not restored to the tabernacle in the time of
Samuel; and the tabernacle itself was removed from Shiloh to Nob, probably in the time
of war; and when Saul had had all the priests put to death (1Sa_21:2; 1Sa_22:11.), it was
removed to Gibeon, which necessarily caused it to fall more and more into neglect.
Among the different explanations, the rendering given by Aquila (καὶ ἐπιβλέψει [?
ἐπιβλέψης] ἀντίζηλον κατοικητηρίου) has met with the greatest approval, and has been
followed by Jerome (et videbis aemulum tuum), Luther, and many others, including De
Wette. According to this rendering, the words are either supposed to refer to the attitude
of Samuel towards Eli, or to the deposition of Abiathar, and the institution of Zadok by
Solomon in his place (1Ki_2:27). But רַצ does not mean the antagonist or rival, but
simply the oppressor or enemy; and Samuel was not an enemy of Eli any more than
Zadok was of Abiathar. Moreover, if this be adopted as the rendering of רַ,צ it is
impossible to find any suitable meaning for the following clause. In the second half of
the verse the threat of 1Sa_2:31 is repeated with still greater emphasis. ים ִָמיּ ַל־הָ,כּ all the
time, i.e., so long as thine house shall exist.
255](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-255-320.jpg)
![ל ַא,ֹאל ישׁ ִא , Exodus 16:19; Exodus 34:3; Leviticus 18:6. But when the accent falls on
the word expressive of universality by an adversative particle, as here (ישׁ ִא ְ,)ו the
following negation may affect this word alone, as in Numbers 23:13. Accordingly we
render here: “Yet I will not cut off every one from thee.” The following words: to
consume thine eyes and to grieve thy heart, or “that I may consume,” etc, mark the
highest degree of punishment which would befal Eli but for the limitation contained
in the words “not every man.” Thenius refers this limitation specially to Ahitub, son
of Phinehas, and brother of Ichabod, against which Keil justly remarks that it
cannot be proved from 1 Samuel 14:3 and 1 Samuel 22:20 that he was the only one
who survived of Eli’s house.[FN57]—The following words: the great majority or
mass shall die as men, not only answer to the repeated threat in 1 Samuel 2:31-32,
that there should be no old man in the house, but at the same time explain the
declaration of 1 Samuel 2:31 : “I will break thine arm;” for “men” (ים ִָשׁנֲ)א indicates
the power and strength of the house, and is contrasted with “old man” (Luther:
“when they have become men;” Van Ess: “in mature age”.(—On ב׳ ,מ׳ “multitude,”
“majority,” not “offspring,” comp. 1 Chronicles 12:29; 2 Chronicles 30:18.—[Sept.:
“And every survivor of thy house shall fall by the sword of men.” Vulg.: “and the
great part of thy house shall die when they attain the age of men.” Targ.: “and all
the multitude of thy house shall be slain young.” Syr.: “and all the pupils (so Castle
renders marbith) of thy house shall die men.” Philippson: “and all the increase of
thy house shall die as men.” The Eng. A. V. probably gives the sense. The adj. “all”
does not suit the rendering “multitude,” which Targ. and Erdmann adopt. In regard
to the first clause of the verse, the rendering of Eng. A. V. seems to be possible, that
Isaiah, the taking א׳ ֹאל as indef. rel. clause. Erdmann regards the reservation of the
“man” as a limitation of the punishment (“consume, grieve”); Eng. A. V. better,
with most expositors, as an element of the punishment. Mendoza (in Poole’s
Synopsis): “I will take from thee the high-priesthood, which thou hast by privilege; I
will give thee or thy descendants the priesthood of the second order, which thou
hadst by hereditary right.” Grotius: “They shall live that they may be the greatest
grief to thee.”—Long afterwards this curse was held to cling to the family of Eli. Gill
cites a saying of the Talmud that there was a family in Jerusalem the men of which
did not live to be more than eighteen years old, and Johanan ben Zacchai being
asked the reason of this, replied that they were perhaps of the family of Eli.—Sept.
has “his eyes” and “his soul,” instead of thy; but there is no good ground for
altering the Heb. text.—TR.]
PETT, "1 Samuel 2:33
“And the man of yours, whom I will not cut off from my altar, will be to consume
258](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-258-320.jpg)
![Eleazar’s, to which Zadok belonged; the latter from now on was sole high-priest,
while hitherto Abiathar had exercised this office along with him.—Thus was to be
fulfilled the negative part of the prophetic announcement ( 1 Samuel 2:31-34):
gradually Eli’s house went down in respect to the majority of its members [better, in
all its increase.—TR.]; the office of high-priest, which the surviving members for
some time filled, was at last taken away from it altogether.
PULPIT, "With this the sign here given exactly agrees. Hophni and Phinehas died
fighting valiantly in battle, and then came the sacking of Shiloh, and the slaughter of
the ministering priests (Psalms 78:64). Upon this followed a long delay. For first
Eli's grandson, Ahitub, the son of Phinehas, was high priest, and then his two sons,
Ahiah and Ahimelech, and then Abiathar, the son of Ahimelech. It was in
Ahimelech's days that the slaughter took place at Nob, from which the house of
Ithamar seems never to have fully recovered.
K&D, 1Sa_2:34
“And let this be the sign to thee, what shall happen to (come upon) thy two sons,
Hophni and Phinehas; in one day they shall both die.” For the fulfilment of this, see
1Sa_4:11. This occurrence, which Eli lived to see, but did not long survive (1Sa_4:17.),
was to be the sign to him that the predicted punishment would be carried out in its
fullest extent.
35 I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who
will do according to what is in my heart and mind.
I will firmly establish his priestly house, and they
will minister before my anointed one always.
BARNES, "Zadok is meant rather than Samuel. The High Priesthood continued in
262](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-262-320.jpg)
![of the Old Testament, and especially in such passages as Ezekiel 44:15, (quoted by
Keil). Erdmann’s objections to this view do not seem conclusive. He urges: 1) that
the prophecy ( 1 Samuel 2:27-36) speaks not of a change within the Aaronic family,
but of a setting aside of that family in favor of a non-Aaronic priest.—But this is not
the declaration of the prophecy, ( 1 Samuel 2:30 speaks of the exclusion of unworthy
members, and the reference is plainly to Eli’s immediate family), and is contradicted
by the facts of history; for the Aaronic priesthood did continue to the end, while the
change announced ( 1 Samuel 2:36) was to take place in the history of Israel. Samuel
founded no priestly family, and the restriction of the prophecy to him alone is not in
keeping with the broadness of its declarations2) That Zadok was not specially
prominent, and does not exhibit a commanding character cannot be urged against
this view, since the prophecy promises not intellectual vigor in the “faithful priest”
but theocratic official purity and personal godliness, which Zadok and his
descendants in the main exhibited. III. Augustine (De Civ. Dei17, 5) explains the
priest here announced to be Christ alone, basing his view on the breadth and fulness
of the statements made about Him. The text does not allow this exclusive reference
to Christ, looking plainly, as it does, to the then existing order of things (as in 1
Samuel 2:36, which Augustine interprets of Jewish priests coming to worship
Christ), but it may include Him, or rather point to Him as the consummation of the
blessedness which it promises; and the remarkable fulness of the terms in 1 Samuel
2:35 naturally leads us to this explanation. IV. If the prophecy finds a partial
fulfilment in Samuel and Zadok, and also points to Christ, then it would seem best
to regard it as announcing a line of faithful men who would do God’s will in full
official and personal sympathy with His law. First comes Samuel, not indeed an
official priest, but a true representative of the spirituality of the divine service (see 1
Samuel 15:22). He is followed by Zadok, the father of a long line of priests, who
(with many defects) in the main preserve among the people and in the presence of
the king the fundamental ideas of the sacrificial service, and are a type ( Ezekiel
44:15) of the perfect priesthood into which they are finally merged. To this
Erdmann objects that the reference is plainly ( 1 Samuel 2:35) to one person, and
not to a body of men; but he himself understands the “anointed,” in which the
expression of singleness is not less distinct, of Saul and David. If the anointed is to
be understood of a line of kings, why not the priest of a line of priests?—This last
view then seems best to meet the demands of this confessedly difficult passage. See
Keil and Wordsworth in loco.—Tr.].
PETT, "1 Samuel 2:36
“And it will come about that every one who is left in your house will come and bow
down to him for a piece of silver and a loaf of bread, and will say, “Put me, I pray
280](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/1samuel2commentary-160309194731/85/1-samuel-2-commentary-280-320.jpg)
Uploaded byGLENN PEASE
1 samuel 2 commentary
The document discusses Hannah's prayer and song of thanksgiving found in 1 Samuel 2, highlighting its prophetic nature and significance. It emphasizes themes of God's justice, mercy, and sovereignty, as Hannah rejoices not only for her personal blessings but also for the future deliverance through the Messiah. The commentary draws parallels between Hannah's song and other biblical hymns, showcasing its theological depth and encouragement for believers to express gratitude and praise God.
More Related Content
More from GLENN PEASE
1 samuel 2 commentary
- 1. 1 SAMUEL 2COMMENTARY EDITED BY GLENN PEASE Hannah’s Prayer 1 Then Hannah prayed and said: “My heart rejoices in the Lord; in the Lord my horn[a] is lifted high. My mouth boasts over my enemies, for I delight in your deliverance. BARNES, "The song of Hannah is a prophetic Psalm. It is poetry. and it is prophecy. It takes its place by the side of the songs of Miriam, Deborah, and the Virgin Mary, as well as those of Moses, David, Hezekiah, and other Psalmists and prophets whose inspired odes have been preserved in the Bible. The special feature which these songs have in common is, that springing from, and in their first conception relating to, incidents in the lives of the individuals who composed them, they branch out into magnificent descriptions of the Kingdom and glory of Christ, and the triumphs of the Church, of which those incidents were providentially designed to be the types. The perception of this is essential to the understanding of Hannah’s song. Compare the marginal references throughout. CLARKE, "And Hannah prayed, and said - The Chaldee very properly says, And Hannah prayed in the spirit of prophecy; for indeed the whole of this prayer, or as it may be properly called oracular declaration, is a piece of regular prophecy, every part of it having respect to the future, and perhaps not a little - of it declaratory oil the Messiah’s kingdom. 1
- 2. Dr. Hales hassome very good observations on this prophetic song. “This admirable hymn excels in simplicity of composition, closeness of connection, and uniformity of sentiment; breathing the pious effusions of a devout mind, deeply impressed with a conviction of God’s mercies to herself in particular, and of his providential government of the world in general; exalting the poor in spirit or the humble-minded, and abasing the rich and the arrogant; rewarding the righteous, and punishing the wicked. Hannah was also a prophetess of the first class, besides predicting her own fruitfulness, 1Sa_2:5, (for she bore six children in all, 1Sa_2:21), she foretold not only the more immediate judgments of God upon the Philistines during her son’s administration, 1Sa_2:10, but his remoter judgments ‘upon the ends of the earth,’ 1Sa_ 2:10, in the true spirit of the prophecies of Jacob, Balaam, and Moses. Like them, she describes the promised Savior of the world as a King, before there was any king in Israel; and she first applied to him the remarkable epithet Messiah in Hebrew, Christ in Greek, and Anointed in English, which was adopted by David, Nathan, Ethan, Isaiah, Daniel, and the succeeding prophets of the Old Testament; and by the apostles and inspired writers of the New. And the allusion thereto by Zacharias, the father of the Baptist, in his hymn, Luk_1:69, where he calls Christ a ‘horn of salvation,’ and the beautiful imitation of it by the blessed Virgin throughout in her hymn, Luk_1:46-55, furnishing the finest commentary thereon, clearly prove that Hannah in her rejoicing had respect to something higher than Peninnah her rival, or to the triumphs of Samuel, or even of David himself; the expressions are too magnificent and sublime to be confined to such objects. Indeed the learned rabbi, David Kimchi, was so struck with them that he ingenuously confessed that ‘the King of whom Hannah speaks is the Messiah,’ of whom she spake either by prophecy or tradition; for, continues he, ‘there was a tradition among the Israelites, that a great zing should arise in Israel; and she seals up her song with celebrating this King who was to deliver them from all their enemies.’ The tradition, as we have seen, was founded principally on Balaam’s second and third prophecies, Num_24:7-17; and we cannot but admire that gracious dispensation of spiritual gifts to Hannah (whose name signifies grace) in ranking her among the prophets who should first unfold a leading title of the blessed Seed of the woman.” In the best MSS. the whole of this hymn is written in hemistich or poetic lines. I shall here produce it in this order, following the plan as exhibited in Kennicott’s Bible, with some trifling alterations of our present version: - 1Sa_2:1. My heart exulteth in Jehovah; My horn is exalted in Jehovah. My mouth is incited over mine enemies, For I have rejoiced in thy salvation. 1Sa_2:2. There is none holy like Jehovah, For there is none besides thee; There is no rock like our God. 1Sa_2:3. Do not magnify yourselves, speak not proudly, proudly. Let not prevarication come out of your mouth; For the God of knowledge is Jehovah, And by him actions are directed. 1Sa_2:4. The bows of the heroes are broken, And the tottering are girded with strength. 1Sa_2:5. The full have hired out themselves for bread, And the famished cease for ever. The barren hath borne seven, And she who had many children is greatly enfeebled. 1Sa_2:6. Jehovah killeth, and maketh alive; He bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up. 1Sa_2:7. Jehovah maketh poor, and maketh rich; He bringeth down, and he even 2
- 3. exalteth. 1Sa_2:8. He liftethup the poor from the dust; From the dunghill he exalteth the beggar, To make him sit with the nobles, And inherit the throne of glory. For to Jehovah belong the pillars of the earth, And upon them he hath placed the globe. 1Sa_2:9. The foot of his saints he shall keep, And the wicked shall be silent in darkness; For by strength shall no man prevail. 1Sa_2:10. Jehovah shall bruise them who contend with him; Upon them shall be thunder in the heavens. Jehovah shall judge the ends of the earth; And he shall give strength to his King. And shall exalt the horn of his Messiah. It is not particularly stated here when Hannah composed or delivered this hymn; it appears from the connection to have been at the very time in which she dedicated her son to God at the tabernacle, though some think that she composed it immediately on the birth of Samuel. The former sentiment is probably the most correct. Mine horn is exalted in the Lord - We have often seen that horn signifies power, might, and dominion. It is thus constantly used in the Bible, and was so used among the heathens. The following words of Horace to his jar are well known, and speak a sentiment very similar to that above: - Tu spem reducis mentibus anxiis, Viresque et addis Cornua pauperi. Hor. Odar. lib. iii., Od. 21, v. 18. Thou bringest back hope to desponding minds; And thou addest strength and horns to the poor man. Paraphrastically expressed by Mr. Francis: - “Hope, by thee, fair fugitive, Bids the wretched strive to live. To the beggar you dispense Heart and brow of confidence.” In which scarcely any thing of the meaning is preserved. My mouth is enlarged - My faculty of speech is incited, stirred up, to express God’s disapprobation against my adversaries. GILL, "And Hannah prayed and said,.... She had prayed before, but that was mental, this vocal; she had prayed and was answered, and had what she prayed for, and now she gives thanks for it; and thanksgiving is one kind of prayer, or a part of it; see 1Ti_2:1, wherefore though what follows is a song, it was expressed in prayer; and therefore it is said she prayed, and that by a spirit of prophecy, as the Targum; hence she is by the Jews (h) reckoned one of the seven prophetesses; and indeed in this song she not only relates the gracious experiences of divine goodness she had been favoured with, and celebrates the divine perfections, and treats of the dealings of God with men, both in a way of providence and grace; but prophesies of things that should be done hereafter in 3
- 4. Israel, and particularlyof the Messiah and of his kingdom. There is a great likeness in this song to the song of the Virgin Mary; compare 1Sa_2:1 with Luk_1:46 and 1Sa_2:2 with Luk_1:49 and 1Sa_2:4 with Luk_1:51, my heart rejoiceth in the Lord: not in her son the Lord had given her, but in the goodness and kindness of the Lord in bestowing him on her, as an answer of prayer; which showed great condescension to her, the notice he took of her, the love he had to her, and his well pleasedness in her, and his acceptance of her prayer through Christ; she rejoiced not in her husband, nor in the wealth and riches they were possessed of, nor in any creature enjoyments, but in the Lord, the giver of all; nor in her religious services and sacrifices, but in the Lord Christ, through whom her duties were acceptable to God, and who was the antitype of the sacrifices offered; and it is in the person, offices, and grace of Christ, that we should alone rejoice: see Phi_4:4 this joy of Hannah's was not worldly, but spiritual; not outward, but inward; not hypocritical, but real and hearty: mine horn is exalted in the Lord: which supposes that she had been in a low estate, was crest fallen, and her horn was defiled in the dust, as Job says was his case, Job_ 16:15, when God had shut up her womb, and her adversary upbraided her with it, and provoked and fretted her; and when she was so full of grief, that she could not eat her food, and prayed in the bitterness of her soul; but now she could lift up her horn and her head, as horned creatures, to whom the allusion is, do, when they are lively and strong; now she could look pleasant and cheerful, and even triumph, being raised to an high estate, and greatly favoured of the Lord, to whom she ascribes this change of her state and circumstances: it was owing to his power and grace that she was thus strengthened and exalted; as it is owing to the same, that the people of God, who are in a low estate by nature, are raised out of it in conversion, and brought into an open state of grace and favour with God, and put into the possession of rich blessings and mercies, and have hope of eternal glory, on account of which they can exult and triumph: my mouth is enlarged over mine enemies; meaning Peninnah, and those that provoked her, and upbraided her with her barrenness, to whom she was not able to make any reply; but now her mouth was opened, and she could speak largely, and did; not in a way of reproach and reviling, in retaliation for what she had met with from others; but in prayer to God, to whom she could come with open mouth, and use freedom and boldness, and plead with importunity, fervency, and in faith, and in praise and thanksgiving to him for the great and good things he had done for her, and would now freely and largely speak of them to others; to some, her friends, to their joy and pleasure; and to others, her enemies, to their grief and confusion: because I rejoice in thy salvation; not only in temporal salvation wrought by the Lord for her, whereby she was delivered from the reproach of barrenness, through a son being given unto her; but in spiritual and eternal salvation, through the Messiah, she had knowledge of, and faith in, as appears from 1Sa_2:10, as all believers in him do, as it is contrived by the wisdom of God, wrought out by Christ, and applied by his Spirit; it being so great, so suitable, so perfect and complete, entirely free, and of an everlasting duration; see Psa_20:5. 4
- 5. HENRY 1-2, "Wehave here Hannah's thanksgiving, dictated, not only by the spirit of prayer, but by the spirit of prophecy. Her petition for the mercy she desired we had before (1Sa_1:11), and here we have her return of praise; in both out of the abundance of a heart deeply affected (in the former with her own wants, and in the latter with God's goodness) her mouth spoke. Observe in general, 1. When she had received mercy from God she owned it, with thankfulness to his praise. Not like the nine lepers, Luk_17:17. Praise is our rent, our tribute. We are unjust if we do not pay it. 2. The mercy she had received was an answer to prayer, and therefore she thought herself especially obliged to give thanks for it. What we win by prayer we may wear with comfort, and must wear with praise. 3. Her thanksgiving is here called a prayer: Hannah prayed; for thanksgiving is an essential part of prayer. In every address to God we must express a grateful regard to him as our benefactor. Nay, and thanksgiving for mercies received shall be accepted as a petition for further mercy. 4. From this particular mercy which she had received from God she takes occasion, with an elevated and enlarged heart, to speak glorious things of God and of his government of the world for the good of his church. Whatever at any time gives rise to our praises in this manner they should be raised. 5. Her prayer was mental. Her voice was not heard; but in her thanksgiving she spoke, that all might hear her. She made her supplication with groanings that could not be uttered, but now her lips were opened to show forth God's praise. 6. This thanksgiving is here left upon record for the encouragement of those of the weaker sex to attend the throne of grace. God will regard their prayers and praises. The virgin Mary's song has great affinity with this of Hannah, Luk_1:46. Three things we have in this thanksgiving: - I. Hannah's triumph in God, in his glorious perfections, and the great things he had done for her, 1Sa_2:1-3. Observe, 1. What great things she says of God. She takes little notice of the particular mercy she was now rejoicing in, does not commend Samuel for the prettiest child, the most toward and sensible for his age that she ever saw, as fond parents are too apt to do. No, she overlooks the gift, and praises the giver; whereas most forget the giver and fasten only on the gift. Every stream should lead us to the fountain; and the favours we receive from God should raise our admiration of the infinite perfections there are in God. There may be other Samuels, but no other Jehovah. There is none beside thee. Note, God is to be praised as a peerless being, and of unparalleled perfection. This glory is due unto his name, to own not only that there is none like him, but that there is none besides him. All others were pretenders, Psa_18:31. Four of God's glorious attributes Hannah here celebrates the glory of: - (1.) His unspotted purity. This is that attribute which is most praised in the upper world, by those that always behold his face, Isa_6:3; Rev_4:8. When Israel triumphed over the Egyptians God was praised as glorious in holiness, Exo_15:11. So here, in Hannah's triumph, There is none holy as the Lord. It is the rectitude of his nature, his infinite agreement with himself, and the equity of his government and judgment in all the administrations of both. At the remembrance of this we ought to give thanks. (2.) His almighty power: Neither is there any rock (or any strength, for so the word is sometimes rendered) like our God. Hannah had experienced a mighty support by staying herself upon him, and therefore speaks as she had found, and seems to refer to that of Moses, Deu_32:31. (3.) His unsearchable wisdom: The Lord, the Judge of all, is a God of knowledge; he clearly and perfectly sees into the character of every person and the merits of every cause, and he gives knowledge and understanding to those that seek them of him. (4.) His unerring justice: By him actions are weighed. His own are so, in his eternal counsels; the actions of the children of men 5
- 6. are so, inthe balances of his judgment, so that he will render to every man according to his work, and is not mistaken in what any man is or does. 2. How she solaces herself in these things. What we give God the glory of we may take the comfort of. Hannah does so, (1.) In holy joy: My heart rejoiceth in the Lord; not so much in her son as in her God; he is to be the gladness of our joy (Psa_43:4), and our joy must not terminate in any thing short of him: “I rejoice in thy salvation; not only in this particular favour to me, but in the salvation of thy people Israel, those salvations especially which this child will be an instrument of, and that, above all, by Christ, which those are but the types of.” (2.) In holy triumph: “My horn is exalted; not only is my reputation saved by my having a son, but greatly raised by having such a son.” We read of some of the singers whom David appointed to lift up the horn, an instrument of music, in praising God (1Ch_25:5), so that, My horn is exalted means this, “My praises are very much elevated to an unusual strain.” Exalted in the Lord; God is to have the honour of all our exaltations, and in him must we triumph. My mouth is enlarged, that is, “Now I have wherewith to answer those that reproached me.” He that has his quiver full of arrows, his house full of children, shall not be ashamed to speak with the enemy in the gate, Psa_127:5. JAMISON, "1Sa_2:1-11. Hannah’s song in thankfulness to God. Hannah prayed, and said — Praise and prayer are inseparably conjoined in Scripture (Col_4:2; 1Ti_2:1). This beautiful song was her tribute of thanks for the divine goodness in answering her petition. mine horn is exalted in the Lord — Allusion is here made to a peculiarity in the dress of Eastern women about Lebanon, which seems to have obtained anciently among the Israelite women, that of wearing a tin or silver horn on the forehead, on which their veil is suspended. Wives, who have no children, wear it projecting in an oblique direction, while those who become mothers forthwith raise it a few inches higher, inclining towards the perpendicular, and by this slight but observable change in their headdress, make known, wherever they go, the maternal character which they now bear. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:1. Hannah prayed — That is, praised God. Hymns of praise are frequently comprehended under the name of prayers. To utter this hymn Hannah was raised by divine inspiration, while she was engaged in devout meditation on the extraordinary goodness of God to her. My heart rejoiceth — Or, leapeth for joy; for the words signify, not only inward joy, but also the outward demonstration of it. She was influenced by the same spirit which moved St. James to say, Is any afflicted? Let him pray, as she did, 1 Samuel 1:10. Is any merry? Let him sing psalms, as she now does. In the Lord — As the author of my joy, that he hath heard my prayer, and accepted my son for his service. My horn is exalted — My strength and glory (which are often signified by a horn) are advanced, and manifested to my vindication, and the confusion of my enemies. She who was bowed down and dejected, now lifts up her head and triumphs. My mouth is enlarged, 6
- 7. &c. — Thatis, opened wide to pour forth abundant praises to God, and to give a full answer to all the reproaches of my adversaries. Enemies — So she manifests her prudence and modesty in not naming Peninnah, but only her enemies in general. I rejoice in thy salvation — The matter of my joy is no trivial thing, but that strange and glorious deliverance thou hast given me from my oppressing grief and care, and from the insolent reproaches of my enemies. COFFMAN, "Willis cited six reasons why "some scholars" reject this song as pertaining in any sense to Hannah.[1] All six reasons are utterly worthless! (1) The placement of the song is alleged as "a reason," but it appears in the text exactly where it belongs, precisely following the dedication of Samuel at the tabernacle and in connection with the worship service mentioned in 1 Samuel 1:28. Where else would the critics have placed it? (2) The fact that 1 Samuel 2:11 is the natural continuation of 1 Samuel 1:28 is erroneously called "a reason," but there are a thousand instances in the Holy Bible were a verse, or ten verses, or a hundred verses, or whole chapters could be deleted and the disjoined portions be styled as "a natural continuation." In my commentaries, I have cited dozens of these. (3) The criticism that the song fits Hannah's situation "only in a very general way" is simply untrue. Every line of it fits Hannah's situation perfectly. (See below.) (4) "The details indicate a knowledge of the weapons of war, and neither Elkanah nor Hannah had any military experience." This ridiculous criticism is founded upon a single word, the word `bows' in 1 Samuel 2:4. This mention of such a weapon cannot possibly be construed as "a knowledge of military weapons, tactics, and warfare." In that age, there was not a dummy on earth who was ignorant of the fact that a bow, used to shoot arrows, was a very important military weapon. (5) The reference to the Lord's "king" in 1 Samuel 2:10 is said to assume a time AFTER the monarchy was established. Such a conclusion is a gross error. Hannah was familiar with the Pentateuch, and Moses had specifically prophesied that Israel, in time, would have a king (Deuteronomy 13:14ff and Deuteronomy 28:36ff), and 7
- 8. Hannah's words hereare a prophesy that God would give power and strength to such a king. The real trouble that unbelieving critics have with this song is the prophetic element in it, but their wicked unbelief is of no significance whatever. (6) 1 Samuel 2:6 here has an undeniable reference to God's raising the dead to life, and this is dubbed by critics as an example of, "theological ideas that reflect a later period." This type of nonsense is founded on the false notion that faith in the resurrection of the dead did not arise in Israel until a far later time than that of Samuel. However, Abraham, the ancestor of all Israel, believed in the resurrection, that being the sole and absolute reason for his obedience when God commanded him to offer Isaac as a sacrifice on mount Moriah (Hebrews 11:17-19). The inspired author of Hebrews could not have been wrong about that. The critical dictum that faith in the resurrection belongs to a later period than that of Abraham is merely a prejudiced and ignorant falsehood! So much for critical efforts to get rid of this song of Hannah, their sole objective being that of nullifying the Messianic import of it. "The refusal of modern critics to admit the genuineness of this song is founded upon an "a priori" and utter denial of the supernatural saving revelations of God, and upon a consequent inability to discern the prophetic illumination of the pious Hannah, and a complete misinterpretation of the contents of her song of praise."[2] The genuineness of the song is attested by the following reflections of the conduct of Peninnah in Hannah's song. (1) Proud talking and arrogance are mentioned in 1 Samuel 2:3. (2) The barren woman bears a child in 1 Samuel 2:5. 8
- 9. (3) The criticalwoman that had many children is forlorn in 1 Samuel 2:5. (4) The poor are made rich; the lowly are exalted, etc., appear in 1 Samuel 2:8. No more appropriate words pertaining to that situation between Hannah and Peninnah could possibly have been written. Note especially the honor that was said to be reserved for the poor and needy who would sit among "princes." As the mother of the distinguished prophet and judge of Israel and the great king-maker of Israel, Hannah fulfilled this perfectly. "There is no rock like our God." This line indicates that Hannah was familiar with Genesis 49:24, which records Jacob's blessing of Joseph, wherein he referred to God as the "Rock of Israel." There are many other reflections of the Pentateuch in the books of Samuel. In the first chapter of Luke, we find that the Magnificat and the song of Zacharias are both written within the influence of the song of Hannah, indicating dramatically that the Messianic import of Hannah's song was recognized by the pious Israelites of all subsequent ages.[3] Prior to the arrogant, unjustified criticisms that originated in the 19th century, the accepted translations of the entire Christian period, until that time, reflected the prophetic nature of this song. Adam Clarke, for example, translated 1 Samuel 2:10, as follows: "Jehovah shall bruise them who contend with him; Upon them shall he thunder in the heavens. 9
- 10. Jehovah shall judgethe ends of the earth; And he shall give strength to his King, And shall exalt the horn of his Messiah."[4] In the words of F. C. Cook: "The song of Hannah is a prophetic psalm; it is poetry, and it is prophecy. It takes its place by the side of the songs of Moses, Miriam, Deborah, the Virgin Mary, David, and Hezekiah."[5] That the Bible indeed is filled with predictive prophecy was affirmed by Willis in these words: "God can reveal coming events before they occur. Several passages in Isaiah 44-55 affirm that one thing that distinguishes God from the false gods is that He predicts what will come to pass and then causes it to happen as he had said (Isaiah 41:23,26; 42:9; 44:7; 45:21; 46:10-11; and Isaiah 48:3-8). Isaiah often referred to predictions that the Lord had made in the past which had already come to pass, and it seems unlikely that He would have made such arguments if His hearers did not know that they came to pass as prophesied."[6] We should add that such evidences of fulfilled prophecies are by no means restricted to Isaiah. The Bible is literally filled with them. Who can deny that Micah prophesied that Christ would be born in Bethlehem? In this light, therefore, we declare unequivocally that the Song of Hannah is 10
- 11. authentic, and thatthe interpretation of it as Messianic, both by Jewish and Christian scholars, for thousands of years should by no means be abandoned because of Satan's being uncomfortable with it! Like the Magnificat, Hannah's hymn of thanksgiving begins with the temporal mercies accorded to herself, but rises immediately into the realms of prophecy, foretelling Christ's kingdom and the triumphs of his Church."[7] "The barren has borne seven, but she who has many children is forlorn." This was interpreted by R. Payne Smith as, "A typical reference to the long barrenness of the Gentile world, to be followed by a fruitfulness far exceeding that of fleshly Israel."[8] The text supports this view because "seven" is a number standing for perfection, completeness, or infinity, and this did not apply to Hannah who bore six, (not seven) children. "The Lord will judge the ends of the earth." This definitely is not a reference to the islands or to the ends of the Mediterranean Sea, but a reference to the final judgment of the Last Day when God shall judge all mankind. "`Ends of the earth' means the whole earth up to its remotest quarters."[9] "He will give strength to his king, and exalt the power of his anointed." We are delighted to find in the Interpreter's Bible the following regarding this verse: "This verse seems to envisage the miraculous discomfiture (defeat) of the enemies of Israel, followed by the judgment of the nations and the coming of the Messiah."[10] Of course, the term anointed was applied especially to the kings of Israel from the times of Saul and afterward, especially to the Davidic dynasty; but "The `King' here is the Ideal Son of David (The Christ)."[11] (We do not agree with the reason for this interpretation by Caird, but his analysis of what the passage says is exactly correct). 11
- 12. It is notnecessary to suppose that Hannah herself knew the full meaning of her prophecy (See 1 Peter 1:10-12). As Fraser expressed it, "Whether or not it was clear to Hannah's mind, the Spirit who rested upon her signified a King greater than David and a more illustrious kingdom."[12] Concerning this tenth verse, F. C. Cook declared that, "This is a most remarkable passage, containing a clear and distinct prophecy of the Kingdom and Glory of the Christ of God (Compare Luke 1:69,70)."[13] By her mention of the Final Judgment here, "Hannah's prayer rises to a prophetic glance at the consummation of the kingdom of God."[14] ELLICOTT, "EXCURSUS A: ON THE SONG OF HANNAH (1 Samuel 2). The song of Hannah belongs to that group of inspired hymns of which examples have been preserved in most of the earlier books. Genesis, for instance, contains the prophetic song of the dying Jacob, Exodus the triumph hymn of Miriam, Numbers the glorious prophet song of Balaam, Deuteronomy the dying prayer and prophecy of Moses; Judges preserves for us the war song of Deborah. The Book of the Psalms was a later collection of the favourite sacred hymns and songs of the people, written mostly in what may be termed the golden age of Israel, when David and Solomon had consolidated the monarchy. Each of the greater songs embedded in the earlier books seems to have marked a new departure in the life of the chosen people. This is especially noticeable in the prophetic song of Jacob, which heralded the period of the Egyptian slavery, and pointed to a glorious future lying beyond the days of bitter oppression. Miriam sung of the triumphs of the Lord; her impassioned words introduced the free desert life which succeeded the slavery days 12
- 13. of Egypt. Moses’grand words were the preparation for the settlement of the tribes in Canaan. Hannah was impelled by the Spirit of the Lord to make a strange announcement respecting her boy Samuel. She had learned by Divine revelation that he was to be God’s chosen instrument in the future: first, as the restorer of the true life in Israel—which was then beginning to forget its God-Friend; and afterwards, as the founder of a new and kingly order of governors, who should unite the divided tribes, and weld into one great nation the scattered families of Israel. It is probable that these “poems,” which we find embedded in the oldest Hebrew records, were preserved in the nation, some as popular songs, sung and said among the people in their public and private gatherings as the best and noblest expression of their ideal national life; some as even forming part of the primitive liturgical service of those sacred gatherings of the chosen people which subsequently developed into the synagogue, the well-known sacred assemblies of Israel. The various compilers or redactors of the several Old Testament Books, according to this theory, gathered these poems, hymns, and songs from the lips of the people as they repeated and chanted them in their sacred festal gatherings. EXCURSUS B: ALLEGED DIFFICULTIES IN THE ASCRIPTION OF SONG TO HANNAH (1 Samuel 2). The advocates of a later date for the song of Hannah, with some force allege two points in the composition, which they say forbids their ascribing the “song” to the mother of Samuel, or even to the period in which she lived. It will be well briefly to examine these. First, the “song,” they say, is a triumph song, celebrating a victory over some foreign enemies. Such a theory, however, completely misinterprets the whole hymn. Nowhere is a victory spoken of, and the song contains only one allusion (1 Samuel 2:4 : “The bows of the mighty men”) which has anything to do with war; and this solitary passage contrasts the mighty bowmen with the stumbling or weak ones, and shows how, under the rule of God, the warrior is often confounded, and 13
- 14. the weak unarmedone strengthened. It is, in fact, only one of several vivid pictures painting the marvellous vicissitudes which, under God’s providence, so often happen to mortals. The strong often are proved weak, and the weak strong. The foes alluded to in the hymn of Hannah are not the enemies of Israel, but the unrighteous of the chosen people contrasted with the pious and devoted. Secondly, the “song” in 1 Samuel 2:10 assumes the existence of an earthly king in Israel, whereas when Hannah sung no king but Jehovah was acknowledged by any of the tribes. Erdmann, in Lange’s Commentary, well observes, in explanation of this, that “at the period when Hannah gave birth to Samuel it was incontestable that in the consciousness of the people, and the noblest part of them too, the idea of a monarchy had then become a power which quickened more and more the hope of a realisation of the old promises that there should be a royal dominion in Israel, till it took shape in an express demand which the people made of Samuel. The Divine promise that this people should be a kingdom is given as early as the patriarchal period (Genesis 17:6; Genesis 17:16. See too Genesis 49:10; Numbers 24:17; Numbers 24:19; Deuteronomy 17:14 to end of chapter). At the close of the period of the judges, when Hannah lived, the need of such a kingdom was felt the more strongly because the office which was entrusted with the duty of forming and guiding the theocratic life of the nation, namely, the high priestly office, was involved in the deepest degradation.” EXCURSUS C: THE HIGH PRIESTHOOD, AND THE FAMILY WHICH HELD IT (1 Samuel 2). The supreme dignity in Israel was held by the family of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, until the death of the high priest Ozi. We are not in possession of the circumstances which led to the transference of the office to Eli, the descendant of Ithamar, the younger son of Aaron; probably the surviving son of the high priest Ozi, of the house of Eleazar, was an infant, or at all events very young, when his father died, and Eli—his kinsman, no doubt—had probably distinguished himself in some of the ceaseless wars in which the people during the stormy period of the judges were continually involved, and was in consequence chosen by the popular voice to the vacant dignity. After the death of Eli and his two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, the high priestly dignity never seems to have recovered its ancient power and dignity. The eyes of Israel were turned first to Samuel, and then to Saul and his royal 14
- 15. successors, David andSolomon. During the lifetime of Samuel, Saul, and David, though shorn of its old proportions and exposed to many vicissitudes, the high priesthood continued in the family of Eli, who was succeeded by his grandson, Ahitub, the son of Phinehas. In the days of Saul, Ahijah, or Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub, gave David the shewbread to eat at Nob, and was for this act murdered by King Saul, together with all the priests then doing duty at the national sanctuary. His son, Abiathar, escaped the massacre, and was allowed to assume his father’s office. During the reign of David this Abiathar continued to be high priest, but was arbitrarily deposed by Solomon, who restored Zadok, of the old high priestly line of Eleazar. The descendants of Zadok continued to hold the office as long as the monarchy lasted. The annexed table shows the double line of high priests to the reign of Solomon:— [image] Verse 1 (1) And Hannah prayed, and said.—“Prayed,” not quite in the sense in which we generally understand prayer. Her prayer here asks for nothing; it is rather a song of thanksgiving for the past, a song which passes into expressions of sure confidence for the future. She had been an unhappy woman; her life had been, she thought, a failure; her dearest hopes had been baffled; vexed, tormented, utterly cast down, she had fled to the Rock of Israel for help, and in the eternal pity of the Divine Friend of her people she had found rest, and then joy; out of her own individual experience the Spirit of the Lord taught her to discern the general laws of the Divine economy; she had had personal experience of the gracious government of the kind, all-pitiful God; her own mercies were a pledge to her of the gracious way in which the nation itself was led by Jehovah—were a sign by which she discerned how the Eternal not only always delivered the individual sufferer who turned to Him, but would also at all times be ever ready to succour and deliver His people. 15
- 16. These true, beautifulthoughts the Spirit of the Lord first planted in Hannah’s heart, and then gave her lips grace and power to utter them in the sublime language of her hymn, which became one of the loved songs of the people, and as such was handed down from father to son, from generation to generation, in Israel, in the very words which first fell from the blessed mother of the child-prophet in her quiet home of “Ramah of the Watchers.” My heart rejoiceth.—The first verse of four lines is the introduction to the Divine song. She would give utterance to her holy joy. Had she not received the blessing at last which all mothers in Israel so longed for? Mine horn is exalted.—She does not mean by this, “I am proud,” but “I am strong”—mighty now in the gift I have received from the Lord: glorious in the consciousness “I have a God-Friend who hears me.” The image “horn” is taken from oxen and those animals whose strength lies in their horns. It is a favourite Hebrew symbol, and one that had become familiar to them from their long experience—dating from far-back patriarchal times—as a shepherd-people. HAWKER, "We have in this Chapter, the song of Hannah in her devout thanksgivings to the Lord, for her Samuel. She had dedicated the child to the Lord's service, and then closes the subject with praise. Besides this, the Chapter contains an account of the increase of Elkanah's family: of the sin of Eli's family; a man of God sent to reprove Eli: the threatened death of Eli's two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, in one day: the gracious promise of God's raising up to himself, a faithful Priest, and the degraded state of the house of Eli. 1 Samuel 2:1 (1) ¶ And Hannah prayed, and said, My heart rejoiceth in the LORD, mine horn is exalted in the LORD: my mouth is enlarged over mine enemies; because I rejoice in thy salvation. 16
- 17. There is agreat deal of the spirit of prophecy, as well as the spirit of prayer and praise, in this hymn of Hannah's, and therefore demands our attention the more. Though it is called a prayer, yet it contains subject also of information to the Church. The special mercy Hannah had received, gives occasion to her, to comfort the people of God in all ages with an assurance of the Lord's mercies to others. But principally I would call upon the Reader to observe, how much gospel is contained in it, and how evidently the Holy Ghost must have been shedding his sweet influences upon the mind of Hannah, when speaking as she doth in this verse, of rejoicing in God's salvation. Is not this plainly referring to the Lord Jesus? Did not the dying patriarch say the same? Genesis 49:18. And is not Jesus expressly called, Jehovah's salvation? Isaiah 49:6. CONSTABLE, "2. Hannah's Song of Solomon 2:1-10 Some commentators have seen Hannah's prayer as a non-essential song of praise included in the text for sentimental reasons. But this magnificent prayer provides the key to interpreting the rest of 1 and 2 Samuel. In this prayer, which contains no petition, Hannah articulated her belief that God rewards trust with blessing. He turns barrenness into fertility, not just in her case but universally. Mary, the mother of Jesus, incorporated some of Hannah's song in her own "Magnificat" (Luke 1:46-55). "The Song of Hannah appears near the beginning of 1 Samuel, and the Song of David appears near the end of 2 Samuel. These two remarkably similar hymns of praise thus constitute a kind of inclusio, framing the main contents of the books and reminding us that the two books were originally one. Both begin by using 'horn' (1 Samuel 2:1; 2 Samuel 22:3) as a metaphor for 'strength,' referring to God as the 'Rock,' and reflecting on divine 'deliverance/salvation' (1 Samuel 2:1-2; 2 Samuel 22:2-3). Both end by paralleling 'his king' with 'his anointed' (1 Samuel 2:10; 2 Samuel 22:51)." [Note: Youngblood, p. 579.] Hannah praised God because He had provided salvation for His people (1 Samuel 2:1-2). She had learned that God will humble people who view themselves as self- sufficient (1 Samuel 2:3-4), but He will help those who cast themselves on Him, asking Him to provide what they need (1 Samuel 2:5-8). Therefore the godly and the wicked will experience vastly different fates (1 Samuel 2:9-10). The Old Testament 17
- 18. writers spoke ofSheol (1 Samuel 2:6), the abode of the dead, as though it were a huge underground cave where judgment takes place (cf. Deuteronomy 32:22; Psalms 88:3-6; et al.). The whole point of this inspired poetic prayer is that people should trust in the Lord. Hannah had done this, and God had blessed her miraculously. Hannah's song contains a reference to a king that God would raise up as His anointed representative to lead Israel (1 Samuel 2:10). This is one of a few such references made by an ordinary Israelite that God recorded in Scripture (cf. Judges 8:22-23). God had revealed through Moses that in the future He would provide a king for His people (Deuteronomy 17). God revealed His purpose to set up a king over His people as early as Genesis (Genesis 17:6; Genesis 17:16; Genesis 35:11; Genesis 49:10; cf. Genesis 1:26-28). Hannah's reference to this king shows that the people of Israel looked forward to the fulfillment of that promise. Shortly after this the people demanded a king from God (1 Samuel 8:4-7). "This is the first reference in the OT to the king as the anointed of the Lord. Later, in the eschatological thought of Judaism, this expression became the characteristic title of the expected Deliverer, the Messiah or the Christ, who would alleviate world troubles in a Messianic era." [Note: Fred E. Young, "First and Second Samuel," in The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 276.] The motif of God making the barren fertile in response to their trust and obedience runs through the rest of 1 and 2 Samuel (cf. Samuel). So does the corollary truth that God will make the "powerful," who are not trusting and obedient, infertile and ultimately dead (cf. Saul). Likewise the motif of the Lord's anointed king is a major one in 1 and 2 Samuel (cf. David). Thus this prayer prepares the reader for the rest of the book. In 1 Samuel 1:1 to 1 Samuel 2:10 we also find for the first time the reversal of fortune motif that is a major theme in 1 and 2 Samuel. [Note: Longman and Dillard, p. 159.] People apparently unimportant become important, and those who appear to be important become unimportant (cf. Matthew 19:30). The crucial factor for them as Israelites was their response to the will of God as contained in the Mosaic 18
- 19. Covenant. God will blesspeople who want to further His program in the world by making it possible for them to do that. He may even do supernatural things to enable them to do so. Natural limitations do not limit God. Knowledge of what God has revealed about Himself and His program is what God uses to inspire trust in Himself and interest in His program. God may even reverse the fortunes of people in response to their response to His will. LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:1. The superscription, “and Hannah prayed,” does not suit precisely the contents of the following Song of Solomon, which is not exactly a prayer (ָהלּ ִפ ְ)תּ but a thanksgiving-testimony to the Lord and the revelation of His glory. Clericus: “Hannah rather sings praises to God than asks anything of Him.” So the word “prayers” )וֹתִלּ ִפ ְתּ ) in Psalm 72:20, includes all the Pss. from 1 to72, in the broad sense of thinking and speaking of God and in God’s presence, when the heart is most thoroughly concentrated and deeply immersed in Him, though the form of thinking and speaking to God may be lacking. The “thou,” however, referring to God, appears in two places ( 1 Samuel 2-2:1 ). [Chald.: “H. prayed in the spirit of prophecy.”—Tr.]. The content of the Song is: 1) The manifestation of deep joy in the Lord at the deliverance vouchsafed by Him over against enemies ( 1 Samuel 2:1). With lofty flight the four-membered strophe rises from the depth of the heart’s joyful emotion on high, where the source of salvation and help in the living God is seen and praised. The heart (as elsewhere the soul) is the central organ of all painful and joyful feelings. The “horn” is the symbol—derived from horned beasts, which carry the head high in consciousness of power—of vigorous courage and consciousness of power, of which the Lord is the source, (comp. Deuteronomy 33:17; Psalm 75:5; Psalm 89:18; Psalm 89:25).[FN11] The repetition of the “in the Lord” emphasizes the fact that the joyous frame of mind and lofty consciousness of power has its root in the Lord, and presupposes the most intimate communion with the living God. The “mouth opened wide over my enemies,” intimates that the joy and courage that filled her soul had found utterance, partly in exulting over adversaries, as contrasted with the silence of subjection to them, partly in proclaiming the glory of the Lord in thanks and praise for the help received from Him in the attacks of foes. The ground of her joy in the Lord is His salvation, His help against enemies2) The praise of the majesty of God in His holiness and His faithfulness, which is as firm as 19
- 20. a rock (1 Samuel 2:2). The “holy” indicates here in the broad sense the infinite superiority of God to everything earthly and human, His isolation from the world, but at the same time His absolute completeness of life in contrast with the nothingness and perishableness of everything in the sphere of the creaturely, as in Psalm 99:2-5; comp. 1 Kings 8:27. This is evident from the double negation: “none is holy as the Lord; for there is none beside thee.” The ground of this exclusive holiness is the aloneness and absoluteness of God; there is no God beside Him, He shares the divine being [Germ. Sein und Wesen] with none; therefore He is apart from everything human and earthly, and lifted up above it.[FN12]—The words “there is no rock like our God,” express the aloneness and exclusiveness of God’s character as set forth by the name rock. This superiority of God to all earthly and worldly being, this absolute glory beyond everything finite and human does not exclude, but is the ground of His self-revelation as the Fixed, Unchangeable, Immovable amid everything earthly and human. The “our God” presupposes the revelation of God by which Hebrews, as the Holy One, has chosen His people to be His possession, announced Himself to this people as their God, and made a covenant with them. The symbolical designation of this covenant-God by Rock, which occurs frequently, was suggested naturally by the configuration of the ground in Palestine, where masses of rock surrounded by steep precipices offered an image of solid and sure protection. God is a rock in His firm unshakable faithfulness; and it is the more necessary to suppose this attribute to be here set forth, because His relation to His people as covenant-God is assumed in the words “our God.” This term has the signification of faithfulness and indestructible trustworthiness in Deuteronomy 32:4, also; where it is clearly the same as ָהנמוֱּא “faithfulness,” Psalm 18:3, (2) sq.; Psalm 92:16.[FN13]—The presupposition is the declaration “there is none beside Thee.” Jehovah, as the Holy One who has revealed Himself to His people as their God in His lofty elevation above the earthly and human, and is alone the truly existing living God, is for this very reason the Rock also in the absolute sense, the unchangeable, unshakably faithful, trustworthy God, and therefore claims from men, to whom He has revealed Himself as their God, and is known as such, unconditioned complete confidence, as it is expressed in this brief sentence, “none is a rock like our God.”[FN14] 3) The manifestations of the holy and faithful God in His conduct, as it is determined by His omniscience and omnipotence, partly towards the ungodly, partly towards the godly, 1 Samuel 2:3; 1 Samuel 2:8). PETT, "Introduction 20
- 21. SECTION 1. TheBirth, Rise, Prophetic Ministry And Judgeship of Samuel (1-12). This first section of the book covers the life of Samuel from his birth to the setting up of Saul as king in response to the people’s request. The first three chapters deal with the birth and spiritual growth of Samuel. This is then followed in chapter 4 by the Philistine invasion in which the Ark of YHWH of hosts is lost to Israel, something which takes place while Samuel is still a youth. That loss indicates YHWH’s demonstration of the fact that He no longer sees Himself as king over an Israel that has forsaken Him. However, He then goes on to demonstrate His authority over the gods of the Philistines by bringing disaster on them, so that His Ark is restored to Israel by the Philistines, who also pay Him generous tribute. The Ark is then placed with due honour (after a previous unfortunate incident) in the house of Abinadab where it will remain for many years. It is a recognised symbol that YHWH is still present as King over His people, and will therefore, once they turn back to Him, act on their behalf through His appointed deliverers. This will firstly be through Samuel in this section, then through Saul before he is finally rejected, in the next section, and then through the young David in the final section, until he is outlawed and then exiled as a result of Saul’s activities. As a result of his exile there will be a lull, and the Philistines triumph. But in the second part of the book David will become the Spirit inspired king, the Philistines will be defeated, and then the Ark will be restored for public worship, having been ‘purified’ by its period spent in the house of Abinadab. The Kingship of YHWH has triumphed. A). The Birth, Call and Establishment of Samuel the Prophet (1:1-4:1). This opening subsection of the book commences with a description of the events that led up to the birth of Samuel. That is then followed by a description of the spiritual growth of Samuel which is interwoven with a description of the sinfulness of the sons of Eli, the High Priest of Israel, and leads up to a prophetic denunciation of the priesthood of the house of Ithamar. After that we have a description of how Samuel is called to be a prophet and a summary of what follows, ending with the fact that Samuel takes the word of YHWH to all Israel. 21
- 22. a The birthof Samuel (1 Samuel 1:1-28). b The prophecy of Hannah (1 Samuel 2:1-10). c Samuel ministers to YHWH (1 Samuel 2:11). d The failure of Eli’s sons (1 Samuel 2:12-17). e The blessing of God on Samuel and on the house of Elkanah (1 Samuel 2:18-21). d The failure of Eli’s sons (1 Samuel 2:22-25). c Samuel grows in favour with YHWH and men (1 Samuel 2:26). b The prophecy of the man of God (1 Samuel 2:27-36). a The call and establishment of Samuel as a prophet (1 Samuel 3:1 to 1 Samuel 4:1). Note that in ‘a’ we have described the miraculous birth of Samuel, and in the parallel his establishment as a Prophet of YHWH. In ‘b’ we have the prophecy of Hannah, and in the parallel the prophecy of a man of God, both including reference to YHWH’s ‘anointed one’. Chapter 2. Samuel Grows Up Amidst The Sad State Of Affairs At The Tabernacle. 22
- 23. After Hannah’s prayer,which is in effect a summary of all that is to come in the remainder of the book, this chapter alternates the growth of Samuel with the evil behaviour of Eli’s sons, bringing out how he continues to grow spiritually, even amidst the sordidness of the behaviour of the priests. It commences with the prayer- cum-prophecy from Hannah, and a brief description of the settling in of the child, which is then followed by a description of the wicked behaviour of the sons of Eli. Meanwhile Samuel is seen as continuing to develop and the godliness of Elkanah and Hannah is commended. This commendation is placed in direct contrast with the rebuke that Eli gives to his own sons, and at the same time Samuel is seen to be growing in favour before all. The chapter closes with the arrival of a man of God who prophesies the doom of Eli’s house. Verses 1-10 The Prayer-Prophecy of Hannah (1 Samuel 2:1-10). This prayer-prophecy should be seen as continuing the thought of 1 Samuel 1. It does, however, summarise the message of the whole book, leading up to the exaltation of His righteous king, and the promise of an everlasting king arising from David’s house. In it Hannah prophesies concerning the greatness of YHWH, and of his dealings with the righteous as against the unrighteous, and then she gazes ahead to the establishment of the glorious, ideal kingship which past prophecy had led true believers to anticipate. This kingship had been prophesied in Genesis 17:6; Genesis 17:16; Genesis 35:11; Genesis 49:10; Numbers 25:17; Deuteronomy 18:14-20. Once the king came all their problems would be solved. So God had from the beginning led His people to anticipate the coming one day of a great king who would do all His will (Genesis 49:10; Deuteronomy 18:14-20), and, as we know, the people had already experimented with kingship (Judges 8:22-23; Judges 8:29-32). Now as she dedicates her son to YHWH Hannah looks ahead to this greater gift that YHWH will one day give to His people. In view of what follows it is clear that this dream of a coming king was something that was in the minds of all God’s people, as it had also been in Judges 8:22, and it was in the light of this desire that we must see the later request for a king (1 Samuel 8:5). God’s disapproval would not be of their desire for a king, but of the kind of king that they had in mind, one who essentially 23
- 24. displaced YHWH andwas like the kings of all the nations. Hannah had been preparing for this moment for three years and may well have spent considerable time thinking over what she would say when it came, and to that end her mind had clearly ranged far and wide. We must see her words in that light, and not just as the inspiration of the moment. To us the prayer might not seem personal enough for the occasion. But in those days individualism was not emphasised and each Israelite saw himself/herself as a part of a whole rather than as an individual. Their own futures were therefore seen by them as very much tied up in the future of the whole people. If blessing was to come, therefore, it would come upon all who were righteous. And to that end it was her prayer that her gift of her son might contribute to the good of the nation. It is clear that the greatness of her sacrifice had given her great expectations. Surely, she had thought, this must aid in the bringing about of God’s ultimate purposes, and even in the coming of the hoped for Shiloh (Genesis 49:10)? We can divide her prayer up as follows: 1). The Greatness And Saving Power Of YHWH. She exults in the deliverance and security that she anticipates for herself and her people from YHWH. They lived in dangerous days and none were more aware than she was of how much they needed God’s continued deliverance and protection. It was this confidence that would sustain the godly in Israel in the dark days that were to come. But it also indicated her own triumph in her deliverance as something accomplished by God in the face of her own adversary (1 Samuel 2:1-2). 2). A Warning To The Proud And Arrogant. She warns of the need of all men for humility before YHWH in the light of the fact that He knows all things and weighs their actions. She may especially have had in mind here the well publicised behaviour of the priests. But she no doubt also had in mind her own persecution at the hands of Peninnah. As readers we may also see it as pertinent to the behaviour of Saul throughout the first half of the book. It was his arrogance that led to his downfall. If anyone needed this advice, he did (1 Samuel 2:3). 24
- 25. 3). God HumblesThe Proud And Raises Up The Humble And Needy. Hannah was very much aware that this was what YHWH had done for her and she emphasises YHWH’s continual care for the weak, hungry and barren, in contrast with His dealings with the powerful, rich and seemingly well-blessed. Here she has in mind her own experience, as seen in the light of God’s continuously revealed concern for the poor, the widow, the fatherless and the needy (e.g. Deuteronomy 10:18; Exodus 22:22; Deuteronomy 14:29 and often). Her own experience of barrenness had given her a realisation of the heartfelt needs of the people (1 Samuel 2:4-5). She had become one with them in their need. It also, however, depicts the vicissitudes through which David would go in his conflict with Saul. 4). YHWH’s Sovereignty Over Humanity As Giver Of Life And As Their Creator. In these verses she beautifully expresses YHWH’s control over life and death as Creator, (death was ever close in those days), and over people’s future prospects and destinies, having special reference to his love for the downtrodden and His readiness to exalt them. She especially felt that this applied to her because YHWH had given life to her in the giving of her child. But these things were all her people’s everyday concerns and this also reflected her compassion and hopes for her people (1 Samuel 2:6-8). That indeed was why she had given her child to YHWH, so that he might be a blessing to the whole people. But also reflected in these words we can see David’s rise to power out of seeming death. 5). She Glories In The Power Of YHWH And In His Coming King. In closing she emphasises YHWH’s care for ‘His holy ones’ (including herself) and warns those who vaunt themselves against Him of the consequences. And all this is in the light of the future glorious day when YHWH will rule over the whole earth (‘judge the ends of the earth’) through His coming anointed king. The hoped for Shiloh will come, and to Him will the gathering of the people be (Genesis 49:10). See also Numbers 23:21; Numbers 24:17; Deuteronomy 17:14-20. It was her dream that her child might have his part to play in this glorious scenario (as indeed he would). This found partial fulfilment in the enthroning of David, but the ending of 2 Samuel in a plague caused by the king’s disobedience (2 Samuel 22) demonstrates quite clearly that even to the writer he was only to be seen as a prototype and not as the real thing. The real thing would lie in the final everlasting king from David’s house described in 2 Samuel 7:13; 2 Samuel 7:16. 25
- 26. The Greatness AndSaving Power Of YHWH. 1 Samuel 2:1-2 ‘And Hannah prayed, and said: “My heart exults in YHWH, My horn is exalted in YHWH, My mouth is enlarged over my enemies, Because I rejoice in your salvation. There is none holy as YHWH, For there is none besides you, Neither is there any rock like our God.” Hannah exults in YHWH Who has given her a son, and even more over her great privilege of giving him to YHWH. This has raised her status above all women in Israel (her horn is exalted in YHWH, i.e. she can now toss her head like the horned stag in his triumph). At the same time she no longer has to keep silent in humiliation in the face of her adversaries because she has borne a son to the discomfiture of all 26
- 27. her enemies whohad criticised her. For God has saved her from her humiliation and proved that none is holy like Him (compare Exodus 15:11), none can be compared with Him, none is so firm a foundation as He is. The idea of God as her rock comes from Deuteronomy 32:4; Deuteronomy 32:15; Deuteronomy 32:18; Deuteronomy 32:30. SIMEON, "THE return which mankind in general make to God for his mercies is, to idolize the gift, and forget the Giver. Directly opposite to this is the conduct of those who are truly pious: they value the gift only in proportion to its real worth, and rise in heavenly contemplations to the Donor himself; thus making the creature an occasion of exalting and magnifying the Creator. We observe this particularly in the history of Hannah, whose devout acknowledgments we have just recited. She had been greatly afflicted on account of her not bearing any child to her husband Elkanah, whilst Peninnah, who was his other wife, had borne several. Her grief was daily augmented by the unkind behaviour of Peninnah; nor could all the kindness and love that she experienced from her husband, remove it. She carried her complaints therefore to the Lord, who alone was able to relieve them: unto him she vowed, that if he would grant her a son, she would dedicate him to the service of the sanctuary, and that he should be a Nazarite from the womb. Having obtained her request from God, she now came to perform her vow: as soon as the child could with any propriety be separated from her, it is thought at three or four years old, she took him with her to the tabernacle at Shiloh, and there, for the whole remainder of his days, “lent him to the Lord.” At the time of surrendering him up, she burst forth in this song of praise and thanksgiving, in which she takes occasion, from the mercy vouchsafed to her, to adore the goodness of God as manifested towards the whole creation. She mentions, I. The perfections of his nature— Unless we are fully aware of the desire which the Jewish women felt to have the Messiah spring from them, we shall not be able to account for the extreme grief occasioned by barrenness, or for the exultation arising from the birth of a child. But to all the common grounds of joy which Hannah had in the birth of Samuel, that of her deliverance from the taunts and insults of her rival was a great addition: and to that she had especial respect in the opening of this song — — — But, after this slight mention of her own particular case, she proceeds to celebrate, 27
- 28. 1. The powerand holiness of God— [God does not always interpose in this world to display his hatred of sin, or to vindicate the oppressed; because there is a day coming, when he will rectify all the present inequalities of his moral government: but he does not leave himself altogether without witness, that he is a righteous Governor, and a powerful Avenger. His effectual interposition on this occasion was, in Hannah’s eyes, a decisive proof, yea and a glorious exhibition too, of his holiness and power; and gave her an assurance, that as these perfections were essential to his nature, and unbounded in their extent, so they should ever be called forth into activity in behalf of all who should trust in him — — —] 2. His wisdom and equity— [Great was her consolation, that whilst she was judged uncharitably by her fellow- creatures, she had One to whom she could commit her cause; One who was privy to every thought of her heart, and would put a just construction upon the whole of her conduct: and, in the contemplation of this truth, she exulted over those who had so proudly and so arrogantly condemned her. And truly this is one of the richest sources of consolation that any person can have, when suffering under misrepresentations or calumnies of whatever kind: yea, it is quite sufficient to tranquillize the mind, and to raise it above all those feelings which oppression is calculated to produce [Note: 1 Corinthians 4:3-5.] — — —] II. The dispensations of his providence— [Here the pious Hannah extends her views from herself to the world at large; and declares, that the change thus produced in her state, is illustrative of what is done by God throughout the whole creation. In the events of war — in the enjoyment of plenty — in the increase of families — in the continuance of life — in the possession of wealth — and in advancement to honour — who does not see that the greatest changes take place, even when least expected [Note: ver. 4–8.]? and who therefore 28
- 29. must not beconvinced of the folly of indulging either presumptuous confidence, on the one hand, or desponding fears on the other? None can say, “I am so strong, I shall never be moved;” nor ought any one to say, “There is no hope;” the afflicted should “weep, as though they wept not;” and the prosperous “rejoice, as though they rejoiced not;” each being aware that their condition may soon be altered, and shall be, if God see it on the whole conducive to their good.] III. The purposes of his grace— From a view of temporal concerns, she rises to those which are spiritual and eternal: indeed here her words are evidently prophetic, and relate, 1. To the Church— [She had found to her joy what care God takes of his people: and she confidently declared, that that care should be extended to all his saints, even to the end of time. Their adversaries might lay snares for their feet; but he would “keep their feet;” he would “keep them from falling, and present them faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy [Note: Jude, ver. 24.]” — — — On the other hand, his adversaries should assuredly be confounded by him: however they might vindicate themselves now, they should soon “be silent in darkness;” and though now they might defy him, as it were, to his face, he would thunder upon them out of heaven, and utterly, yea eternally, destroy them — — —] 2. To the Church’s King, the Messiah himself— [As yet there had been no king in Israel; nor was there for fifty years afterwards: and therefore it is reasonable to think that she spake of Him, whose throne was in due time to be erected in the hearts of men, even the Lord Jesus Christ. This further appears from her characterising him by the very name Messiah, a name never before assigned to the king of Israel, but henceforth intended to designate him before all others; the Messiah, the Anointed, and the Christ, being all terms of 29
- 30. precisely the sameimport. That she spake of Him, yet further appears by the marked resemblance between this song, and that which the blessed Virgin poured forth at the prospect of the Saviour’s birth [Note: Luke 1:46-55.]. His triumph then she firmly predicts; and declares that his kingdom shall be extended even to “the ends of the earth.” Many efforts will be made to prevent its establishment in the world; but none shall prevail: “his horn shall be exalted,” and all his enemies shall perish. It may be asked, What had this to do with the particular occasion of Hannah’s thanksgiving? I answer, It is this very thing which constitutes in a very great degree the beauty of this song, and that marks the effects of ardent piety upon the soul: a single mercy, like a stream, leads the soul up to the Fountain-head: and it is then only improved aright, when we take occasion from it to contemplate the fulness that is treasured up there, and that is diffusing all possible blessings, temporal and spiritual, throughout the world: and, inasmuch as the universal reign of Christ is that which will bring most glory to God and most good to men, it ought ever to be uppermost in our minds; and every mercy we enjoy should lead us ultimately to the contemplation of it.] We may learn then from hence, 1. The benefit of prayer— [See how successful she was, though she uttered no words, but only importuned God in her heart [Note: 1 Samuel 1:10; 1 Samuel 1:12-13.]! And what will God refuse to those who seek him in sincerity and truth? — — — The Saviour’s promise to us all is this, “Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, I will do it;” “Ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.” Let all the sons and daughters of affliction bear this in mind. Here is a sure remedy for all their griefs, and an infallible supply for all their wants [Note: Psalms 40:1-3.].] 30
- 31. 2. The blessednessof true religion— [Exceeding heavy were Hannah’s trials [Note: 1 Samuel 1:6-7.]: and they were not a little aggravated by the uncharitable surmises of Eli himself [Note: 1 Samuel 1:13-16.]. But into what holy joy were they turned at last! Thus, when true religion occupies the soul, will even the most afflictive dispensations be overruled for good: our night of sorrow may appear long; but the morning of joy shall soon arise: our seed-time of tears shall be followed with a blessed harvest. Only let us delight in heavenly contemplations, and every perfection of God’s nature, every dispensation of his providence, and every purpose of his grace, shall swell, as it were, our tide of joy, till it becomes “unspeakable and glorified.”] PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:1 And Hannah prayed and said. Like the Magnificat, Hannah's hymn of thanksgiving begins with the temporal mercies accorded to herself, but rises immediately into the realms of prophecy, foretelling Christ's kingdom and the triumphs of the Church. From this prophetic element, common more or less to all the hymns of the Bible, most of them have been used in Christian worship, and still merit a place in it, though we in the liturgy of the Church of England now use only two, taken both from the New Testament. In 1 Samuel 2:1, in four strophes of equal length, Hannah declares how, first, her heart, the centre with the Hebrews, not merely of the physical, but also of the moral and intellectual life, rejoices in Jehovah; while the exaltation of her horn, the symbol of strength and vigour, signifies that this inward joy is accompanied, or even occasioned, by the changed circumstances of her outward lot. Her mouth, therefore, is opened wide over her enemies, yet not for cursing and in bitterness, but for joyful praise of the God who has answered her prayers. It is his salvation, the being delivered by him, that makes her thus burst forth into thanksgiving. It is a proof too of her faith and spirituality that she thus refers all to Jehovah. PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:1-10 Salvation. 31
- 32. The facts impliedand indicated in the song are— 1. Hannah's deliverance from grief and realisation of desire are perfected. 2. God is recognised as the author of the great salvation. 3. Under Divine inspiration Hannah sees in her own personal experience a type of various triumphs which God achieves for his people. 4. She is conscious of an overwhelming joy in her own deliverance, and in the prevision of future triumphs of the Church. 5. A clear and joyous recognition of Christ's final triumph as the climax of all. The burden of this glorious song is the salvation wrought by God, and this may be considered as— I. TYPICAL. The term "salvation" is very common in the Old Testament, and its application is "exceeding broad," being inclusive of deliverance from evils and a realisation of positive good. It may be applied to an episode in personal experience, as in the case of Hannah, David, and others; a soul's restoration to God through Christ; a nation's rescue from calamity and elevation to relative influence, as when Israel was delivered from the waters of the Red Sea, and later, from the Assyrian hosts; the deliverance of the Church from persecution, as in apostolic days and subsequently; and especially the completion of Christ's triumph over all enemies and the gathering into one of the redeemed children of God (Titus 2:13; Hebrews 9:28; Revelation 7:9-17). The episode in the life of Hannah was typical of all other salvations to be wrought by the same merciful God. As in the physical world the trained eye can detect what are called "typical forms," so in the records of God's dealings with the saints the spiritually enlightened can see in the personal experience of individuals a foreshadowing of numerous instances yet to occur in human experience. Omnia in Uno will hold true here. The elements of all salvations are found in the blessing vouchsafed to the "woman of sorrowful spirit." For there 32
- 33. is in hercase, as in all, a deep human need, arising from a pressure of a heavy burden, and the non-realisation of the very end for which life was supposed to be given; utter despair of human resources for the removal of the evil and the acquisition of the good; Divine energy graciously acting directly on the hidden forces by which sorrow or joy are governed and produced; Divine patience in working out the processes by which the want and sorrow shall be made to pass away; completeness of result in the bestowment of the very boon so long desired and waited for; connection of the result attained with some ulterior issue of still wider blessing; and employment throughout of visible and invisible second causes in working out the purposes of mercy. Each item found reality in Hannah's experience, and has its counterpart in our deliverance from trouble; in the restoration of the lost soul; in the rescue of a nation or Church from destruction; and in the completion of the desire of him who from the travail of his soul looked on through the ages, saw, and was satisfied. Every deliverance of every saint now is a shadowing forth and a prediction sure and certain of the great salvation, in the bliss of which Christ, and angels, and men shall share. II. OCCASION OF JOY. Naturally salvation in every form brings joy. It is the great event of the life. It means freedom, rest, enrichment, full, sunny favour of God. Hannah could not but sing. Moses led the joy of Israel on the shores of the Red Sea. When Saul became Paul the Churches enjoyed "comfort of the Holy Ghost." The fatted calf and dance awaited the restored prodigal son. The very advent of the one true Saviour awoke the chorus of the skies, and heaven will resound with the joyous acclaim of innumerable hosts when the woes of earth are past, and all power submits to Christ (Revelation 19:1). It is noteworthy that the joy awakened by accomplished salvation is not a mere selfish delight in one's own happiness. It is joy in God. In "thy salvation" do I rejoice. "In the Lord" is my "horn exalted." "The heart" is not set on the bliss of a Samuel's love, it "rejoiceth in the Lord." Again, it is joy in God saving through his Anointed. The "promised seed," the foreordained Messiah, was the spring of all inspired Hebrew expectation of blessing. The birth of a son called forth Hannah's song. It is curiously sweet to notice how like the echo of some distant melody is this song, reminding us of a Child more holy than even Samuel. Surely in the invisible spheres angels recognised here the substance of that hymn they on a later day sang over the plains of Bethlehem. In that severe but blessed discipline of years the spirit of Hannah had been trained to pass over in vision to a salvation more perfect than what Samuel would effect for Israel, and by a Child more truly given of God. The songs of faith and of fulfilment find alike their inspiration in "his King" and "my Saviour." But the relationship to his chosen One 33
- 34. grows closer anddearer as the ages roll on. What shall it be at last! And what joy will it awaken! Also, the condition of sharing in this joy is twofold, being personally a saved one, and cherishing full sympathy with "his King." Hannah, blessed with a great deliverance from sorrow and desolation, could sing and, laying all at the feet of God in holy sympathy with the coming kingdom, she found inspiration for song beyond the range of her own experience. A "new song" is learnt on earth, in so far as its first notes, by all who have known in their personal experience the salvation of God; and it becomes sweeter and more inspired as the freed spirit sees by faith the blessed day when the ends of the earth shall also see the King in his beauty. III. REVELATION OF DIVINE PERFECTIONS. In some sense all God's acts are revelations. Nature, as we call the beautiful system around us, is but the shadow of the Eternal Presence. The Eternal Power and Godhead are clearly seen through the visible creation. In the Incarnation of God in Christ we have, therefore, a higher expression of a general truth; so that in one respect the most stupendous and mysterious of all supernatural facts is in keeping with Nature. Especially is every instance of salvation, whether typical or antitypical, individual or national, a revelation to the universe of the ever blessed One. From Hannah's deliverance from sorrow and desolation, on through the ages of mercy, to Christ's final victory over death and sin, the same attributes are revealed in the deeds and processes by which the salvation in each instance is effected. 1. Mercy, as seen in compassion shown to the sorrowful and helpless. 2. Holiness, inasmuch as the salvation is wrought out against evil powers and persons, for only good and pure issues, by exacting and nourishing into maturity holy, unselfish motives, and ordaining suffering and deferred good only for pure and blissful ends. 3. Power, demonstrating that "beside'' him "there is none," as seen in complete control over the hidden forces of Nature, and full realisation of all that is promised. 4. Wisdom, counteracting the devices of the proud, and causing the bitterest grief 34
- 35. and protracted sufferingto contribute at last to depth and fulness of joy. 5. Faithfulness, unshaken and firm as a "rock," insuring that all the strength and wisdom of the Divine nature shall be exercised for the final bestowment of the covenanted blessings. The retrospect of a personal history was to Hannah the means of reading the outlines of the manifestation of the Divine glory, especially in the salvation of the Church. She, like us, saw only the beginnings of things. The remote glory shone through a glass darkly. It was for St. Paul and St. John to declare the same truth in fuller and more precise terms, as the one tells of the "manifold wisdom of God" being made known "by the Church" unto "principalities and powers in heavenly places," and the other, of him who by virtue of what he has wrought out for his redeemed is "worthy" of all that is due to the only Lord of glory. Men are now intent on studying the material framework of the universe; the day will come when the best minds will study with unbounded delight the perfections of God as seen in the restoration of spiritual order, beauty, and joy out of the chaos of sin and sorrow. IV. INSTRUCTIVE TO THE WICKED. There was a time when the jealous and cruel Peninnah was proud in her strength and abundance. Also Pharaoh, and other oppressors of Israel, could boast of their power and resources. The infant Church in primitive times was as nothing in comparison with the numerical and social power of her enemy. The exceeding proud talk and arrogancy of men who proclaim their vast superiority in secular knowledge to the mass of Christians, is in keeping with the conduct of the kings and princes who "take counsel against the Lord and against his Anointed." But as Hannah's fear and trembling yielded to confidence and joy, consequent on the casting down of her proud enemy and the lifting up of the sorrowful spirit, so the same ever recurring triumphs of the Redeemer, awakening in his people the song of salvation, reads out in clear and forcible terms the instructive lesson to the proud to "talk" no more, and to the arrogant to "shut their mouth," and to the seemingly prosperous that all "actions are weighed" by him who is a "God of knowledge." It is ever true that no weapon formed against God's children can prosper. In what God has effected for the lowly pious in time past, the proud, the wise, the strong may find instruction; and, if they will, learn both how vain it is to curse in heart or mouth whom God has blessed, and how important for themselves that they "kiss the Son," lest they perish, "while his wrath is kindled but a little." 35
- 36. V. INVOLVING GREATREVERSIONS. Providence vindicated itself for former apparently unequal and undesirable distributions of favour by breaking the bows of the strong and giving strength to the feeble; by causing the self-satisfied Peninnah to feel the lack of a satisfaction not to be obtained by the cruel, and the yearning Hannah to want for nothing more. The once proud mother of many children, from causes in the home life, fails in her joys, while the unfruitful attains to the perfection of earthly bliss. In the one case hopes and joys are smitten; in the other, created. The rich in home delights becomes poor, by possibly erring sons, or enfeebled health; the poor and sorrowful is enriched with a treasure for the use of all ages. Thus does Hannah see in outline the reversions ever occurring in the working out of God's salvation in the individual, the nation, or the Church. 1. In the human soul saved by Christ, forces of evil once strong and self-satisfied, lacking nothing, and usurping authority, are brought low, enfeebled, made conscious of their impotence, and finally killed; while the poor, faint, struggling spirit of love and faith is, when once "made alive," girded with strength, satisfied with good, and made finally dominant over the entire nature. Doubts, fears, and mighty temptations are laid low. Hopes, joys, and victories of faith are called forth; and, as a final issue, the once outcast, unhappy soul is enriched with the full bliss of a child of God. 2. In national affairs. The strength of Egypt sinks in the sea; the helplessness of Israel puts on the strength of God. The boastful nations that in pride of their resources set aside the practice of righteousness, one by one are brought low by the corruption concealed beneath their material splendour; while the feeble people who live in the fear of God go from strength to strength, and "delight themselves in the abundance of peace." 3. In the Church. The wealth, power, and wisdom of Rome and Greece fell before the rising power and spiritual know]edge of poor fishermen. The mighty evils of an age are at length brought down, and the despised "things that are not" are caused to be the most potent and blessed of all agencies. 36
- 37. VI. TRACEABLE TOGOD. Well did Hannah know that her deliverance was of God, and not of man. In all the second causes cooperating towards the completion of her desire she, with true spiritual instinct, saw the work of the First Cause. "The Lord" it was who "killed and made alive." "The Lord" "brought low" the proud rival, and "lifted up" "the woman of sorrowful spirit." He it is who "keeps the feet of his saints," and causes the wicked at length "to be silent." So through the unfolding ages it is "the Lord" who works to destroy the evils of the soul, and to create and nourish the good. All the triumphs of the Church over political scheming, pseudo-learning, violent persecution, and satanic opposition are by the might and power of him who raiseth up the wise and good, checks the rage of man, and in the invisible sphere frustrates the "gates of hell." All things are of God, who worketh all and in all. It is not crude anthropomorphism that refers all the processes of individual, national, and Church salvation to the energy of God. It is the most penetrating philosophy, born of the inspiring Spirit of God. There are "pillars"' or foundations, or bases, of all terrestrial things. We may call this a cause, and that an effect. We may clothe matter with qualities, and point out their uniform and necessary interaction. But still they are all traceable down to some original constitution inherent in the elemental forces and materials; and that constitution, that firm and grand arrangement of invisible "pillars" or bases, is what it is because God made it so, and for no other reason. Wisely and beautifully, therefore, does the prophetess anticipate the philosophies of the coming ages by referring all the agencies and powers involved in the accomplishing of salvation for men to "the Lord." Not unto us, but to thy name be the glory. VII. CULMINATING IN CHRIST'S PERFECT REIGN. The prophetic eye looks on through the material disorder of Eli's day to a typical King in Zion. The order and prosperity of a David's reign are but the temporal shadow of the enduring order and unfading prosperity of the "Anointed," who is in the highest spiritual sense to "exalt" his "horn," and "judge the ends of the earth." What though, meanwhile, "adversaries" may combine, and the occasional "strength" of the wicked threaten to cast down "the saints;" he that sitteth in the heavens has in reserve his swift and awe inspiring forces (Psalms 2:1-12) to shatter all opposition, and ultimately insure a peaceful reign over mankind. It was some years before Peninnah s ground of annoyance to Hannah was removed, and the lowly one was raised to joy and full satisfaction; so, proportionately to the vaster deliverance to be wrought out for mankind, it may require many centuries to cast down all foes and create and perfect the bliss of the redeemed. But the" strength" of the "King" will bring it to pass by a combination of invisible and visible forces more subtle and 37
- 38. intricate, but notless obedient to his will, than those which brought a mother's joy to Hannah. Here we see the beautiful unity of all Scripture reference to the final triumph of Messiah. The "serpent's head" is to be "bruised" was consolation to our weeping ancestors, bereft of Eden. In him "all nations shall be blessed" was the grand assurance that made Abraham's life one of large sympathy with the future. "To him shall the gathering of the people be" was the solace of Jacob's dying hour. And thus, aided by Hannah's joyous song of victory, as though already real, the holy, blessed succession ran on, telling of the "kingdom" that "shall have no end," and the day when to the Name that is "above every name" every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that he is Lord and Christ. From this survey of truth concerning "salvation" note a few important Practical truths:— 1. See here a beautiful instance of how a single life's experience, when under the holy discipline of God, may be rich in instruction and inspiration for men in all ages. This is brought about not by mere natural genius, but by a woman's pure and full consecration to Christ, and passionate desire to accelerate the advent of his kingdom. Happy they who can live so as to inspire and help posterity! Let our life become a song of thanksgiving to our successors. This is possible to all in some degree. 2. An underlying current of faith in Christ's complete triumph runs through the ancient Church, and this should embolden us. True saints live much in the future, while not careless of present duties. There may be much inspiration for work from the prospect of what is to be. 3. The effect of true faith is to enlarge the vision and broaden the sympathies. Hannah's faith in a coming Christ caused her spirit to be open to those inspirations which carried the vision over the weary ages to the true golden age, and she felt with all the saints in all time. Religion of this kind becomes an expansive power in whatever nature it dwells. 38
- 39. 4. The properunity of the Church lies in the one faith which holds the life to Christ, whether to come, or having come; and this will insure sympathy with his kingdom and with purity of life, as well as consecration of what is most precious to its realisation. K&D, "Hannah's song of praise. - The prayer in which Hannah poured out the feelings of her heart, after the dedication of her son to the Lord, is a song of praise of a prophetic and Messianic character. After giving utterance in the introduction to the rejoicing and exulting of her soul at the salvation that had reached her (1Sa_2:1), she praises the Lord as the only holy One, the only rock of the righteous, who rules on earth with omniscience and righteousness, brings down the proud and lofty, kills and makes alive, maketh poor and maketh rich (1Sa_2:2-8). She then closes with the confident assurance that He will keep His saints, and cast down the rebellious, and will judge the ends of the earth, and exalt the power of His king (1Sa_2:9, 1Sa_2:10). This psalm is the mature fruit of the Spirit of God. The pious woman, who had gone with all the earnest longings of a mother's heart to pray to the Lord God of Israel for a son, that she might consecrate him to the lifelong service of the Lord, “discerned in her own individual experience the general laws of the divine economy, and its signification in relation to the whole history of the kingdom of God” (Auberlen, p. 564). The experience which she, bowed down and oppressed as she was, had had of the gracious government of the omniscient and holy covenant God, was a pledge to her of the gracious way in which the nation itself was led by God, and a sign by which she discerned how God not only delivered at all times the poor and wretched who trusted in Him out of their poverty and distress, and set them up, but would also lift up and glorify His whole nation, which was at that time so deeply bowed down and oppressed by its foes. Acquainted as she was with the destination of Israel to be a kingdom, from the promises which God had given to the patriarchs, and filled as she was with the longing that had been awakened in the nation for the realization of these promises, she could see in spirit, and through the inspiration of God, the king whom the Lord was about to give to His people, and through whom He would raise it up to might and dominion. The refusal of modern critics to admit the genuineness of this song is founded upon an a priori and utter denial of the supernatural saving revelations of God, and upon a consequent inability to discern the prophetic illumination of the pious Hannah, and a complete misinterpretation of the contents of her song of praise. The “proud and lofty,” whom God humbles and casts down, are not the heathen or the national foes of Israel, and the “poor and wretched” whom He exalts and makes rich are not the Israelites as such; but the former are the ungodly, and the latter the pious, in Israel itself. And the description is so well sustained throughout, that it is only by the most arbitrary criticism that it can be interpreted as referring to definite historical events, such as the victory of David over Goliath (Thenius), or a victory of the Israelites over heathen nations (Ewald and others). Still less can any argument be drawn from the words of the song in support of its later origin, or its composition by David or one of the earliest of the kings of Israel. On the contrary, not only is its genuineness supported by the general consideration that the author of these books would never have ascribed a song to Hannah, if he had not found it in the sources he employed; but still more decisively by the circumstance that the songs of praise of Mary and Zechariah, in Luk_1:46. and Luk_1:68., show, through the manner in which they rest upon this ode, in what way it was understood by the pious Israelites of every age, and how, like the pious Hannah, they recognised and praised in their own individual experience the government of the holy God in the midst of His kingdom. 1Sa_2:1 The first verse forms the introduction to the song. Holy joy in the Lord at the blessing which 39
- 40. she had receivedimpelled the favoured mother to the praise of God: 1 My heart is joyful in the Lord, My horn is exalted in the Lord, My mouth is opened wide over mine enemies: For I rejoice in Thy salvation. Of the four members of this verse, the first answers to the third, and the second to the fourth. The heart rejoices at the lifting up of her horn, the mouth opens wide to proclaim the salvation before which the enemies would be dumb. “My horn is high” does not mean 'I am proud' (Ewald), but “my power is great in the Lord.” The horn is the symbol of strength, and is taken from oxen whose strength is in their horns (vid., Deu_33:17; Psa_75:5, etc.). The power was high or exalted by the salvation which the Lord had manifested to her. To Him all the glory was due, because He had proved himself to be the holy One, and a rock upon which a man could rest his confidence. 2 “There is no one holy like the Lord; there is no one besides you; there is no Rock like our God. BARNES, "Any rock ... - The term rock as applied to God is first found in the song of Moses (see Deu_32:4 note), where the juxtaposition of rock and salvation in 1Sa_2:15, “he lightly esteemed the rock of his salvation,” seems to indicate that Hannah was acquainted with the song of Moses. CLARKE, "None holy - Holiness is peculiar to the God of Israel; no false god ever pretended to holiness; it was no attribute of heathenism, nor of any religion ever professed in the world before or since the true revelation of the true God. There is none beside thee - There can be but one unoriginated, infinite, and eternal Being; that Being is Jehovah. Any rock like our God - Rabbi Maimon has observed that the word צור tsur, which we translate rock, signifies, when applied to Jehovah, fountain, source, spring. There is no source whence continual help and salvation can arise but our God. 40
- 41. GILL, "There isnone holy as the Lord,.... From the consideration of what the Lord had done for her, which had filled her heart and mouth with joy and praise, she is led to celebrate the perfections of God, and begins with his holiness, in which he is glorious, and which appears in all his ways and works; he is essentially, originally, independently, perfectly, and immutably holy, as others are not. Angels are holy, but not of themselves; their holiness is from the Lord; nor is it perfect in comparison of his, and therefore they cover their faces while they celebrate that perfection of his; nor immutable, at least not naturally so, as the loss of it in those that fell demonstrates. Of men, some under the legal dispensation were holy, not truly, but in a typical and ceremonial sense; some are only outwardly and hypocritically holy, and only so in the sight of men, not in the sight of God; and those that are truly holy, being called to holiness, and have the principle of it implanted in them, and live holy lives and conversations; yet though there is a likeness of the holiness of God in them, being made partakers of the divine nature; it is far from an equality to it; for the holiness of the best of men is imperfect; they are not without sin in them, nor without sin committed by them, and perfection is disclaimed by them all; but the Lord is without iniquity, just and true is he; none in his nature, nor in any of his works, not the least shadow thereof: for there is none besides thee; there is no God besides him; no being but what is of him, and none is holy but by him; the holiness of angels is from him; the holiness of Adam in innocence was of him; and all the holiness of his chosen ones comes from him, to which they are chosen by him, and which is secured in that choice unto them, and are sanctified by God the Father, in Christ, and through the Spirit: neither is there any rock like our God; the word rock is used for Deity, and sometimes for a false one, Deu_32:31 and so it may here, and the sense be, there is no god like to our God; there is indeed none besides him; there are fictitious gods, and nominal ones, as the idols of the Gentiles, and who are so in an improper and figurative sense, as magistrates; but there is but one true and living God; nor is there any like him for the perfections of his nature, and the blessings of his goodness, whether in providence or grace. Under this metaphor of a rock, our Lord Jesus Christ is often signified; he is the rock of Israel, the rock of refuge, and of salvation; and there is no rock can do what he does, hide and shelter from the justice of God; there is no rock like him for strength and duration; none like him for a foundation to build upon, or for safety and protection from the wrath of God, and the rage of men, see Psa_18:31. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:2. There is none holy as the Lord — None so perfectly, unchangeably, and constantly holy. None besides — Not only none is so holy as thou art, but in truth there is none holy besides thee; namely entirely, or independently, but only by participation from thee. Any rock — Thou only art a sure defence and refuge to all that flee to thee. ELLICOTT, " (2) Neither is there any rock.—This was a favourite simile among the inspired song-writers of Israel. The image, doubtless, is a memory of the long desert 41
- 42. wandering. The steepprecipices and the strange fantastic rocks of Sinai, standing up in the midst of the shifting desert sands, supplied an ever present picture of unchangeableness, of majesty, and of security. The term rock, as applied to God, is first found in the Song of Moses (Deuteronomy 32:4; Deuteronomy 32:15; Deuteronomy 32:18; Deuteronomy 32:30-31; Deuteronomy 32:37), where the juxtaposition of rock and salvation in 1 Samuel 2:15—he lightly esteemed the rock of his salvation—seems to indicate that Hannah was acquainted with this song or national hymn of Moses. The same phrase is frequent in the Psalms. That the term was commonly applied to God so early as the time of Moses we may conclude from the name Zurishaddai: “My rock is the Almighty” (Numbers 1:6); and Zuriel: “My rock is God” (Numbers 3:35).—Speaker’s Commentary. HAWKER, "(2) There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God. I pray the Reader not to overlook the great warmth of devotion, expressed in those words. The unspotted holiness of Jehovah, calls forth we are told, the unceasing adoration of the blessed. Hannah first celebrates this glorious perfection of our God, which plainly proves that one, and the same Spirit operated upon her mind, and theirs. And here by the way, Reader, is a plan opened to your heart, to see whether the same Spirit operates upon you. The song of saints and angels, and the spirits of just men made perfect, is of the holiness of Jehovah. None but redeemed souls can rejoice in it. Devils and spirits of darkness know that Jehovah is holy, but cannot love him for it. But his people rejoice in this glorious perfection, because in the holiness of their surety, the Lord Jesus, they see this holiness glorified, and their redemption eternally secured. I would have the Reader also consider, and then, as the blessed Spirit than instruct him, judge for himself, whether Hannah when calling Jehovah a Rock, did not evidently allude to Jesus, who in all the eventful journeys of Israel, through the wilderness, was the Rock that followed them, and whom the Apostle decidedly declares to have been Christ. Compare Exodus 33:21-22; Exo_17:6; Numbers 20:8. PULPIT, "In 1 Samuel 2:2 she gives her reasons for this holy joy. The first is God's absolute holiness; the second his absolute existence, in which she finds the proof of his holiness. Hannah may have meant to express only the language of piety, but she 42
- 43. also stated aprimary philosophical truth, which was early grasped by the deeply religious instinct of the Hebrews, that outside of God is no existence. Many necessary deductions follow from this fundamental truth, that God alone absolutely exists, and that all other existence is secondary and derived; but no deduction is more certain than Hannah's own, that such a Being must be absolutely holy. In calling him a rock she assigns to him strength, calm, immovable, enduring, but a strength which avails for the safety of his people (comp. Deuteronomy 32:4, Deuteronomy 32:15; Psalms 18:2). For rocks, as being capable of easy defence, formed the nucleus of most ancient towns, and continued to serve as their citadels. K&D, "1Sa_2:2-3 2 None is holy as the Lord; for there is none beside Thee; And no rock is as our God. 3 Speak ye not much lofty, lofty; Let (not) insolence go out of thy mouth! For the Lord is an omniscient God, And with Him deeds are weighed. God manifests himself as holy in the government of the kingdom of His grace by His guidance of the righteous to salvation (see at Exo_19:6). But holiness is simply the moral reflection of the glory of the one absolute God. This explains the reason given for His holiness, viz., “there is not one (a God) beside thee” (cf. 2Sa_22:32). As the holy and only One, God is the rock (vid., Deu_32:4, Deu_32:15; Psa_18:3) in which the righteous can always trust. The wicked therefore should tremble before His holiness, and not talk in their pride of the lofty things which they have accomplished or intend to perform. ה ָבֹהְגּ is defined more precisely in the following clause, which is also dependent upon ל ַא by the word ק ָתָ,ע as insolent words spoken by the wicked against the righteous (see Psa_ 31:19). For Jehovah hears such words; He is “a God of knowledge” (Deus scientiarum), a God who sees and knows every single thing. The plural ת ע ֵדּ has an intensive signification. ת ל ֲִלע נוּ ְכּ ְת ִנ ֹאל might be rendered “deeds are not weighed, or equal” (cf. Eze_18:25-26; Eze_33:17). But this would only apply to the actions of men; for the acts of God are always just, or weighed. But an assertion respecting the actions of men does not suit the context. Hence this clause is reckoned in the Masora as one of the passages in which ֹאל stands for ל (see at Exo_21:8). “To Him (with Him) deeds are weighed:” that is to say, the acts of God are weighed, i.e., equal or just. This is the real meaning according to the passages in Ezekiel, and not “the actions of men are weighed by Him” (De Wette, Maurer, Ewald, etc.): for God weighs the minds and hearts of men (Pro_ 16:2; Pro_21:2; Pro_24:12), not their actions. This expression never occurs. The weighed or righteous acts of God are described in 1Sa_2:4-8 in great and general traits, as displayed in the government of His kingdom through the marvellous changes which occur in the circumstances connected with the lives of the righteous and the wicked. 43
- 44. 3 “Do not keeptalking so proudly or let your mouth speak such arrogance, for the Lord is a God who knows, and by him deeds are weighed. CLARKE, "A God of knowledge - He is the most wise, teaching all good, and knowing all things. Actions are weighed - נתכנו nithkenu, they are directed; it is by his counsel alone that we can successfully begin, continue, or end, any work. GILL, "Talk no more so exceeding proudly,.... At such an high rate, in such an overbearing manner, as if above everyone; this may have respect to Peninnah, and all that joined with her to provoke Hannah to anger, and make her fret, insulting and triumphing over her, because she had not children, as they had; but now their mouths would be stopped, and their talk over, and not give themselves the haughty airs they had done, at least there would be no occasion for them: let not arrogancy come out of your mouth; arrogating to themselves, and to their merits, what they enjoyed, as children, riches, &c. when all come from the Lord; or what is "hard" (i), intolerable, which bears so hard on those to whom it is said, that it cannot be bore with; or what is "old" (k), and trite, old sayings concerning barren women, as if of no use in the world, and disagreeable to God, and as having no share in his favour. The Targum renders the word by reproaches, or blasphemies: for the Lord is a God of knowledge; or knowledges (l): of perfect knowledge; he knows all persons and things; he knows himself, his perfections, purposes, thoughts, words and works; he knows all his creatures, animate and inanimate, rational and irrational, angels and men; the hearts of all men; all that they say, all their hard sayings, all their proud, haughty, overbearing expressions, calumnies, and reproaches, as well as 44
- 45. all they thinkand all they do, good or bad; and God will sooner or later convince them of and punish them for their hard speeches against his people: and he is the author of all knowledge, natural, civil, spiritual, and evangelical: and by him actions are weighed: his own actions; his works "ad intra"; his purposes and decrees, the counsels of his will, and the thoughts of his heart, the things his mind is set upon; all his appointments and designs, his whole will and pleasure; all are pondered by him, and are formed with the utmost wisdom, and for the best ends and purposes: and all, his actions and works without, whether of creation, providence, and grace, all are weighed and done according to infinite wisdom, unerring justice and truth; all respecting things temporal or spiritual, what relate to the outward estate of men, or to their everlasting happiness: all the actions of men, as they are known unto him, they are weighed and examined by him, whether they proceed from a right principle to a right end or not; upon which, many actions, thought to be good, are not found to be so, and others, though good, yet not found perfect before God; so that there is no justification nor salvation by the best: or the sense is, such actions as are done well, they are "directed to him" (m); as they are ordained by him that men should walk in them, they are for his use, and are done with a view to his glory. There is a double reading of these words; the marginal, which we follow, is "to" or "by him" actions are directed or weighed; but the textual reading is a negative, "actions are not weighed" (n), or numbered; the works of God cannot be comprehended, or the actions of men are not disposed and ordered without his will and pleasure, or cannot be performed unless he wills or permits; and all are disposed of, overruled, and directed, to answer his own ends and purposes. HENRY, "3. How she herewith silences those that set up themselves as rivals with God and rebels against him (1Sa_2:3): Talk no more so exceedingly proudly. Let not Peninnah and her children upbraid her any more with her confidence in God and praying to him: at length she found it not in vain. See Mic_7:10, Then she that is my enemy shall see it, and shame shall cover her that said, Where is thy God? Or perhaps it was below her to take so much notice of Peninnah, and her malice, in this song; but this is intended as a check to the insolence of the Philistines, and other enemies of God and Israel, that set their mouth against the heavens, Psa_73:9. “Let this put them to silence and shame; he that has thus judged for me against my adversary will judge for his people against all theirs.” II. The notice she takes of the wisdom and sovereignty of the divine providence, in its disposals of the affairs of the children of men; such are the vicissitudes of them, and such the strange and sudden turns and revolutions of them, that it is often found a very short step between the height of prosperity and the depth of adversity. God has not only set the one over against the other (Ecc_7:14), but the one very near the other, and no gulf fixed between them, that we may rejoice as though we rejoiced not and weep as though we wept not. BENSON. "1 Samuel 2:3. Talk no more — Thou Peninnah, boast no more of thy numerous offspring, and speak no more insolently and scornfully of me. She speaks of her in the plural number, because she would not expose her name to censure. A God of knowledge — He knoweth thy heart, and all that pride, and envy, and 45
- 46. contempt of me,which thy own conscience knows: and all thy perverse carriage toward me. By him actions are weighed — That is, he trieth all men’s thoughts and actions, (for the Hebrew word signifies both,) as a just judge, to give to every one according to his works. ELLLICOTT, " (3) A God of knowledge.—The Hebrew words are placed thus: A God of knowledge is the Lord, The Talmud quaintly comments here as follows:— Rabbi Ami says: “Knowledge is of great price, for it is placed between two Divine names; as it is written (1 Samuel 2:3), ‘A God of knowledge is the Lord,’ and therefore mercy is to be denied to him who has no knowledge; for it is written (Isaiah 27:11), ‘It is a people of no understanding, therefore He that made them will not have mercy on them.’”—Treatise Berachoth, fol. 33, Colossians 1. And by him actions are weighed.—This is one of the fifteen places reckoned by the Masorites where in the original Hebrew text, instead of “lo” with an aleph, signifying not, “lo” with a vaw, signifying to, or by him, must be substituted. The amended reading has been followed by the English Version. The meaning is that all men’s actions are weighed by God according to their essential worth, all the motives which led to them are by Him, the All-knowing, taken into account before He weighs them. HAWKER, "(3) Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed. If the Reader looks closely to this, and the past verse, he will perceive, that Hannah is engaged to celebrate several of Jehovah's divine perfections. First his holiness; next his Power; then his wisdom; and next his Justice. Reader! it is delightful to contemplate the astonishing perfections of God, as they are in himself. But it is doubly so, when we contemplate them, as all pledged in covenant engagements, ready upon every occasion, to be brought forward into exercise, for the blessing and security of his people. PULPIT, "In 1 Samuel 2:3 she appeals to God's omniscience, "for Jehovah is a God of knowledges," the pl. being intensive, and signifying every kind of knowledge. As too he weighs and judges human actions, how can men venture to talk so arrogantly before him, lit. so proudly, proudly. The last clause is one of those numerous places in which there is a doubt whether the Hebrew word lo means not, or by him. If the negative sense be taken, which the Hebrew spelling favours, the rendering will be "though actions be not weighed." Though wicked actions be not immediately 46
- 47. punished, yet Jehovahis cognisant of them, and in due time will requite. LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:3. The negative particle is omitted before “come out” (אֵֵצי) as before “speak”[FN15] (רוּ ְבּ ַד ְ,)תּ and the sense requires that it be supplied (Gesenius, § 152, 3). Partly by the “more,” [Heb. literally, “do not increase to speak.”—Tr.], partly by the doubling of the noun [הָהֹב ְגּ “pride;” in Eng. A. V. the intensive doubling is rendered by “exceeding,”—TR.], the boastful vaunting character, the haughty soul of the ungodly is characterized, showing itself, as it often does, in arrogant words, and becoming, as it were, a second nature. The warning, “talk not so proudly, proudly,” stands in contrast with the praise of God’s grandeur in His holiness, and brings out the more sharply the contrast between human pride and the humility which is appropriate towards the holy God. Herder’s reference of the word (Geist d. ebrהisch. Poesie 2, 282) to the “heights, which were used for defence, and in which pride was felt” is untenable, the Heb. not permitting it. The talking with so many proud and arrogant words stands in contrast with the expression of humility and gratitude in 1 Samuel 2:2 : “My mouth is opened wide, etc., there is none holy.”.......” ק ָתָﬠ “arrogance” specially marks the haughty talk as the expression of a bold defiant soul, which will not bend, and manifests itself particularly towards the pious and God fearing by bold words, comp. Psalm 75:6; Psalm 94:4; Psalm 31:19. Sins of word, corresponding to the proud nature, are here emphasized, because what the heart is full of the mouth will speak. His warning is supported by pointing to God’s omniscience and omnipotence, in which the relation of His holiness to earthly and human things is shown. “For Jehovah is a God of omniscience.” The plu. “knowledges” )עוֹת ֵדּ ) indicates that God knows and is acquainted with every individual thing, that, as He is raised above every created thing, and thus present with all things and creatures, so they are present and known to Him; and thus it expresses the thought that the concrete content of God’s omniscience is everything finite and created.[FN16] The proud and bold men, who speak so haughtily, must recollect that God knows all their deeds and hears their words, that therefore they cannot withdraw from His rule.— Secondly, reference is made to God’s power, which controls all things according to a fixed unchangeable plan. We must first inquire whether the “actions” (לוֹתֲִלﬠ) is to be understood of human or divine deeds, and then whether we are to read “not” )ֹאל ) or the Qeri “by him” )לוֹ ). The first question can be decided only by the connection. The preceding context speaks not of the deeds, but of the words of ungodly men. In what follows it is similarly not works and deeds of men that are treated of, but the conditions and relations of human life, with which divine agency has to do; in 1 Samuel 2:4, sq., the thought expressly confines itself to divine deeds. We cannot 47
- 48. therefore with Bצttcher(Aehrenlese, in loco) suppose a question, and, retaining the Kethib, render, “and are not deeds measured?” that Isaiah, “ is not care taken that human deeds shall not become immoderate, insolent?” nor, with Thenius, adopting the Qeri, “and by Him actions are measured,” that Isaiah, “He determines how far human doing may go;” nor, with Luther, paraphrase “the Lord does not suffer such conduct to prosper.” But, if we have to suppose only divine deeds, then the translation “to him or by him actions are weighed or measured” is certainly to be preferred to the other—“are not actions weighed or measured, that Isaiah, determined?”—because of the vagueness of the thought in the latter. The thought, then, is this: God’s actions are weighed, measured, fixed; He proceeds, in His working, by unchangeable paths established by Himself, so that none can free himself from His omnipotence, as none can withdraw from His all-pervading omniscience. Against the explanation “by Him the actions of men are weighed” (Bunsen: according to their essential worth), Keil properly urges: “God weighs the spirits, the hearts of men indeed ( Proverbs 16:2; Proverbs 21:2; Proverbs 24:12), but not their deeds. This expression is never found.” It is without ground, however, that he introduces the idea of righteousness, since we have here to do with nothing but the free, unrestricted activity of the divine omnipotence, to which, as to His omniscience, men are absolutely subject. [The correctness of this interpretation is open to doubt. The conception of God weighing His own actions, acting with prudence and forecast, is not, I believe, found elsewhere in the Bible; the higher conception of immutable wisdom is every where presented. On the other hand, that God weighs the actions of men, if not (as Keil says) explicitly stated, is yet involved in many passages, in all, for example, which set forth His righteous retribution; as, “Thou renderest to every man according to his work” ( Psalm 62:12); “God shall bring every work into judgment” ( Ecclesiastes 12:14); and comp. Psalm 10:18; Psalm 11:5; Psalm 14:2; Proverbs 15:3; Job 34:21; Job 34:23; Jeremiah 9:23-24; Joel 3:12. And this interpretation agrees very well with the context. The word “actions” may well include all exhibitions of human character, and the antithesis throughout the Song is between the wicked and the righteous. The thought, therefore, may be: Jehovah is holy and immutable. Give ho exhibition of pride, for He knows and weighs your actions. He reverses human conditions, bringing down (i. e. the wicked), and setting up (i. e. the righteous). Expositors are about equally divided between these interpretations. With Erdmann are Targum, Sept, Theodoret, Patrick, Keil; in favor of the other, Syr, Clarke, Henry, Ewald; doubtful, Vulg, Synop. Crit, Gill, “Wordsworth. Deuteronomy 32:4 does not seem to bear on the decision, for it is Jehovah’s righteousness that is there emphasized.—Tr.] 48
- 49. PETT, "A WarningTo The Proud And Arrogant. 1 Samuel 2:3 “Talk no more so exceeding proudly, Let not arrogance come out of your mouth, For YHWH is a God of knowledge, And by him actions are weighed.” Hannah may have had in mind here her treatment by Peninnah and other spiteful women of her acquaintance who had expressed their own pride and had given her a hard time. But in mind also may have been the behaviour of the current priesthood as soon to be described. It is, however, a general warning to all. She wants all to humble themselves before YHWH as she has, so that they may also enjoy similar blessings to the ones which she has received from the One Who has weighed her actions and responded accordingly. If only Saul had heeded these words, what a difference it might have made to him. Her point is not that she has been blessed because her good actions have outweighed the bad, but that God has weighed up the longing of her heart and the purity of her purpose. That is why He has blessed her. 49
- 50. 4 “The bows ofthe warriors are broken, but those who stumbled are armed with strength. CLARKE, "The bows of the mighty - The Targum considers the first verse as including a prophecy against the Philistines; the second verse, against Sennacherib and his army; the third, against Nebuchadnezzar and the Chaldeans; the fourth, against the Greeks; the fifth, against Haman and his posterity; and the tenth, against Magog, and the enemies of the Messiah. GILL, "The bows of the mighty men are broken,.... Hannah, from relating gracious experiences, and celebrating, the divine perfections of holiness, omniscience, and sovereignty, passes on to take notice of the dealings of God with men in providence and grace; bows are here put for all military arms, which men of might and war make use of, and which God can easily break in pieces, and so make war to cease in the earth, and hinder warlike men from doing what they design and attempt; they are enfeebled and weakened by him, and their hands cannot perform their enterprises: so the bows of Satan, and his principalities and powers, are broken, and his fiery darts are quenched, and the people of the Lord enabled to stand against him, and wrestle with him and them, being strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might, as it follows: and they that stumbled are girt with strength; who, through weakness, are ready to stumble at everything they meet with in the way; yet, being girded with strength by the Lord, are able to do great exploits, as David did, that being his case, Psa_18:29, so such as are weak in grace, in faith, in knowledge, and ready to stumble at every trial and exercise, let it come from what quarter it will; yet being girded by the Lord with strength, are able to exercise grace, perform duty, go through every service they are called to, whether in a way of doing or suffering, to bear the yoke and cross of Christ, to oppose every enemy, to walk on in the ways of God, and to persevere in faith and holiness to the end. HENRY, "1. The strong are soon weakened and the weak are soon strengthened, when God pleases, 1Sa_2:4. On the one hand, if he speak the word, the bows of the mighty men are broken; they are disarmed, disabled to do as they have before done and as they have designed to do. Those have been worsted in battle who seemed upon all accounts to have the advantage on their side, and thought themselves sure of victory. See Psa_46:9; Psa_37:15, Psa_37:17. Particular persons are soon weakened by sickness and 50
- 51. age, and theyfind that the bow does not long abide in strength; many a mighty man who has gloried in his might has found it a deceitful bow, that failed him when he trusted to it. On the other hand, if the Lord speak the word, those who stumble through weakness, who were so feeble that they could not go straight or steady, are girded with strength, in body and mind, and are able to bring great things to pass. Those who were weakened by sickness return to their vigour (Job_33:25), and those who were brought down by sorrow shall recover their comfort, which will confirm the weak hands and the feeble knees, Isa_35:3. Victory turns in favour of that side that was given up for gone, and even the lame take the prey, Isa_33:23. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:4. The bows of the mighty are broken — The strength of which they boasted. They that stumbled — Or, were weak and feeble. The great sense she had of God’s power, branches out itself into an humble acknowledgment of this glorious attribute, in divers instances. And, first, in vanquishing the most victorious; for bows were a principal part of warriors’ weapons, Psalms 44:6; and their girdles, being an important part of the military habit, are elegantly interpreted to signify strength and warlike prowess. ELLICOTT, " (4) The bows of the mighty men are broken.—God reverses human conditions, bringing low the wicked, and raising up the righteous. Von Gerlach writes of these verses that “Every power which will be something in itself is destroyed by the Lord: every weakness which despairs of itself is transformed into power.” “The bows of the heroes,” that is to say, the heroes of the bow, the symbol of human power being poetically put first instead of the bearer of the symbol. The next line contains the antithesis: while the heroes rejoicing in their strength are shattered, the tottering, powerless ones are by Him made strong for battle. HAWKER, "(4) The bows of the mighty men are broken, and they that stumbled are girded with strength. (5) They that were full have hired out themselves for bread; and they that were hungry ceased: so that the barren hath born seven; and she that hath many children is waxed feeble. Some have thought, that Hannah is here triumphing over Penninah, who before insulted her. But I conceive, that Hannah's mind was soaring to an higher subject. It is the triumph of the Church of Jesus over all her adversaries, that she had in view. And here is large scope for the illustration of these precious truths. The vows of the carnal, in their own strength, are broken. The full in their own righteousness, are 51
- 52. sent empty away.While on the contrary the Lord satisfieth the hungry with good things; and poor barren souls are satiated with the bread of life, LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:4-8 further carry out the thought of God’s almighty working in human life by a series of sharply contrasted changes of fortune. In this it is assumed that God’s omnipotent working is just, but it is not explicitly declared till afterwards. “The preceding thought is carried further: Every power which will be something in itself is destroyed by the Lord; every weakness, which despairs of itself, is transformed into power” (O. v. Gerlach). 1 Samuel 2:4. As in Isaiah 21:17 we have bows of heroes instead of heroes of the bow, so here the symbol of human power and might is poetically put first instead of the personal subject. [Dr. Erdmann translates: “the heroes of the bow are cast down,” which Isaiah, however, giving up the poetical form. Better: “the bows of heroes are broken.” So in Isaiah 21:17 : “the residue of the bows of the heroes shall become small.”—Tr.] The “broken” (ים ִתַּ)ח refers, according to the sense, to the latter (since “heroes” is the logical subject) instead of to “bows,” the breaking of which indicates the broken power of those who, like heroes of the bow, trust to their might. The strong are overcome by God, as a hero loses his power when his bow is broken. The antithesis: “And they that stumbled [or, stumble] are girded with strength.” As stumbling, tottering indicates weakness and powerlessness, so “being girded” with strength denotes fitness for battle, power prepared for battle. The strong He deprives of strength, the powerless He makes strong—according to the free working of His power. PULPIT 4-8, "In 1 Samuel 2:4-8 Hannah illustrates the working of this attribute of the Deity by enumerating the vicissitudes of human events, which are not the result of chance, but of that omniscience combined with holiness which she has claimed for Jehovah in 1 Samuel 2:2, 1 Samuel 2:3. She begins with the vicissitudes of war; but these are not more remarkable than those of peace, by which the full, the rich and wealthy, have to descend to the position of a hireling; while those previously hungry have ceased, i.e. from labour, and keep holiday. In a nation of small proprietors, where the land was tilled by the owner and those "born in his house," the position of the hireling, the "mean white" of the southern States of America, was lower than that of the slave, especially in Judaea, where the slave was more in the position of a vassal than of a serf or forced labourer. In the next clause the translation may either be, "She that was long barren hath borne seven," or, "Until the barren" etc.; i.e. these vicissitudes may even reach so far as to make a barren woman the mother of seven, i.e. of a perfect number of children, happily generalised in Psalms 113:9 into 52
- 53. "a joyful motherof children." But see Ruth 4:15; Jeremiah 15:9. In this there is also a typical reference to the long barrenness of the Gentile world, to be followed by a fruitfulness far exceeding that of the Jewish Church, while it, prolific once in patriarchs, and prophets, and saints, is now comparatively sterile. In Jeremiah 15:6 "the grave, Hebrews Sheol, is "the pit," the hollow vault underground, which is the dwelling of the dead. Lit; therefore, Hannah's words might seem to imply a belief in the resurrection; but her meaning rather was that God brings a man to the very brink of the grave, and then, when all hope seems past, raises him up again. In verse 8 beggar is simply needy, but the expressions dust and dunghill add dishonour to his poverty. To set might more correctly be translated to make them sit; sitting, especially on a raised seat, being a mark of honour among Orientals, who generally squat on mats on the ground. In the next clause the A.V. particularises what in the Hebrews is quite general. "He will make them possess (or enjoy) a glorious throne." Their seat among the princes is not inherited, but acquired; and though promoted thus to a place among men of hereditary rank, and given an honourable position among them, yet it was not necessarily "the throne of glory," the highest seat. Still even this was quite possible; for while the tribal chiefs and heads of fathers' houses obtained their rank by inheritance, nevertheless, in early days the judges, and among them Eli and Samuel, acquired rank and power for themselves. Subsequently, under the kings, the great officers of state took their place along with the hereditary princes, but were dependent upon royal favour. In the last clause the word rendered pillars is rare, being found only here and in 1 Samuel 14:4. In both places the ancient versions are uncertain as to its signification, but in the latter it can only mean a crag, or mass of rock. If then the rock masses of the earth are Jehovah's, and he can lift up and poise upon them the inhabited world (Hebrews rebel), how much more easily can he raise up a man! PETT, "God Humbles The Proud And Raises Up The Humble And Needy. 1 Samuel 2:4-5 “The bows of the mighty men are broken, And those who stumbled are girded with strength. 53
- 54. Those who werefull have hired out themselves for bread, And those who were hungry have ceased to hunger. Yes, the barren has borne seven, And she who has many children languishes.” Hannah here contrasts the proud, self-sufficient warriors with those who stumble on their way, and is pointing out that it is God Who brings down and disarms the one while giving strength to the other. That is what He has done for her. In her weakness He has girded her with strength. (We can compare here also the contrast between Saul and David). She then contrasts the rich with their high standard of living with those who go hungry, and warns that God will cause the rich to have to fend for bread, while the hungry will cease being hungry because their needs will be supplied, in the same way as God has fed her own hungry soul. This is also relevant to Saul and David. In both cases the warning is to the proud and arrogant of what God does to those who are so proud unless they consider their ways, while at the same time being gracious to the weak and helpless, something that she has now experienced for herself. She lived at a time when such vicissitudes of life were constantly being revealed. They were turbulent times. The third example of the three is especially pertinent to her own case, and again warns against arrogance in the face of other people’s sufferings. She who was barren has borne a child who has fulfilled her desire. To her he is the equivalent of seven children the divinely perfect number (compare 1 Samuel 4:15). In contrast the one who has many children will languish (either because of her pride and unkindness to those less fortunate than herself, with Peninnah in mind, or because she loses her children and is left bereft - Jeremiah 15:9). The overall point is that all such people should take into account God and His ways so that they are not caught out. For she has learned through her own experience 54
- 55. what matters mostis not to trust in one’s own strength and resources, but to trust in YHWH. K&D, "In 1Sa_2:4, the predicate ים ִתּ ַח is construed with the nomen rectum ים ִֹרבִּ,גּ not with the nomen regens ת ֶשׁ ֶ,ק because the former is the leading term (vid., Ges. §148, 1, and Ewald, §317, d.). The thought to be expressed is, not that the bow itself is to be broken, but that the heroes who carry the bow are to be confounded or broken inwardly. “Bows of the heroes” stands for heroes carrying bows. For this reason the verb is to be taken in the sense of confounded, not broken, especially as, apart from Jer_51:56, ת ַת ָח is not used to denote the breaking of outward things, but the breaking of men. 5 Those who were full hire themselves out for food, but those who were hungry are hungry no more. She who was barren has borne seven children, but she who has had many sons pines away. BARNES, "See an instance in 1Sa_2:36. See, too, in Eze_13:19, another example of hire paid in bread. Ceased - i. e. were at rest, did no work. The general sense is expressed by the translation of the Latin Version, “they were filled.” CLARKE, "They that were full - All the things mentioned in these verses frequently happen in the course of the Divine providence; and indeed it is the particular providence of God that Hannah seems more especially to celebrate through the whole of 55
- 56. this simple yetsublime ode. GILL, "They that are full have hired out themselves for bread,.... Such as have been full of the good things of this life have been stripped of all, and reduced to such circumstances as to be obliged to hire themselves out to persons to labour under them for their bread. Hannah has either respect to some instances she had known, or prophesies of what would be hereafter, and was fulfilled in the Israelites, when in the hands of the Egyptians and Assyrians, Lam_4:6 and may be exemplified in the case of the prodigal son, Luk_15:13 and is true of such who have larger gifts, but not grace, and which they exercise for lucre sake, and are mere hirelings; and of self-righteous persons who are full of themselves, of their goodness and righteousness, purity, and power; are quite mercenary do all they do for gain, work for life, and labour for perishing meat, and for that which is not bread, and is unsatisfying: and they that were hungry ceased; that is, from being hungry, being filled with good things, having a large and sufficient supply to satisfy their craving desires, Luk_ 1:53. Such are the changes sometimes in Providence, that those who have lived in great plenty and fulness are obliged to work for their bread; and, on the other hand, such as have been starving, and in furnishing circumstances, have been brought into very plentiful and affluent ones. The "hungry", in a spiritual sense, are such who hunger an thirst after Christ, and his righteousness, for justification before God; after him and his blood for the remission of their sins, and the cleansing of their souls; after him, and salvation by him, in whom alone it is to be had; after a view of interest in him, and a greater degree of knowledge of him; and after more communion with him in his word and ordinances; and after the enjoyment of them for that purpose: now when they enjoy what they are craving after, they cease to hire out themselves for bread, as others do; they do not cease from working, but from dependence on their works, on which they cannot feed and live, having found and got other and better bread to feed upon; they cease to be hungry, for they are filled and satisfied with the love of God, with the righteousness of Christ, with the blessings of grace, and salvation by him, with the goodness of his house, and with all the fulness of God and Christ; and so having what satisfies them, they desire no other food, shall have no more want, or be in a starving condition any more, especially this will be the case hereafter: so that the barren hath born seven; meaning herself, who had born many, even five children besides Samuel, 1Sa_2:20 which either was the case before this song was delivered; or rather what she believed would be the case after Eli had blessed her, and prayed for the children by her; seven being a number put for many, Pro_24:16. and she that hath many children is waxed feeble; and incapable of bearing more; and stripped of what she had; this may be understood of Peninnah, concerning whom the Jews have this tradition (o), which Jarchi relates, that when Hannah bore one child, Peninnah buried two; and whereas Hannah had five, Peninnah lost all her ten children. This may be applied to the case of the Gentile and Jewish churches, under the Gospel dispensation, when more were the children of the desolate or barren, the Gentiles, than of the married wife, the Jews, Isa_54:1. 56
- 57. HENRY 5-7, "2.The rich are soon impoverished and the poor strangely enriched on a sudden, 1Sa_2:5. Providence sometimes does so blast men's estates and cross their endeavours, and with a fire not blown consume their increase, that those who were full (their barns full, and their bags full, their houses full of good things, Job_22:18, and their bellies full of these hidden treasures, Psa_17:14) have been reduced to such straits and extremities as to want the necessary supports of life, and to hire out themselves for bread, and they must dig, since to beg they are ashamed. Riches flee away (Pro_23:5), and leave those miserable who, when they had them, placed their happiness in them. To those that have been full and free poverty must needs be doubly grievous. But, on the other hand, sometimes Providence so orders it that those who are hungry cease, that is, cease to hire out themselves for bread as they have done. Having, by God's blessing on their industry, got beforehand in the world, and enough to live upon at ease, they shall hunger no more, not thirst any more. This is not to be ascribed to fortune, nor merely to men's wisdom or folly. Riches are not to men of understanding, nor favour to men of skill (Ecc_9:11), nor is it always men's own fault that they become poor, but (1Sa_2:7) the Lord maketh some poor and maketh others rich; the impoverishing of one is the enriching of another, and it is God's doing. To some he gives power to get wealth, from others he takes away power to keep the wealth they have. Are we poor? God made us poor, which is a good reason why we should be content, and reconcile ourselves to our condition. Are we rich? God made us rich, which is a good reason why we should be thankful, and serve him cheerfully in the abundance of good things he gives us. It may be understood of the same person; those that were rich God makes poor, and after awhile makes rich again, as Job; he gave, he takes away, and then gives again. Let not the rich be proud and secure, for God can soon make them poor; let not the poor despond and despair, for God can in due time enrich them again. JAMISON, "they that were hungry ceased — that is, to hunger. the barren hath born seven — that is, many children. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:5. Have hired themselves out for bread — They that formerly lived in affluence have been so reduced as to be obliged to labour hard for daily bread. They that were hungry ceased — That is, ceased to suffer hunger, or to complain of it. This vicissitude of human affairs, especially the sudden turns which often take place, from a great height of prosperity to a very low condition, and the contrary, are very wonderful, and ought seriously to be pondered; that no man may be self-confident and proud, nor any one be dejected and desponding. So that the barren hath born seven — That is, many children. She alludes to the great change God had made in her own condition. For though she had actually born but one, yet it is probable she had a confident persuasion that she should have more, grounded either upon some particular assurance from God, or, rather, upon the prayer or prediction of Eli. She that hath many children, &c. — Those that have been fruitful 57
- 58. grow barren whenGod pleaseth. COKE, "1 Samuel 2:5. And they that were hungry, ceased— Houbigant renders this, they that were oppressed with famine, shall no longer be so; whilst the barren shall bring forth seven, and she who had many children shall be deprived of strength. All the expressions in this and the other verses are designed to humble the pride of man, and to set forth the greatness, wisdom, and uncontrollable power of God. ELLICOTT, " (5) They that were full.—Another image to illustrate the vicissitudes of human affairs is sketched, one very familiar to the dwellers among the cornfields and vineyards of Canaan. The barren hath born seven.—Here the thought of the inspired singer reverts to herself, and the imagery is drawn from the story of her own life. Seven children are mentioned as the full number of the Divine blessing in children (see Ruth 4:15; Jeremiah 15:9). There is a curious Jewish legend which relates how for each boy child that was born to Hannah, two of Peninnah’s died. LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:5. The “full,” who in the abundance of their wealth had no need, have hired themselves out for bread, that Isaiah, must earn their bread in order to appease their hunger. On the other hand, the hungry “cease” (לוּ ֵדָ)ח either “to be hungry,” or, “to work for bread.” The latter is preferable on account of the contrast with “hire themselves out for bread” in the first clause; so Herder (“they now have holiday”) and Bunsen (“they no longer need work for bread”). Clericus: “Hannah here rightly attributes to divine providence what the heathen wrongly attribute to fortune, of whose instabilitv they speak ad nauseam.” See J. Stobזi, florileg. tit. 105[FN17] The דַﬠ [“till,” rendered in Eng. A.V. “so that”] is taken by some expositors in the sense “even” [Germ. sogar]. Clericus explains it as a sort of ellipsis “as if she said that all experienced the vicissitudes of human affairs, even to the barren woman, who,” etc. Similarly Keil explains it as a brachylogy: “it goes so far that”..… This adverbial construction, with the presupposed logical zeugma, would have as much in its favor as the view of Thenius, who asks: “Might not דַﬠ be an adverb: the long barren?” But there are passages in which דַ,ﬠ from its sense of continuance, must be taken simply as a conjunction, meaning “in that or while” ( Jonah 4:2; Job 1:18; 1 Samuel 14:19); in the two last passages it is followed as here by ְו [“and”], and introduces an occurrence contemporaneously with which, or following on which, something else occurred. Here then: “while the barren bears seven.” “Seven children” Isaiah, according to Ruth 4:15, the “complete number of 58
- 59. the divine blessingin children” (Keil). Comp. Psalm 113:9 : “he makes the barren woman dwell in the house, the joyful mother of children.” [Erdmann translates: “he makes the barren woman of the house dwell as a joyful mother of children.”—Tr.] [ Psalm 113:7-9 resembles 1 Samuel 2:5; 1 Samuel 2:7-8 so closely as to suggest an imitation. It would be very natural in a later writer, in composing a Psalm celebrating Jehovah’s majesty and power, to take such general expressions from a well-known Song of Solomon, which we may suppose was committed to writing by Hannah herself, and through Samuel transmitted to the prophetic students, among whom, no doubt, were many psalmists. The Book of “Samuel” itself was probably in circulation soon after Rehoboam’s time.—Tr.] “And she who had many children languishes away.” Clericus remarks: “being exhausted before the end of the, usual bearing-time of women, and perhaps left solitary by the death of her children.” As to this last point comp. Jeremiah 15:9.[FN18] [The view held by some that in Hannah’s barrenness and subsequent fruitfulness there is a mystical or typical meaning, deserves consideration. It is advocated by Jerome, Augustine, Patrick, Gill, Wordsworth, and the Bib. Comm. Hannah is said to be the type of the Christian Church, at first barren and reviled, afterwards fruitful and rejoicing. As to such a typical character we must be guided, not by outward resemblances, but by fixed principles of biblical interpretation. If Hannah’s late fruitfulness is typical, it must be because it sets forth a spiritual element of the spiritual kingdom of God. These facts may guide us to a decision: 1) God’s relation to His people is set forth under the figure of marriage; He is the husband, His people the wife ( Isaiah 54; Jeremiah 3; Hosea 1-3); 2) Isaiah ( 1 Samuel 54:1) describes God’s spiritual people as barren, yet with the promise of many children; 3) Paul ( Galatians 4:27) quotes this passage of Isaiah, refers it to the Church of Christ as distinguished from the Jewish dispensation, and declares that this antithesis is given in Sarah and Hagar. The barren Sarah is the new dispensation, the fruitful Hagar the old. Besides Sarah, other barren women in the Bible become the mothers of remarkable sons: Rebecca, Rachel, Samson’s mother, Hannah, Elizabeth. Are these all typical of the new dispensation or the Church of Christ? The answer is to be found in Paul’s treatment of Sarah’s history. What he declares Isaiah, that Sarah is the mother of the child of promise, while Hagar’s child was the product of natural fruitfulness. Thus Sarah sets forth the dispensation which is based on promise or free grace and faith; Hagar represents the dispensation of works. Paul quotes Isaiah 54:1, to show simply that the spiritual Jerusalem, the Church of Christ, is our mother. Throughout his argument it is the spiritual element of promise and faith on which Sarah’s typical position is based. Only, therefore, where we can show such spiritual element are we justified in supposing a typical character. There must be involved the truth that the origination and maintenance of God’s people depend on His promise and not on human strength. This is not necessarily involved in the history of every barren 59
- 60. woman who becomesfruitful—certainly not in that of Rachel, probably in that of Rebecca, probably not in the others. These histories teach indeed that fruitfulness is the gift of God; and, as an encouragement to faith, He has in some instances granted to the barren to be the mothers of sons to whom He has assigned important positions in the development of His kingdom. But this fact does not in itself show that these mothers sustained to the kingdom of God the relation which Sarah sustained. Hannah seems to be simply a pious mother whose prayer for a Song of Solomon, contrary to human probabilities, is granted.—Tr.]. 1Sa_2:5-8 ים ִע ֵב ְשׂ are the rich and well to do; these would become so poor as to be obliged to hire themselves out for bread. ל ֵד ָ,ח to cease to be what they were before. The use of דַע as a conjunction, in the sense of “yea” or “in fact,” may be explained as an elliptical expression, signifying “it comes to this, that.” “Seven children” are mentioned as the full number of the divine blessing in children (see Rth_4:15). “The mother of many children” pines away, because she has lost all her sons, and with them her support in her old age (see Jer_15:9). This comes from the Lord, who kills, etc. (cf. Deu_32:39). The words of 1Sa_2:6 are figurative. God hurls down into death and the danger of death, and also rescues therefrom (see Psa_30:3-4). The first three clauses of 1Sa_2:8 are repeated verbatim in Psa_113:7-8. Dust and the dunghill are figures used to denote the deepest degradation and ignominy. The antithesis to this is, sitting upon the chair or throne of glory, the seat occupied by noble princes. The Lord does all this, for He is the creator and upholder of the world. The pillars (י ֵקֻצ ְ,מ from צוּק = קַָצי) of the earth are the Lord's; i.e., they were created or set up by Him, and by Him they are sustained. Now as Jehovah, the God of Israel, the Holy One, governs the world with His almighty power, the righteous have nothing to fear. With this thought the last strophe of the song begins: 6 “The Lord brings death and makes alive; he brings down to the grave and raises up. 60
- 61. CLARKE, "The Lordkilleth - God is the arbiter of life and death; he only can give life, and he only has a right to take it away. He bringeth down to the grave - The Hebrew word שאול sheol, which we translate grave, seems to have the same meaning in the Old Testament with ἁδης, hades in the New, which is the word generally used by the Septuagint for the other. It means the grave, the state of the dead, and the invisible place, or place of separate spirits. Sometimes we translate it hell, which now means the state of perdition, or place of eternal torments; but as this comes from the Saxon, to cover or conceal, it means only the covered place. In some parts of England the word helling is used for the covers of a book, the slating of a house, etc. The Targum seems to understand it of death and the resurrection. “He kills and commands to give life; he causes to descend into Sheol, that in the time to come he may bring them into the lives of eternity,” i.e., the life of shame and everlasting contempt, and the life of glory. GILL, "The Lord killeth, and maketh alive,.... Which is true of different persons; some he takes away by death, and others he preserves and continues in life; and of the same persons, whom God removes by death, and restores them to life again, of which there are instances both in the Old and New Testament; and be they which they will, both are of God, he is the great Disposer of life and death. Death is of him; it is by his appointment; it is sent by his order; and when it has a commission from him, there is no resisting it; and let it be brought about by what means it will, still it is of God: and life is of him; it is first given by him, and it is preserved by him; and though taken away, it shall be restored at the resurrection of the dead; of which some interpret this clause, as Kimchi and Ben Gersom observe: and what is here said is true, in a spiritual sense; the Lord kills by the law, or shows men that they are dead in sin, and in a legal sense; and he makes alive by his Spirit, through the Gospel, quickening such who were dead in trespasses and sins; which is his own work, and the effect of divine power and grace; See Gill on Deu_32:39. he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up; he bringeth some very near to the grave, to the very brink of it; so that in their own apprehensions, and in the opinion of their friends, they are just dropping into it, and no hope of recovery left; when he says to them "Return", and brings them back from the pit, and delivers them from going into it, Job_33:22 and even when they are laid in it, he brings up out of it again, as in the case of Lazarus, and which will be the case in the resurrection, Joh_5:28. HENRY, " God is the sovereign Lord of life and death (1Sa_2:6): The Lord killeth and maketh alive. Understand it, (1.) Of God's sovereign dominion and universal agency, in the lives and deaths of the children of men. He presides in births and burials. Whenever any die it is God that directs the arrows of death. The Lord killeth. Death is his messenger, strikes whom and when he bids; none are brought to the dust but it is he that brings them down, for in his hand are the keys of death and the grave, Rev_1:18. Whenever any are born it is he that makes them alive. None knows what is the way of the spirit, but this we know, that it comes from the Father of spirits. Whenever any are 61
- 62. recovered from sickness,and delivered from imminent perils, it is God that bringeth up; for to him belong the issues from death. (2.) Of the distinction he makes between some and others: He killeth some, and maketh, that is, keepeth, others alive that were in the same danger (in war, suppose, or pestilence), two in a bed together, it may be, one taken by death and the other left alive. Even so, Father, because it seemed good in thy eyes. Some that were most likely to live are brought down to the grave, and others that were as likely to die are brought up; for living and dying do not go by likelihoods. God's providences towards some are killing, ruining to their comforts, and towards others at the same time reviving. (3.) Of the change he makes with one and the same person: He killeth and bringeth down to the grave, that is, he brings even to death's door, and then revives and raises up, when even life was despaired of and a sentence of death received, 2Co_1:8, 2Co_1:9. He turns to destruction, and then says, Return, Psa_110:3. Nothing is too hard for God to do, no, not the quickening of the dead, and putting life into dry bones. JAMISON, "he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up — that is, He reduces to the lowest state of degradation and misery, and restores to prosperity and happiness. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:6-7. The Lord killeth and maketh alive — The power of life and death is in the hands of God; whom he pleaseth he takes out of the world, and whom he pleaseth, he preserves in it; raising men even from the brink of the grave, when they are ready to drop into it. The Lord maketh poor, &c. — Here she acknowledges the power of God, in frequently changing the conditions of men, reducing the rich to extreme poverty, and exalting the poor to great riches. ELLICOTT, " (6) The Lord killeth, and maketh alive.—Death too and life come from this same omnipotent Lord: nothing in the affairs of men is the sport of blind chance. The reign of a Divine law administered by the God to whom Hannah prayed is universal, and guides with a strict unerring justice what are commonly called the ups and downs, the changes and chances, of this mortal life. The following lines of the 7th, 8th, and 9th verses enforce by varied instances the same solemn truth. The Babylonian Talmud on these words has a curious and interesting tradition:— “Three classes appear on the day of judgment: the perfectly righteous, who are at once written and sealed for eternal life; the thoroughly bad, who are at once written and sealed for hell: as it is written (Daniel 12:2), ‘And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt;’ and those in the intermediate state, who go down into hell, where they cry and howl for a time, whence they ascend again: as it is written 62
- 63. (Zechariah 13:9), ‘AndI will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried; they shall call on my name, and I will hear them.’ It is of them Hannah said (1 Samuel 2:6), ‘The Lord killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to hell, and bringeth up.’”—Treatise Bosh Hashanah, fol. 16, Colossians 2. HAWKER, "(6) The LORD killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up. (7) The LORD maketh poor, and maketh rich: he bringeth low, and lifteth up. (8) He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the LORD'S, and he hath set the world upon them. These are all so many beautiful repetitions of the same important doctrine, in asserting God's sovereignty over all things, both in the kingdoms of providence, and of grace. And it is sweet when the heart finds a cordial assent, in all the circumstances of our own warfare. Reader! what can afford more solid joy, than the contemplation of the Lord Jesus, in the character which John saw him in, and which corresponds to what is here said: He hath the keys of hell and death. Revelation 1:18. LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:6. This Keil connects with the preceding, explaining: This comes from the Lord, who kills, etc. But here, as in the remaining members of the Song of Solomon, we must suppose a logical asyndeton. The contrast of death and life, killing and making alive demands even a wider extension of these conceptions than is indicated in the last clause of 1 Samuel 2:5. Killing denotes (with a departure from the ordinary sense) bringing into the extremest misfortune and suffering, which oppresses the soul like the gloom of death, or brings it near to death—making alive is extricating from deadly sorrow and introducing into safety and joy. This is confirmed by the second member: “He brings down to Sheol and brings up.” The same contrast is found in Deuteronomy 32:39, “I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal;” Psalm 30:4 (3), “Thou hast brought up my soul from Sheol, Thou hast made me alive,” etc.; Psalm 71:20, “Thou, who hast showed us great and sore trouble, wilt quicken us again, and wilt bring us up again from the depths of the earth,” [Eng. A. V. reads, with Qeri, me; Kethib, us.—Tr.]. Psalm 86:13 : “Great is Thy mercy towards me, and Thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest Sheol,” (comp. Job 5:18, and Psalm 88:4-6). So also in Psalm 66:9, misfortune is conceived of as death, salvation as revival. Calvin: “in the word ‘death’ Hannah properly embraces everything injurious, and whatever leads step by step to death, as, on the other 63
- 64. hand, the word‘life’ includes everything happy and prosperous, and whatever can make a fortunate man contented with his lot.” [As is apparent from the above exposition, there is no reference in this verse to the doctrine of the resurrection. The word אוֹל ְשּׁ “Sheol,” improperly rendered in Eng. A. V. “hell” and “the grave,” means “the underworld,” (Erdmann, the same, “unterwelt”), the gloomy abode of all the dead, conceived of by the Hebrews as the negation of all earthly activity. It thus became an image of darkness and suffering, only here and there illumined and soothed (as in Psalm 16) by the conviction that God’s love would maintain and develop into fulness of joy the life which He had bestowed on His servants.—The word is usually supposed to mean a “hole,” “cleft” like, Eng. hell (=“hole,” “hollow,” German hצlle.—Tr.]. PETT 6-8, "This now turns her thoughts to YHWH’s overall sovereignty both in life and death, and in regard to wealth and poverty. She is very much aware of this because of the life that God has given her in her son. There is no reference here to resurrection. The thought is rather that life and death are in His hands. Some die, others are ‘given life’, or revive after illness. But all depend on YHWH. Some are brought down to the grave world (Sheol), others are raised up from their beds of sickness. And in the same way it is He Who makes men poor or rich, Who brings men low, or raises them up. This indeed is what has happened to her, She herself feels that she has been lifted out of a living death, and has been made rich and exalted in her bearing of a son. For she has come by it to recognise that YHWH is the One Who lifts the poor and needy from the dust and from the dunghill (the place of misery and humiliation. See Isaiah 47:1; Lamentations 4:5), and makes them enjoy the privilege of being princes, and of sitting on a glorious throne (a total contrast to the dust and the dunghill). No doubt at that moment she felt that she, who had spiritually been mourning on a dunghill, was indeed now enthroned in glory at her joy over Samuel’s birth. The picture in general is, of course, idealistic, although examples can certainly be found from history. Perhaps Jephthah sprang to mind. And it would certainly be true of David. But she has in mind what will happen ultimately when the ideal king who has been promised has come. And all this will be so because YHWH controls creation itself and is Lord over it all. Its very continuance is dependent on His provision, as is demonstrated by the fact that ‘the pillars of the earth are YHWH’s, and He has set the world upon them’. This vivid description pictures the world as being like a house or temple (see Judges 16:26). If He were to pull the pillars away the house would come crashing down. 64
- 65. We gain fromthis some understanding of how Hannah’s soul is exalted, for in her eyes all these descriptions bring out what YHWH has done for her. He has turned her world upside down. And her point is that He not only does it for her, but will do it for others. David will be a prime example. 7 The Lord sends poverty and wealth; he humbles and he exalts. CLARKE, "The Lord maketh poor - For many cannot bear affluence, and if God should continue to trust them with riches, they would be their ruin. Maketh rich - Some he can trust, and therefore makes them stewards of his secular bounty. GILL, "The Lord maketh poor, and maketh rich,.... Which is true in a natural sense of the same persons, as might be exemplified in the case of Job; and of different persons, as in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus; for both poverty and riches are of God, see Pro_22:2. Poverty is of God; for though it is sometimes owing to a man's own conduct, yet that there is such a difference among men in general, that some should be poor, and others rich, is owing to the wise providence of God, that men may be dependent on one another. Riches are of God, and are the gifts of his bountiful providence; for though they are oftentimes the fruits of industry and diligence, as means, yet not always; and whenever they are, they are to be ascribed to the blessing of God attending the diligent hand. This is also true in a spiritual sense; for though spiritual poverty is owing to the fall of Adam, and to the actual sins and transgressions of men, whereby they become poor and miserable, yet all this is not without the knowledge and will of God: and it is he that makes men sensible of their poverty, and then makes them rich in spiritual things, with his own grace, and the blessings of it, with the riches of grace here, and of glory hereafter; all which flow from the good will of God, who has laid up much for his people, bestowed much on them, and entitles them to more; and which come to them through the poverty of Christ, who, though he was rich, became poor, that they through his poverty might be made 65
- 66. rich, 2Co_8:9 hebringeth low, and lifteth up; which has been verified in the same persons, as in Job, Nebuchadnezzar, &c. and in different persons, for he puts down one, and raises up another; so he rejected Saul from being king, and took David from the sheepfold, debased Haman, and raised Mordecai to great dignity: and, in a spiritual sense, the Lord shows men the low estate and condition they are brought into by sin, humbles them under a sense of it, brings down their proud spirits to sit at the feet of Jesus, and to submit to him, and to his righteousness; and he lifts them up by his son out of their fallen, captive, and miserable estate, and by his Spirit and grace brings them out of the horrible pit of nature into the state of grace; sets them upon the rock Christ, and makes their mountain to stand strong by the discoveries of his love, and will at last lift them up to glory, and place them on the same throne with Christ. HENRY 7-8, "Advancement and abasement are both from him. He brings some low and lifts up others (1Sa_2:7), humbles the proud and gives grace and honour to the lowly, lays those in the dust that would vie with the God above them and trample upon all about them (Job_40:12, Job_ 40:13), but lifts up those with his salvation that humble themselves before him, Jam_4:10. Or it may be understood of the same persons: those whom he had brought low, when they are sufficiently humbled, he lifteth up. This is enlarged upon, 1Sa_2:8. He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, a low and mean condition, nay, from the dunghill, a base and servile condition, loathed, and despised, to set them among princes. See Psa_113:7, Psa_113:8. Promotion comes not by chance, but from the counsel of God, which often prefers those that were very unlikely and that men thought very unworthy. Joseph and Daniel, Moses and David, were thus strangely advanced, from a prison to a palace, from a sheep-hook to a sceptre. The princes they are set among may be tempted to disdain them, but God can establish the honour which he gives thus surprisingly, and make them even to inherit the throne of glory. Let not those whom Providence has thus preferred be upbraided with the dust and dunghill they are raised out of, for the meaner their beginnings were the more they are favoured, and God is glorified, in their advancement, if it be by lawful and honourable means. LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:7. By His power the Lord determines the contrast of rich and poor, high and low; comp. Psalm 75:8 (7). The thought of the second clause is developed in 1 Samuel 2:8, with the first half of which Psalm 113:7-8 agrees almost Word for word. Being low is here regarded as being despised, for “dust and dunghill” indicate a condition of deepest dishonor and disgrace, in which one Isaiah, as it were, trodden under foot; comp. Psalm 44:26 (25). The “raising and lifting” denotes the divine government, by which shame and contempt are changed into honor and glory. The contrast to the dust and the dunghill is the sitting in the company of nobles and princes, on the throne of honor. Calvin: “Hannah goes on to say the same thing of honors and dignities as of fortunes, namely, that, when we behold in this world so many and so great vicissitudes, we should lift up our gaze to the providence of God, who rules all things in heaven and earth by His will, not imagining that there is anything fortuitous in our lives, (… but knowing that God’s providence controls everything).”—The two last clauses point to the foundation of the Lord’s determination and arrangement of the contrasted relations of life and 66
- 67. fates of men:“for the pillars of the earth are Jehovah’s, and He hath set the earth upon them.”[FN19] The control and government of God here portrayed is founded on the fact that He is the creator and sustainer of the earth, and therefore by His omnipotence exercises unrestricted rule over the earth-world. Here we have clear and plain the highest point of view, from which all that is said from 1 Samuel 2:4 on is to be looked at: the all-embracing power of the Lord. Clericus: “Hannah, therefore, means to say that God easily effects any change in human affairs, since He is creator and lord of the earth itself.” 8 He raises the poor from the dust and lifts the needy from the ash heap; he seats them with princes and has them inherit a throne of honor. “For the foundations of the earth are the Lord’s; on them he has set the world. CLARKE, "To set them among princes - There have been many cases where, in the course of God’s providence, a person has been raised from the lowest and most abject estate to the highest; from the plough to the imperial dignity: from the dungeon to the throne; from the dunghill to nobility. The story of Cincinnatus is well known; so is that of the patriarch Joseph; but there is one not less in point, that of Roushen Akhter, who was brought out of a dungeon, and exalted to the throne of Hindustan. On this circumstance the following elegant couplet was made: - 67
- 68. “He was abright star, but now is become a moon, Joseph is taken from prison, and is become a king.” There is a play here on Roushen Akhter, which signifies a bright star; and there is an allusion to the history of the patriarch Joseph, because of the similarity of fortune between him and the Mohammedan prince. For the pillars of the earth are the Lord’s - He is almighty, and upholds all things by the word of his power. GILL, "He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill,.... This is but a further illustration of what is before expressed. Literally; such poor as are beggars, are those that are extremely poor, that sit in the dust and beg, and have nothing but a dunghill to lie on; yet God is able to raise and lift up persons in such an extremely low condition to a very high one: spiritually; such are the poor, who are poor in spirit, and spiritually poor, and are sensible of it, and they, and they only, are beggars. For all that are poor, as they are not sensible of their poverty, so they beg not; but some are and beg; they knock at the door of grace and mercy; their language is petitionary, they entreat the grace and mercy of God; their posture is standing, and waiting till they have an answer; they are importunate, and will not easily take a denial; and they observe all opportunities to get relief, and are thankful for everything that is given then. Their conditions, in which they are, is represented by the "dust" and "dunghill"; which in general denotes that they are in a mean estate, in a sinful one, and in a very polluted and loathsome one; in this condition the Lord finds them, when he calls them by his grace; and from this he raises and lifts them up by his Spirit and grace, out of which they could never have raised themselves; and in which estate of sin and misery they must have lain, had he not exerted his powerful efficacious grace, in bringing them into a glorious one, next described: to set them among princes the people of God called by grace, who are the sons of the King of kings by adoption, manifested in their regeneration and faith; have a princely spirit, the spirit of adoption, a free, generous, and bountiful one; live and look like princes, are well fed and clothed, and attended; have the riches of princes, and are heirs of a kingdom: and to be set among them, is to be made one, and ranked as such; to have a place and a name in the church, and among the people of God; to sit down with them at the table of the Lord, and have communion with them: and to make them inherit the throne of glory; eternal glory and happiness, which as it is signified by a kingdom and crown, so by a throne, and is the same with Christ's, Rev_3:21 and therefore must be a glorious one: and this is had by way of inheritance; not obtained by industry, nor purchased with money; but comes by adoption grace, and belongs only to children, is a bequest of our heavenly Father, and comes through the death of Christ the testator; and this phrase denotes not barely the right unto, but the possession of his happiness and glory: for the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he hath set the world upon them; the earth has its foundations on which it is laid, and its pillars by which it is supported; but these are no other than the power and providence of God; otherwise the earth is hung upon nothing, in the open circumambient air: and that God can and does do this may well be thought, and to do all the above things in providence and grace, related in the preceding verses; in the support, and for the proof of which, this is observed. Figuratively, the pillars of the earth may design the princes of the world, the supreme rulers of it, and civil magistrates, who are sometimes called cornerstones, 68
- 69. and the shieldsof the earth, Zec_10:4, and so pillars, because they are the means of cementing, supporting, and protecting the people of the earth, and of preserving their peace and property. Likewise good men may be meant in a figurative sense, who, as they are the salt of the earth, are the pillars of it, for whose sake it was made, and is supported, and continued in being; the church is the pillar and ground of truth; and every good man is a pillar in the house of God, and especially ministers of the Gospel; see Rev_3:12. HENRY, " Advancement and abasement are both from him. He brings some low and lifts up others (1Sa_2:7), humbles the proud and gives grace and honour to the lowly, lays those in the dust that would vie with the God above them and trample upon all about them (Job_40:12, Job_ 40:13), but lifts up those with his salvation that humble themselves before him, Jam_4:10. Or it may be understood of the same persons: those whom he had brought low, when they are sufficiently humbled, he lifteth up. This is enlarged upon, 1Sa_2:8. He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, a low and mean condition, nay, from the dunghill, a base and servile condition, loathed, and despised, to set them among princes. See Psa_113:7, Psa_113:8. Promotion comes not by chance, but from the counsel of God, which often prefers those that were very unlikely and that men thought very unworthy. Joseph and Daniel, Moses and David, were thus strangely advanced, from a prison to a palace, from a sheep-hook to a sceptre. The princes they are set among may be tempted to disdain them, but God can establish the honour which he gives thus surprisingly, and make them even to inherit the throne of glory. Let not those whom Providence has thus preferred be upbraided with the dust and dunghill they are raised out of, for the meaner their beginnings were the more they are favoured, and God is glorified, in their advancement, if it be by lawful and honourable means. JAMISON, "He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill — The dunghill, a pile of horse, cow, or camel offal, heaped up to dry in the sun, and used as fuel, was, and is, one of the common haunts of the poorest mendicants; and the change that had been made in the social position of Hannah, appeared to her grateful heart as auspicious and as great as the elevation of a poor despised beggar to the highest and most dignified rank. inherit the throne of glory — that is, possesses seats of honor. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:8. He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, &c. — From the most mean estate and sordid place. To set them among princes — Instance Joseph, David, and Daniel. To make them inherit the throne of glory — That is, a glorious throne or kingdom; not only to possess it themselves, but to transmit it to their posterity, as the word inherit implies. For the pillars of the earth are the Lord’s — The foundations which God created and upholds, and wherewith he sustains the earth and all its inhabitants, as a house is supported with pillars. These words signify the reason of all that is contained in the five preceding verses. For the very earth being founded, upheld, and supported by the Lord, it is no wonder that all the inhabitants of it are in his power, so that he can dispose of them as he pleases. COKE, "1 Samuel 2:8. He—lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, &c.— The 69
- 70. author of theObservations remarks, that dried dung being usually burnt in the East, heaps of this sort of turf were commonly laid up in their cottages. Hence he thinks the present expression is elucidated; "He raiseth a beggar from a dunghill, out of a cottage, that is, in which heaps of dried dung are piled up for fuel, as some of the worst accommodated of the poor practise with respect to the turf of this country: or rather, he raiseth up a poor exile, forced to beg his bread in his wanderings, and to lodge in some out-house where dung is laid up, out of the city, in order to set him on the throne of a royal palace, built in the midst of it." When Hannah says, that the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, she urges a strong reason in proof of all she had advanced; namely, that GOD, being the founder, supporter, and upholder of the earth itself, could certainly do with the inhabitants of it as he pleased. The true meaning of the word rendered pillars, מצקי metzukei, is somewhat doubtful. It seems to express those grand instruments, whatever they be, of supporting and retaining in its orbit the globe of the earth. But did it signify pillars, as we have rendered it, every one sees that the word must be understood in a figurative sense. ELLICOTT, " (8) The pillars of the earth.—And the gracious All-Ruler does these things, for He is at once Creator and Upholder of the universe. The words of these Divine songs which treat of cosmogony are such as would be understood in the childhood of peoples. The quiet thinker, however, is tempted to ask whether after 3,000 or 4,000 years, now, with the light of modern science shining round us, we have made much real progress in our knowledge of the genesis and government of the universe. The pillars.—Or columns—Jerome, in the Vulgate, translates this unusual word by “hinges”—cardines terrœ. Gesenius prefers the rendering “foundations.” On the whole, the word used in the English Version, “pillars,” is the best. LANGE, "4. The Song culminates ( 1 Samuel 2:9-10) in the prophetic testimony to the omnipotent rule of the holy God in the manifestation of His justice towards the godly and the ungodly, and in conducting His kingdom to glorious victory over the world, a) To the godly the Lord will grant His protection and salvation, and will guard them from misfortune, comp. Psalm 56:13 (14): “Wilt Thou not deliver my feet from falling, that I may walk before God in the light of life [Germ, as Eng. A. V.: ‘the living’]?” So Psalm 116:8; Psalm 121:3; “he suffers not thy foot to fall.” The 70
- 71. tottering [or falling]of the feet is not to be taken here in an ethical sense; the preservation of the feet from slipping, tottering, stumbling, often denotes deliverance from long-continued misfortune and suffering, so Psalm 15:5; Psalm 55:23; Psalm 66:9. “His saints” points to the intimate association between God and His people, and its correlative is “my God,” “our God.” b) The godless will be the objects of His punitive justice. They will perish in darkness. The darkness is the symbol of misfortune and misery, as light of safety and life, Job 15:22; Psalm 107:14. Godlessness is voluntary remoteness from the light of salvation, which God sheds abroad; and so its walking in darkness must end in destruction. For, not by strength, that Isaiah, by his own strength, shall a man prevail; “shall a man be strong” (ישׁ ִר־אַבּ ְגִ)י is an allusion perhaps to the “mighty men” )ים ִרֹבּ ִג ) in 1 Samuel 2:4. The godless rely on their own strength with which to help themselves in the darkness. But it is universally true that “we do nothing by our own strength.” Psalm 33:16-17. He who leans on his own strength (which cannot be without turning away from the Lord, who alone can help) will receive his just reward, he will perish in darkness. Clericus: “No one can avoid calamity by his own strength, unhelped by divine providence.”—Human weakness is here specially brought out by the order of the words; on man [Heb. ישׁ ִא last word in 1 Samuel 2:9] follows immediately Jehovah [in the Hebrews, first word in 1 Samuel 2:10], which further stands as absolute subject (comp. Psalm 11:4) and thus in sharper contrast. As “prevail” in 1 Samuel 2:9 alludes to 1 Samuel 2:4, so here the “broken” to the “broken” in that verse.—The thought, that God’s justice is shown in the punishment of the godless, is first very strongly and sharply expressed by the immediate collocation of the two verbs after Jehovah: “broken are his opposers,”[FN20] and then illustrated by the allusion to a judicial process which ends with the carrying out of the sentence. The ungodly strive with God as in a judicial contest (יוָיב ִר ְמ [Qeri]), but they are confounded in the presence of the process of law to which the Lord comes. The thunder, the sign of His fear-inspiring and destructive power, is the announcement of His proximity lo the tribunal. The “judge” )ין ִָדי ) denotes the holding of the court. The judicial work of God is the outflow of His holiness, justice and almightiness, which three attributes of God have been celebrated up to this point. The object of the judicial interposition of God is not only the members of the chosen people, but the ends of the earth, that Isaiah, all peoples, the whole world. As before the whole earthly creation, founded and maintained by God’s power, was brought before us in order to establish God’s almighty control over the earth, so here our view is extended from punitive justice as it shows itself in the sphere of God’s people to God’s judgment as it stretches over the whole earth, to the all-embracing world- judgment. The prophetic view often rises to this universality of God’s judicial control as the judge of the whole world ( Genesis 18:25), which corresponds to the idea of the universal salvation embracing all the nations of the earth; Song of 71
- 72. Solomon, for example,Micah 1:2 sq.; Isaiah 2:9 sq.; 1 Samuel 3:13; Psalm 7:8 sq.; 1 Samuel 9:8. The conception of this general judgment over all the peoples of the earth, and that of the special judgment over Israel and every individual member of Israel are closely connected. The aim of both is to lead God’s kingdom to victory and glory. The broad glance at the ends of the earth filled with the judicial glory of King Jehovah fixes itself in the concluding words on the highest aim and end to be reached by the exercise of God’s judicial justice, namely, the unfolding of God’s power and dominion in the kingdom in Israel and in the person of His anointed. “And He will give strength to His king, and exalt the horn of His anointed.” 9 He will guard the feet of his faithful servants, but the wicked will be silenced in the place of darknes “It is not by strength that one prevails; CLARKE, "He will keep the feet of his saints - He will order and direct all their goings, and keep them from every evil way. The wicked shall be silent in darkness - The Targum understands this of their being sent to the darkness of hell; they shall be slain. By strength shall no man prevail - Because God is omnipotent, and no power can be successfully exerted against him. GILL, "He will keep the feet of his saints,.... Now follow promises and prophecies of future things respecting the Israel of God, either in a literal or spiritual sense. By "his saints" are meant not angels, though they are his Holy Ones, but men, and a body of them; who though unholy in 72
- 73. themselves, nor canthey make themselves holy, yet are made so by the grace of God, in consequence of electing grace, by which they are chosen to be holy, from Christ the source and spring of all holiness, by the Holy Spirit of God, as the efficient cause, and which is done in the effectual calling; hence they live holy lives and conversations, though not altogether without sin in the present state. The word also signifies such to whom God has been kind and gracious, and on whom he has bestowed blessings of goodness, and who are bountiful and beneficent to others. These are the Lord's, whom he has set apart for himself, and has sanctified in Christ, and by his Spirit; and of these he is keeper, not angels, nor ministers of the word, nor themselves, but the Lord himself is the keeper of them; and who is an able, faithful, tender and compassionate, constant and everlasting keeper of them; and particularly he keeps their "feet"; he indeed keeps their whole persons, their bodies and souls; the members of their bodies, and the powers of their souls, their head, their heart, their affections, from turning aside from him; he guides, directs, and orders all their actions and goings; he keeps their feet in his own ways, where he has guided them; he keeps them in Christ the way, and in all the paths of faith, truth, righteousness, and holiness, and in the way everlasting: he keeps them from falling; for though they are liable to fall into sin, and by temptation, and from a lively exercise of grace, yet not totally and finally; they are secured from it by his love to them; the promises he has made them; his power exerted on their behalf; their being in the hands of Christ, and the glory of all the three Persons concerned herein: and the wicked shall be silent in darkness; sin has spread darkness over all human nature; every man is born and brought up in darkness, and walks in it: a state of unregeneracy is a state of darkness, in which wicked men continue; and they are in the dark about God, the perfections of his nature, his mind and will, word and worship; about Christ, and the way of life, peace, and salvation by him; about their own state and condition by nature, and the danger they are in; about the nature and necessity of regeneration; and about the Scriptures, and the doctrines of the Gospel; and living and dying; in such a state, darkness, blackness of darkness, is their portion forever: so the Targum,"the wicked in hell in darkness shall be judged:''and it is said they shall be "silent" in it; they are quiet, easy, and content in the state of natural darkness in which they are; they neither do nor will understand; they do not care to come to the light, but shun the means of light and knowledge; they have nothing to say of God, of Christ, of the Spirit of God, or of divine things; they can talk enough of evil things, and pour them out in great plenty, but not of any good; and when their evils are charged upon them by the law, their mouths are stopped, and they pronounced guilty, and have nothing to say why justice and judgment should not take place; and so they will be silent and speechless at the great day of judgment. Some interpret it, they shall be "cut off in darkness"; so Kimchi and Ben Melech; that is, by death, by the hand of God, by the sword of justice: for by strength shall no man prevail; which is a reason both why God will keep his saints, and why the wicked shall be silent, or cut off and perish: with respect to good men, they are not saved, kept, and preserved by their own strength; they are not saved without a righteousness, without regeneration, without repentance towards God, and faith in Christ; neither of which they can perform in their own strength: nor can a saint keep himself from, or prevail over his spiritual enemies of himself, not over sin, nor Satan, nor the world; but it is by the power of God that he is kept through faith unto salvation: and with respect to wicked men, these shall not prevail by their strength over good men, or the church, who are built upon a rock, against which the gates of hell cannot prevail; nor can the wicked so prevail by their strength as to hinder their being cut off, and cast into outer darkness; they have no power over the spirit to retain it in the day of death; and whether they will or not, they shall be cast into hell, and go into everlasting punishment. 73
- 74. HENRY 9-10, "Aprediction of the preservation and advancement of all God's faithful friends, and the destruction of all his and their enemies. Having testified her joyful triumph in what God had done, and is doing, she concludes with joyful hopes of what he would do, 1Sa_2:9, 1Sa_2:10. Pious affections (says bishop Patrick) in those days rose many times to the height of prophecy, whereby God continued in that nation his true religion, in the midst of their idolatrous inclinations. This prophecy may refer, 1. More immediately to the government of Israel by Samuel, and by David whom he was employed to anoint. The Israelites, God's saints, should be protected and delivered; the Philistines, their enemies, should be conquered and subdued, and particularly by thunder, 1Sa_7:10. Their dominions should be enlarged, king David strengthened and greatly exalted, and Israel (that in the time of the judges had made so small a figure and had much ado to subsist) should now shortly become great and considerable, and give law to all its neighbours. An extraordinary change that was; and the birth of Samuel was, as it were, the dawning of that day. But, 2. We have reason to think that this prophecy looks further, to the kingdom of Christ, and the administration of that kingdom of grace, of which she now comes to speak, having spoken so largely of the kingdom of providence. And here is the first time that we meet with the name Messiah, or his Anointed. The ancient expositors, both Jewish and Christian, make it to look beyond David, to the Son of David. Glorious things are here spoken of the kingdom of the Mediator, both before and since his incarnation; for the method of the administration of it, both by the eternal Word and by that Word made flesh, is much the same. Concerning that kingdom we are here assured, (1.) That all the loyal subjects of it shall be carefully and powerfully protected (1Sa_2:9): He will keep the feet of his saints. There are a people in the world that are God's saints, his select and sanctified ones; and he will keep their feet, that is, all that belongs to them shall be under his protection, down to their very feet, the lowest part of the body. If he will keep their feet, much more their head and hearts. Or he will keep their feet, that is, he will secure the ground they stand on, and establish their goings; he will set a guard of grace upon their affections and actions, that their feet may neither wander out of the way nor stumble in the way. When their feet are ready to slip (Psa_73:2) his mercy holdeth them up (Psa_94:18) and keepeth them from falling, Jud_1:24. While we keep God's ways he will keep our feet. See Psa_37:23, Psa_37:24. (2.) That all the powers engaged against it shall not be able to effect the ruin of it. By strength shall no man prevail. God's strength is engaged for the church; and, while it is so, man's strength shall not prevail against it. The church seems destitute of strength, her friends few and feeble, but prevalency does not go by human strength, Psa_ 33:16. God neither needs it for him (Psa_147:10) nor dreads it against him. (3.) That all the enemies of it will certainly be broken and brought down: The wicked shall be silent in darkness, 1Sa_2:9. They shall be struck both blind and dumb, not be able to see their way nor have any thing to say for themselves. Damned sinners are sentenced to utter darkness, and in it they will be for ever speechless, Mat_22:12, Mat_22:13. The wicked are called the adversaries of the Lord, and it is foretold (Mat_22:10) that they shall be broken to pieces. Their designs against his kingdom among men will all be dashed, and they themselves destroyed; how can those speed better that are in arms against Omnipotence? See Luk_19:27. God has many ways of doing it, and, rather than fail, from heaven shall he thunder upon them, and so, not only put them in terror and consternation, but bring them to destruction. Who can stand before God's thunderbolts? (4.) That the conquests of this kingdom shall extend themselves to distant regions: The Lord shall judge the ends of the earth. David's victories and dominions reached far, but the uttermost parts of the earth are promised to the Messiah for his possession (Psa_2:8), to be either reduced to his golden sceptre or ruined by his iron rod. God is Judge of all, and he will judge for his people against his and their enemies, Psa_110:5, Psa_110:6. (5.) That the power and honour of Messiah the prince shall grow and increase more and more: He shall give strength unto his king, for the 74
- 75. accomplishing of hisgreat undertaking (Psa_89:21, and see Luk_22:43), strengthen him to go through the difficulties of his humiliation, and in his exaltation he will lift up the head (Psa_ 110:7), lift up the horn, the power and honour, of his anointed, and make him higher than the kings of the earth, Psa_89:27. This crowns the triumph, and is, more than any thing, the matter of her exultation. Her horn is exalted (1Sa_2:1) because she foresees the horn of the Messiah will be so. This secures the hope. The subjects of Christ's kingdom will be safe, and the enemies of it will be ruined, for the anointed, the Lord Christ, is girded with strength, and is able to save and destroy unto the uttermost. BENSON,"1 Samuel 2:9. He will keep the feet of his saints — That is, will both uphold their steps or paths, and direct their counsels and actions, that they may not fall into ruin, nor wander into those fatal errors into which wicked men daily run. The wicked shall be silent in darkness — They who used to open their mouths wide in speaking against heaven and against the saints, shall be so confounded with the unexpected disappointment of all their hopes, and with God’s glorious appearance and operations for his people, that they shall be put to silence, and have their mouths quite stopped: and this in darkness, both internal, in their own minds, not knowing what to do or say; and external, through outward troubles, distress, and calamities. For by strength shall no man prevail — Namely, against God, or against his saints, as the wicked are ready to think they shall do, because of their great power, wealth, and numbers. ELLICOTT, " (9) He will keep the feet.—This was the comforting deduction Hannah drew from the circumstances of her life: this the grave moral reflection the Spirit of the Lord bade her put down for the support and solace of all true servants of the Eternal in coming ages. Seeing that Jehovah of Israel governs the world, the righteous have nothing really to fear; it is only the wicked and rebellious who have reason to be afraid. The Babylonian Talmud has the following comment on these words:—“If any man has passed the greater part of his years without sin, he will sin no more. If a man has been able to resist the same temptation once or twice, he will sin no more; for it is said (1 Samuel 2:9), ‘He will keep the feet of his saints.’”— Treatise Yoma, fol. 38, Colossians 2. By strength shall no man prevail.—The same thought is expressed very grandly by the prophet, “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts” (Zechariah 4:6). The Holy Ghost, in one of the sublime visions of St. Paul, taught the suffering apostle the same great truth, “My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness” (2 Corinthians 12:9). 75
- 76. HAWKER, "(9) Hewill keep the feet of his saints, and the wicked shall be silent in darkness; for by strength shall no man prevail. (10) The adversaries of the LORD shall be broken to pieces; out of heaven shall he thunder upon them: the LORD shall judge the ends of the earth; and he shall give strength unto his king, and exalt the horn of his anointed. These are very precious expressions, and all evidently referring to the mercies of the gospel. Here for the first time, we meet with the title of the Lord Jesus, as the Anointed of the Father: one of the most lovely, and distinguishing characters of the Redeemer; the Messiah, that is, the sent, the Sealed, the Anointed. Reader! it is the peculiar joy, and triumph of the followers of the Lord Jesus, that he is the Christ of God. And what a sweet thought is it, that our Christ is God's Christ. Our chosen is God's chosen. Our Holy One, is God's Holy One. So that Jehovah, and the sinner here join issue, and meet together. Hannah certainly knew this, and under the full triumph of it, positively declares that the Lord will keep the feet of his saints. And if the feet, surely, the heart, the head. And well must they be kept, whom the Lord keeps. Oh! precious assurance, founded in a precious anointed Redeemer. But this is not all. While the Lord keeps his people, his, and their adversaries he will destroy. Jesus is our King, and all enemies shall he put under his feet. So that here is assurance, that the same Anointed Lord, will save his people, and utterly consume his foes. So let all thine enemies perish, O Lord! was the close of Deborah's song, as it is here prophesied in the close of Hannah's song: while them that love him, shall be as the sun, when he goeth forth in his might. Judges 5:31. PETT 9-10, "Hannah finishes her words with an expression of confidence in the fact that YHWH will keep the feet of His chosen ones, while disposing of the wicked who will be put to silence in darkness. They will end up in Sheol. For no man can prevail by his own strength, which is why His chosen ones need Him to keep their feet from failing, while the unrighteous will end up in darkness and those who strive with Him will be broken in pieces. Indeed He will thunder against them in the heavens. Again we can compare David and Saul. The word for ‘chosen ones’ means ‘those who are the objects of His covenant love’. It refers to those who walk in faithful response to His covenant, and therefore enjoy His covenant love. 76
- 77. The final threelines may simply represent a general expectation. YHWH will rule over (judge) the ends of the earth, and in that role will give strength to any He appoints as king, and exalt the power of any whom He sets aside and anoints. But it is far more likely that it has in mind the expectation of God’s world wide rule, when He will be the ‘Judge’ of all the earth and establish and give strength to the promised king of Genesis 49:10 and exalt his power as His ‘anointed’ (the one whom He has set apart for His service). It should be noted that the fact that YHWH has established him as king would necessarily be seen as signifying that he would be anointed. That was what happened to kings at this time (Judges 9:8). Thus ‘His anointed’ simply means ‘His appointed King’. The words bring out that even at this stage after the vicissitudes of the Judges period Israel still had great expectations. Then they had had no king and it had been reflected in how they had lived. Every man had done what was right in his own eyes. But Hannah knew that as Abraham’s descendants they were intended to bring blessing to the whole world (Genesis 12:3), and be a kingdom of priests to an earth that belonged to YHWH (Exodus 19:6; compare Deuteronomy 10:14). Thus in the future a kingship was envisaged, a kingship in which the king would rule wisely under YHWH (Deuteronomy 17:14-20). That was partly why God had brought them back to Canaan and given them their own land, so that they might minister to the nations. So she was confident that one day Shiloh would surely come and would triumphantly gather the peoples to him so as to bring it all into effect (Genesis 49:10). It was then that God would establish His rule over the nations. This certainly found part fulfilment in the accession and triumphs of David. Indeed many must have thought of him as Shiloh. But the writer is careful at the end of his book to remind us that there were great deficiencies in David’s rule (2 Samuel 24). He wants us to recognise that the future yet awaits a greater David Who will establish His everlasting kingship (2 Samuel 7:13; 2 Samuel 7:16). PULPIT, "The feet of his saints. The Hebrews written text (ch'tib) has his saint, sing.; but the word really means not saint, i.e. one sanctified and holy, but pious, i.e. one lovingly disposed towards God. The sense, therefore, is not affected by the number, but the sing. is more forcible "He will guard the steps, the earthly course, of each one that loveth him;" while over against this watchful providence, ever exerted for the safe keeping of all who love the light, stands God's punitive justice, whereby the wicked are finally brought down to the dark silence of the grave. For they had only human strength and prowess upon which to depend, and no man can sustain himself in the manifold conflict of life without help from above. 77
- 78. K&D, "The Lordkeeps the feet of the righteous, so that they do not tremble and stumble, i.e., so that the righteous do not fall into adversity and perish therein (vid., Ps. 56:14; Psa_116:8; Psa_ 121:3). But the wicked, who oppress and persecute the righteous, will perish in darkness, i.e., in adversity, when God withdraws the light of His grace, so that they fall into distress and calamity. For no man can be strong through his own power, so as to meet the storms of life. All who fight against the Lord are destroyed. To bring out the antithesis between man and God, “Jehovah” is written absolutely at the commencement of the sentence in 1Sa_2:10 : “As for Jehovah, those who contend against Him are broken,” both inwardly and outwardly (ת ַת ָ,ח as in 1Sa_2:4). The word וָלָ,ע which follows, is not to be changed into ם ֶיהֲֵלע. There is simply a rapid alternation of the numbers, such as we frequently meet with in excited language. “Above him,” i.e., above every one who contends against God, He thunders. Thunder is a premonitory sign of the approach of the Lord to judgment. In the thunder, man is made to feel in an alarming way the presence of the omnipotent God. In the words, “The Lord will judge the ends of the earth,” i.e., the earth to its utmost extremities, or the whole world, Hannah's prayer rises up to a prophetic glance at the consummation of the kingdom of God. As certainly as the Lord God keeps the righteous at all times, and casts down the wicked, so certainly will He judge the whole world, to hurl down all His foes, and perfect His kingdom which He has founded in Israel. And as every kingdom culminates in its throne, or in the full might and government of a king, so the kingdom of God can only attain its full perfection in the king whom the Lord will give to His people, and endow with His might. The king, or the anointed of the Lord, of whom Hannah prophesies in the spirit, is not one single king of Israel, either David or Christ, but an ideal king, though not a mere personification of the throne about to be established, but the actual king whom Israel received in David and his race, which culminated in the Messiah. The exaltation of the horn of the anointed to Jehovah commenced with the victorious and splendid expansion of the power of David, was repeated with every victory over the enemies of God and His kingdom gained by the successive kings of David's house, goes on in the advancing spread of the kingdom of Christ, and will eventually attain to its eternal consummation in the judgment of the last day, through which all the enemies of Christ will be made His footstool. 10 those who oppose the Lord will be broken. The Most High will thunder from heaven; the Lord will judge the ends of the earth. 78
- 79. “He will givestrength to his king and exalt the horn of his anointed.” BARNES, "He shall give strength ... - This is a most remarkable passage, containing a clear and distinct prophecy of the Kingdom and glory of the Christ of God. (Compare Luk_1:69-70). CLARKE, "The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken - Those who contend with him, מריביו meribaiu, by sinning against his laws, opposing the progress of his word, or persecuting his people. Shall judge the ends on the earth - His empire shall be extended over all mankind by the preaching of the everlasting Gospel, for to this the afterpart of the verse seems to apply: He shall give strength unto his king, and shall exalt the horn of his Christ, or, as the Targum says, משיחיה מלכות וירבי viribbey malcuth Meshicheyh, “he shall multiply the kingdom of the Messiah.” Here the horn means spiritual as well as secular dominion. After the clause, The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces, the Septuagint add the following words: Μη καυχασθω ὁ φρονιμος εν τῃ φρονησει αυτου, κ. τ. λ. Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glorieth rather glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth the Lord; and that he executeth judgment and righteousness in the midst of the earth. This is a very long addition, and appears to be taken from Jer_9:23, but on collating the two places the reader will find the words to be materially different. This clause is wanting in the Complutensian Polyglot, but it is in the edition of Aldus, in that of Cardinal Caroffa, and in the Codex Alexandrinus. GILL, "The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces,.... Or Jehovah, Father, Son, and Spirit, "shall break in pieces those that contend with him"; with the Lord, or with his people, or with Samuel particularly; for this may be considered as a prophecy of Hannah concerning her son, what God would do for him against his enemies, that should rise up, contend, and fight with him, as the Philistines; of whom Ben Gersom interprets it, whom the Lord discomfited and broke to pieces; see the literal fulfilment of this prophecy in 1Sa_7:1 in a spiritual sense all wicked men are the enemies of God, and of his people, and sooner or later shall be broken to pieces. Some, in a good sense; when they are smitten with the words of his mouth, cut to the heart, and made contrite; are humbled and brought into subjection to him, and their enmity slain and abolished, and they filled with love to him; and are so broken to pieces, that they have 79
- 80. nothing to dependupon, or trust in for life or salvation, but apply to Christ alone for it. Others, in an ill sense; and the meaning is, that the wicked shall be utterly destroyed by the Lord, with an everlasting destruction, with an incurable and irreparable one; shall be broken in pieces like a potter's vessel, which can never be put together again, see Psa_ 2:9. out of heaven shall he thunder upon them: as the Lord did upon the Philistines in the times of Samuel, when Israel were engaged in war with them, 1Sa_7:10. And the last vial of the wrath of God, poured out upon his adversaries the antichristian states, will be attended with thunders and lightnings, Rev_16:17, it denotes the terrible manner in which God will destroy his adversaries; the Septuagint version is, "the Lord ascended to heaven and thundered"; hence Procopius Gazaeus, following this version, says, Hannah prophesied of the taking up of the Saviour, and of the mission of the Holy Ghost, and of the preaching of the apostles, and of the second coming of Christ, as follows: the Lord shall judge the ends of the earth; not of the land of Israel by Samuel, as some interpret it, see 1Sa_7:15 but of the whole world, and may refer to the government of it in general by the Lord, or to the judgment of it by his Son; for he judges none, but has committed all judgment to him; who at his first coming judged the world, by the ministry of the word in Judea and in the Gentile world, by setting up ordinances, and by qualifying and constituting persons to act in the government of his church under him; and at his spiritual coming he will take to himself his great power and reign, and judge the whore of Babylon; and at his last or second coming he will judge the whole world, quick and dead, righteous and wicked: and he shall give strength unto his king: either who was made king in the times of Samuel, Saul, who was the first of the kings of Israel, or David, whom Samuel anointed; and it is true of them both, that the Lord gave them strength to fight with and conquer their enemies; or rather the King Messiah, who in the next clause is called the Lord's anointed, or Messiah: and exalt the horn of his anointed; and so the Targum paraphrases the words,"he shall give strength to his king and enlarge the kingdom of his Messiah.''with which Kimchi agrees, and says, the thing is doubled or repeated, for the King is the Messiah; and to him the words are applied by other Jewish writers (p), ancient and modern. Christ is King over all, angels and men, particularly he is King of saints; he is Jehovah's King, set up and anointed by him from everlasting; was in time promised as such, and in the fulness of time came in that character, and at his ascension to heaven was made and declared Lord and Christ; and through the success of his Gospel in the world has appeared yet more so, and will be still more manifest in the latter day, when he shall be King over all the earth, and especially in his personal reign. Now when "strength" is said to be given him, this must be understood either of strength given to him in human nature, to perform the great work of our redemption and salvation, which required great strength; as a divine Person he needed none, as man he did; or of that strength communicated to him as Mediator, to give unto his people, in whom they have both righteousness and strength; or rather of that power and dominion given him as King particularly; all power in heaven and in earth were given him at his resurrection, and will appear more fully hereafter, when his kingdom will be from sea to sea, and his dominion from the river to the ends of the earth, see Dan_7:13. And the same thing is meant by "horn", which is an emblem of strength, power, dominion, and glory; hence he himself is 80
- 81. called the hornof David, and the horn of salvation; it is a name and title given to kings, Dan_7:24 in allusion to the horns of beasts, in which their strength lies to defend themselves, and annoy their enemies; and the exaltation of him prophesied of may respect and include his resurrection from the dead, ascension to heaven, session at the right hand of God, the judgment of all committed to him, and the glorious exercise of his kingly office in the spiritual and personal reigns. This is the first time we meet with the word Messiah, or anointed, as ascribed to a divine Person, the Son of God; who has this name or title from his being anointed, not with material oil, but with the oil of gladness, with the Holy Ghost, and his gifts and graces without measure; and who is called the Lord's anointed, because he was anointed by his Father to be prophet, priest, and King, or invested by him with those offices even from eternity, see Psa_2:6 and which was more manifestly declared at his birth, his baptism, and ascension to heaven; see Luk_ 2:40. JAMISON, "the Lord shall judge the ends of the earth ... exalt the horn of his anointed — This is the first place in Scripture where the word “anointed,” or Messiah, occurs; and as there was no king in Israel at the time, it seems the best interpretation to refer it to Christ. There is, indeed, a remarkable resemblance between the song of Hannah and that of Mary (Luk_1:46). BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:10. The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces — Here we have an instance of pious affections rising up, through the influence of the Holy Spirit, to the height of prophecy. Here Hannah begins to predict the deliverance of the Israelites from the hand of the Philistines, and their other enemies: and her prediction was fulfilled when, at the command of Samuel, they were gathered together, and fought with the Philistines at Mizpeh, chap. 1 Samuel 7:10. At which time, as Hannah foretels, the Lord thundered out of heaven upon them; and again when David slew Goliath, and the men of Israel and Judah routed and pursued them, (1 Samuel 17:52,) as well as on many other occasions, till at length they were finally subdued. The Lord shall judge the ends of the earth — That Isaiah , 1 st, The Philistines, who lived in the extremity of Canaan westward; and, 2d, The enemies of God’s people in the remotest parts of the earth, who shall be converted or destroyed before the consummation of all things. He shall give strength unto his king — Here she predicts they should have a king. But she is chiefly to be understood as speaking, either, 1st, of David, who was most properly God’s king, appointed and anointed at his express command, instead of Saul, whom he rejected, on account of his disobedience; or, 2d, Of Christ, David’s son, of whom David was but a type. “Who doth not perceive,” saith St. Augustine, (De Civ. Dei, lib. 17, cap. 4,) “that the spirit which animated this woman, whose name, Hannah, signifies grace, prophesied of the Christian religion, the city of God, whose king and founder is Christ? Who does not see that she speaks of the grace of God, from which the proud are estranged that they may fall, but with which the humble are filled, that 81
- 82. they may rise.”Thus also the preceding clause, The Lord shall judge the ends of the earth, obtains a more sublime and important sense, and more exact accomplishment. David’s victories and dominions reached far, but God will give to the son of David the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession. And he will give strength unto his king, for the accomplishment of his great undertaking. And, as the next words express, will exalt the horn — The power and honour, of his Anointed — Till he hath put all his enemies under his feet. It is remarkable, that this is the first time that the name Messiah (or God’s anointed) is found in the Scriptures, there being no such word in any of the preceding books. This is an additional reason why we should consider this prophecy of Hannah as looking forward to gospel days. “And when one considers,” as Dr. Dodd observes, “the terms in which this beautiful song is expressed; when one considers the perfect resemblance there is between this and that of the blessed Virgin, Luke 1:46; when one considers the allusion which the father of John the Baptist makes to the latter part of it, (Luke 1:69-70,) one cannot persuade one’s self but that Hannah had a respect to something higher than Peninnah her rival, or the triumphs even of David himself. The expressions are too magnificent and sublime to be confined to such objects. Kimchi (the Jewish rabbi) was so struck with them, that he ingenuously acknowledges, that the king, of whom Hannah speaks here, is the Messiah; of whom she speaks either by prophecy or tradition. ‘For,’ continues he, ‘there was a tradition among the Israelites, that a great king should arise in Israel; and she seals up her song with celebrating this king, who was to deliver them from all their enemies.’ In short, all the particulars of the 9th and 10th verses especially, perfectly characterize the reign of the Messiah; his protection of his saints; the vain efforts of their enemies; their triumph over them; the extent of his kingdom, and the perpetual increase of his power.” COKE, "1 Samuel 2:10. And he shall give strength unto his king— By king and anointed in this place, say some, is meant David, of whom Hannah prophesies; though it seems most probable that the reference is to the Messiah. See Psalms 89:24. "Who doth not perceive," saith St. Augustine, "that the spirit which animated this woman, whose name, Hannah, signifies grace, prophesied of the Christian religion, the city of God, whose king and founder is Christ?" See de Civ. Dei, lib. 17: cap. 4. This seems to be the chief aim and object of Hannah's song. She is the first person, as Bishop Patrick observes, who names the Messiah or anointed; there being no such word in all the foregoing books: and when we consider the terms in which this beautiful song is expressed; the perfect resemblance there is between this and that of the Blessed Virgin, Luke 1:46; and the allusion which the father of John the Baptist makes to the latter part of it, Luke 1:69-70. We cannot persuade ourselves but that Hannah had a respect to something higher than to Peninnah her rival, or to the triumphs even of David himself. The expressions are 82
- 83. too magnificent andsublime to be confined to such objects. Kimchi was so struck with them, that he ingenuously acknowledges, that the king, of whom Hannah speaks here, is the Messiah; of whom she spake either by prophesy or tradition: "For," continues he, "there was a tradition among the Israelites, that a great king should arise in Israel; and she seals up her song with celebrating this king; who was to deliver them from all their enemies." In short, all the particulars of the 9th and 10th verses especially, perfectly characterize the reign of the Messiah; his protection of his saints; the vain efforts of their enemies; their triumph over them; the extent of his kingdom, and the perpetual increase of his power. See Witsii Miscel. Sacr. tom. 1: lib. 1. ELLICOTT, " (10) His king . . . of his anointed.—A Lapide, quoted by Wordsworth, wrote here, “haec omnia spectant ad Christum,” “all these things have regard to Christ.” Jewish expositors, too, have generally interpreted these words as a prophecy of King Messiah. The words received a partial fulfilment in the splendid reigns of David and Solomon; but the pious Jew looked on the golden halo which surrounded these great reigns as but a pale reflection of the glory which would accompany King Messiah when He should appear. This is the first passage in the Old Testament which speaks of “His Anointed,” or “His Messiah.” The LXX. render the words “Christou autou.” This song was soon evidently well known in Israel. The imagery, and in several passages the very words, are reproduced in the Psalms. See Excursus A and B at the end of this Book. PETT, "Verses 10-17 The Rise Of Samuel And The Fall Of The House Of Eli (1 Samuel 2:12 to 1 Samuel 3:1). In this section we now have a description of the careful build up of Samuel’s ministry and of his own spiritual growth. But deliberately interlaced within it is the continuing description of the downfall of the house of Eli. While the lesson from it is simple. Even in the same environment some develop and grow nearer to God, while others continue headlong on the way to disaster. 83
- 84. This continued growthof Samuel, and the fall of the house of Eli, is depicted as follows: a ‘The child ministered to YHWH before Eli the Priest’ (1 Samuel 2:11). b A description of the wicked behaviour of the sons of Eli (1 Samuel 2:12-17). c ‘Samuel ministered before YHWH being a child girded with a linen ephod ---and the child Samuel grew before YHWH’ (1 Samuel 2:18-21). d Eli rebukes his sons for their wickedness in trespassing on what belongs to YHWH (1 Samuel 2:22-25). c ‘And the child Samuel grew on and was in favour both with YHWH and also with men’ (1 Samuel 2:26). b A man of God prophesies the fall of the house of Eli and the death of his wicked sons (1 Samuel 2:27-36). a ‘And the child Samuel ministered to YHWH before Eli’ (1 Samuel 3:1). The narrative is carefully patterned. Note that in ‘a’ the child Samuel ministers to YHWH before Eli, and in the parallel he does the same. In ‘b’ we have described the wickedness of the two sons of Eli and in the parallel the fate of both they and their house is described. In ‘c’ Samuel continues to grow before YHWH, and the same occurs in the parallel. In ‘d’, and centrally, Eli rebukes his two sons for trespassing on the preserves of YHWH and warns them of the consequences of their actions. It is the consequences of their behaviour for Israel that will cover the next part of the book (1 Samuel 3-6), and will also affect the years ahead until the rise of Samuel, a 84
- 85. rise which willlead to a ‘golden age’ in which the Philistines will be driven back, and will subsequently as a consequence of the activity of his protיg יDavid, result in the Ark returning to its proper place in the Tabernacle/Temple. Samuel Is Set Apart For The Service Of YHWH (1 Samuel 2:11). 1 Samuel 2:11 ‘And Elkanah went to Ramah to his house. And the child ministered to YHWH before Eli the priest.’ In a few poignant words the traumatic moment of the separation is rapidly passed over. There is no mention of Hannah. Her prayer has said all that needs to be said. As the head of the house the godly Elkanah leaves Samuel with Eli, and returns to his house in Ramah without his son, for his son has been given to YHWH. And Samuel remains behind at Shiloh and begins to minister to YHWH under Eli’s guidance and instruction. He has been adopted by YHWH and is under Eli’s protection. How Eli must have wished that his own sons were like this. The Two Sons of Eli (1 Samuel 2:12-17). The lives of the two sons of Eli were the very opposite of Samuel’s. They too had been ‘given to YHWH’ when they had been made priests, but their behaviour revealed how far they were from YHWH. No wonder that YHWH had deserted Shiloh (1 Samuel 3:21). PULPIT, "The adversaries. In the Hebrews the nouns are again sing; though the verb is pl; showing that they are to be taken collectively. Lit. the translation is, "Jehovah they shall be broken in pieces, whoever it be that contendeth with him;" the word having reference to contentions in a court of law, and the whole verse keeping the administration of justice in view. It proceeds, "Upon him he shall thunder in heaven;" i.e. Jehovah, seated on his throne in heaven, shall, as the 85
- 86. supreme Judge, utterthe sentence; and thunder was to the Hebrew God's voice. He shall judge the ends of the earth, i.e. the whole earth up to its remotest quarters. The last distich is remarkable. It is a distinct prophecy of David's kingdom, and of the king as the anointed one, but looking onwards to the Messiah, David's greater Son. So distinct a reference to a king before a king existed has made Ewald and others regard the whole hymn as an interpolation of later times. But already Hannah's thoughts had risen to a higher level than the fortunes of the literal Israel. In claiming for Jehovah, her covenant God, the righteous government of the whole world, she prepares our minds for the corresponding thought of Jehovah being the universal Saviour. Very probably the whole national mind was set upon having a king to enable them to make head against the Philistines long before, under Samuel, the desire became so strong as to be irresistible. The thought of a king was in no respect alien from the Jewish commonwealth (Deuteronomy 17:14). They had wished Gideon to hold this office ( 8:22); Jotham's parable in 9:1-57. described the nation as eager to be thus governed, but the better minds as bent on declining so dangerous a preeminence. There is very much to prove that the nation had come to regard the appointment of a king as an eventual necessity, however long delayed. But not here only, but everywhere, the Jewish mind was constantly brooding upon the future. Hannah does no more than every patriarch and saint and prophet of the old dispensation. Prophecies such as that in Genesis 49:10 filled the hearts of all alike. And though the present longings of the nation for a king make Hannah's words not unnatural even in their lower sense, yet the truer exposition is that which acknowledges in Israel a people raised up for a special purpose, and the bestowal by God upon its seers for the carrying out of this purpose of the gift of prophecy. And it was this extraordinary gift which bent and shaped the mind of the nation, and filled it with future aspirations; and not a causeless state of the national mind which, excited by vague hopes, made men from time to time give utterance to anticipations which by some strange coincidence always came true. 11 Then Elkanah went home to Ramah, but the boy ministered before the Lord under Eli the priest. 86
- 87. BARNES, "The word“minister” is used in three senses in Scripture: (1) of the service or ministration of both priests and Levites rendered unto the Lord Exo_28:35, Exo_28:43 : (2) of the ministrations of the Levites as rendered to the priests, to aid them in divine Service Num_3:6 : (3) of any service or ministration, especially one rendered to a man of God, as that of Joshua to Moses Num_11:28. The application of it to Samuel as ministering to the Lord before Eli the priest accords “most exactly” with Samuel’s condition as a Levite. CLARKE, "And Elkanah went to Ramah - Immediately after the 10th verse, the Septuagint add, Και κατελιπεν αυτον εκει ενωπιον Κυριου· και απηλθεν εις Αραματαια, And she left him there before the Lord, and went unto Arimathea. Thus the Septuagint suppose that the song of Hannah was composed when she brought Samuel to present him to the Lord; and as soon as she had completed this fine ode, she delivered him into the hands of Eli the high priest, and the child entered immediately on his ministration, under the direction and instructions of Eli. GILL, "And Elkanah went to Ramah to his house,.... Of which see 1Sa_1:19. This was after he had offered the sacrifices at the feast, worshipped the Lord, and Hannah had delivered her prayer or song of praise, and both had committed Samuel to the care of Eli, and left him with him: and the child did minister unto the Lord before Eli the priest; he not only read in the book of the law, but learned to sing the praises of God vocally, and to play upon an instrument of music used in the service of God in those times, and to light the lamps in the tabernacle, and open and shut the doors of it, and the like; which were suitable to his age, and which might not be quite so tender as some have thought; or this may respect some small beginnings in the ministry of the sanctuary, in which he gradually increased under the inspection, guidance, and instruction of Eli, which is meant by ministering before him; the Targum is,"in the life of Eli the priest;''he began his ministration before his death. HENRY, "In these verses we have the good character and posture of Elkanah's family, and the bad character and posture of Eli's family. The account of these two is observably interwoven throughout this whole paragraph, as if the historian intended to set the one over against the other, that they might set off one another. The devotion and good order of Elkanah's family aggravated the iniquity of Eli's house; while the 87
- 88. wickedness of Eli'ssons made Samuel's early piety appear the more bright and illustrious. I. Let us see how well things went in Elkanah's family and how much better than formerly. 1. Eli dismissed them from the house of the Lord, when they had entered their little son there, with a blessing, 1Sa_2:20. He blessed as one having authority: The Lord give thee more children of this woman, for the loan that is lent to the Lord. If Hannah had then had many children, it would not have been such a generous piece of piety to part with one out of many for the service of the tabernacle; but when she had but one, an only one whom she loved, her Isaac, to present him to the Lord was such an act of heroic piety as should by no means lose its reward. As when Abraham had offered Isaac he received the promise of a numerous issue (Gen_22:16, Gen_22:17), so did Hannah, when she had presented Samuel unto the Lord a living sacrifice. Note, What is lent to the Lord will certainly be repaid with interest, to our unspeakable advantage, and oftentimes in kind. Hannah resigns one child to God, and is recompensed with five; for Eli's blessing took effect (1Sa_2:21): She bore three sons and two daughters. There is nothing lost by lending to God or losing for him; it shall be repaid a hundred-fold, Mat_19:29. 2. They returned to their own habitation. This is twice mentioned, 1Sa_2:11, and again 1Sa_2:20. It was very pleasant to attend at God's house, to bless him, and to be blessed of him. But they have a family at home that must be looked after, and thither they return, cheerfully leaving the dear little one behind them, knowing they left him in a good place; and it does not appear that he cried after them, but was as willing to stay as they were to leave him, so soon did he put away childish things and behave like a man. 3. They kept up their constant attendance at the house of God with their yearly sacrifice, 1Sa_2:19. They did not think that their son's ministering there would excuse them, or that that offering must serve instead of other offerings; but, having found the benefit of drawing near to God, they would omit no appointed season for it, and now they had one loadstone more in Shiloh to draw them thither. We may suppose they went thither to see their child oftener than once a year, for it was not ten miles from Ramah; but their annual visit is taken notice of because then they brought their yearly sacrifice, and then Hannah fitted up her son (and some think oftener than once a year) with a new suit of clothes, a little coat (1Sa_2:19) and every thing belonging to it. She undertook to find him with clothes during his apprenticeship at the tabernacle, and took care he should be well provided, that he might appear the more decent and sightly in his ministration, and to encourage him in his towardly beginnings. Parents must take care that their children want nothing that is fit for them, whether they are with them or from them; but those that are dutiful and hopeful, and minister to the Lord, must be thought worthy of double care and kindness. 4. The child Samuel did very well. Four separate times he is mentioned in these verses, and two things we are told of: - (1.) The service he did to the Lord. He did well indeed, for he ministered to the Lord (1Sa_2:11, 1Sa_2:18) according as his capacity was. He learned his catechism and was constant to his devotions, soon learned to read, and took a pleasure in the book of the law, and thus he ministered to the Lord. He ministered before Eli, that is, under his inspection, and as he ordered him, not before Eli's sons; all parties were agreed that they were unfit to be his tutors. Perhaps he attended immediately on Eli's person, was ready to him to fetch and bring as he had occasion, and that is called ministering to the Lord. Some little services perhaps he was employed in about the altar, though much under the age appointed by the law for the Levites' ministration. He could light a candle, or hold a dish, or run on an errand, or shut a door; and, because he did this with a pious disposition of mind it is called ministering to the Lord, and great notice is taken of it. After awhile he did his work so well that Eli 88
- 89. appointed that heshould minister with a linen ephod as the priests did (though he was no priest), because he saw that God was with him. Note, Little children must learn betimes to minister to the Lord. Parents must train them up to it, and God will accept them. Particularly let them learn to pay respect to their teachers, as Samuel to Eli. None can begin too soon to be religious. See Psa_8:2, and Mat_21:15, Mat_21:16. (2.) The blessing he received from the Lord: He grew before the Lord, as a tender plant (1Sa_ 2:21), grew on (1Sa_2:26) in strength and stature, and especially in wisdom and understanding and fitness for business. Note, Those young people that serve God as well as they can will obtain grace to improve, that they may serve him better. Those that are planted in God's house shall flourish, Psa_92:13. He was in favour with the Lord and with man. Note, It is a great encouragement to children to be tractable, and virtuous, and good betimes, that if they be both God and man will love them. Such children are the darlings both of heaven and earth. What is here said of Samuel is said of our blessed Saviour, that great example, Luk_2:52. JAMISON, "the child did minister unto the Lord before Eli the priest — He must have been engaged in some occupation suited to his tender age, as in playing upon the cymbals, or other instruments of music; in lighting the lamps, or similar easy and interesting services. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:11-12. The child did minister unto the Lord — As soon as he was capable, and in a way agreeable to his tender years, as in lighting the lamps, or in singing and playing on instruments of music. Before Eli the priest — That is, under the inspection and by the direction of Eli. The sons of Eli were sons of Belial — Very wicked men, Deuteronomy 13:13; being ungodly, profane, covetous, and guilty of violence and filthy lusts. They knew not the Lord — They had no experimental and practical knowledge of his justice or mercy, of his holiness or grace, of his power, or love, or faithfulness; no saving acquaintance with his divine perfections, or with the relations in which he stands to his people; they neither honoured, loved, nor served him. COFFMAN, "SAMUEL IN THE SERVICE OF ELI "Then Elkanah went home to Ramah. And the boy ministered to the Lord in the presence of the priest. "Now the sons of Eli were worthless men; they had no regard for the Lord. The custom of the priests with the people was that when any man offered sacrifice, the 89
- 90. priest's servant wouldcome, while the meat was boiling, with a three-pronged fork in his hand, and he would thrust it into the pan, or kettle, or cauldron, or pot; all that the fork brought up the priest would take for himself. So they did at Shiloh to all the Israelites who came there. Moreover, before the fat was burned, the priest's servant would come and say to the man who was sacrificing, "Give meat for the priest to roast; for he will not accept boiled meat from you, but raw." And if the man said to him, "Let them burn the fat first, and then take as much as you wish," he would say, "No, you must give it now; and if not, I will take it by force." Thus, the sin of the young men was very great in the sight of the Lord, for the men treated the offering of the Lord with contempt. "Samuel was ministering before the Lord, a boy girded with a linen ephod. And his mother used to make for him a little robe and take it to him each year, when she went up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice. Then Eli would bless Elkanah and his wife, and say, "The Lord give you children by this woman for the loan which she lent to the Lord"; so then they would return to their home." The Law of Moses defined exactly what was to be the priest's portion of every peace offering (Leviticus 7:31-35), as it also gave express directions about the burning of the fat (Leviticus 7:23-25,31). It was therefore a gross act of lawlessness and disobedience on the part of Hophni and Phinehas to take more than the Law allowed them. Evidence is afforded by this passage of the existence of the Levitical Law (the Pentateuch) at this time.[15] It is perfectly evident here that, "The people were well acquainted with the words of the Law of Moses, and were indignant because the priests, its proper guardians, did not obey them."[16] The children of Israel in the passages just cited were forbidden, absolutely, to eat the fat of animals. Furthermore, the priests were restricted to the breast and the thigh of animals sacrificed, and the sons of Eli brazenly disobeyed all these prohibitions. They did not heed the admonition that violators would be "cut off" from among God's people. 90
- 91. "A boy girdedwith a linen ephod." "This ephod which Samuel wore was probably like that worn by the Levites, for that of the priests was richer both in material and color."[17] There are a number of special interests in this passage. Hannah's return to the tabernacle each year with a little robe for Samuel is a touching event. She loved her son and cherished these annual visits. Also, Eli was evidently impressed and thankful for the service provided by the young Samuel, and, as a consequence of his appreciation, he customarily blessed Elkanah and Hannah with a prayer that God would give other children to Hannah, which, of course, God surely did. Of great interest is the refusal of Eli to do anything about his reprobate sons and their illegal, wicked and immoral behavior in the sacred precincts of the tabernacle itself. Oh yes, we learn a little later that he "rebuked them," but that was by no means the type of treatment that those evil men deserved. PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:11 The child did minister. Left by his parents at Shiloh, Samuel ministered unto the Lord; that is, certain duties were allotted him to perform suited to his age; but few at first, when he was but three years old, but increasing in importance as time went on; for the words refer to the whole period of his service, until Eli's death. At first Samuel would be but a scholar, for, as we have mentioned on 1 Samuel 1:21, there were, no doubt, regulations for the training of children devoted to the service of the sanctuary. The peculiarity about Samuel was that he was devoted for life, for possibly it was a not uncommon practice for young persons to receive some training at Shiloh; just as we find that Samuel himself subsequently gathered youths round him at Naioth in Ramah for educational purposes. Learning practically was confined to the priesthood, and we can scarcely imagine that the knowledge which Phinehas and the family of Aaron brought with them out of Egypt would be allowed to perish. Samuel certainly had himself received careful instruction (see on 1 Samuel 10:25), and this could scarcely have happened if the training of young persons had not been part of the priests' duties at Shiloh. This then explains why Samuel was 91
- 92. brought to Eliat so tender an age, and why the charge of so young a child was undertaken without a murmur. Before Eli means under his general superintendence. Everything done at Shiloh was done before Eli, as being the chief ruler there. ELLICOTT, "(11) Elkanah went to Ramah.—These simple words just sketch out what took place after Hannah left her boy in Shiloh. Elkanah went home, and the old family life, with its calm religious trustfulness, flowed on in the quiet town of “Ramah of the Watchers” as it did aforetime; the only disturbing sorrowful element was removed in answer to the mother’s prayers, and little children grew up (1 Samuel 2:21) round Hannah and Elkanah. But the life of the dedicated child Samuel was a different one; he lived under the shadow of the sanctuary, ministering with his child powers before the altar of the Invisible, and trained, we may well assume, in all the traditions and learning of Israel by the old high priest. The word “minister is the official term used to signify the duties performed by priests and Levites in connection with the service of God. CONSTABLE. "1. Eli's sons' wickedness 2:11-17 Eli's sons were not only evil in their personal lives, but they flagrantly disregarded the will of God even as they served as leaders of Israel's worship. They neither knew the Lord (in the sense of paying attention to Him, 1 Samuel 2:12) nor treated His offerings as special (1 Samuel 2:17; cf. Malachi 1:6-14). The writer documented these evaluations with two instances of their specific practices (1 Samuel 2:13-16). The Law ordered the priests to handle the offerings in particular ways to respect God's holiness (cf. Leviticus 3:3; Leviticus 3:5; Leviticus 7:34; Deuteronomy 18:3). However, Eli's sons served God the way they chose (cf. Korah's behavior in Numbers 16). The Law allowed the priests to take for themselves the breast and upper part of the right rear leg of animals brought as peace offerings (Leviticus 7:30-34). But Eli's sons took all that the three-pronged fork brought up when plunged into the remaining meat being boiled for the sacrificial meal (1 Samuel 2:13-14). The priests were to burn the best part of the sacrifices on the altar as offerings to God, but Eli's sons demanded for themselves raw meat that was not cooked at all (1 Samuel 2:15-16). Meat was luxurious food in Israel's economy, so Eli's sons were living off the fat of the land. They were worthless men (1 Samuel 2:12, i.e., wicked in God's sight; cf. 1 Samuel 1:16). "To this day, arrogant assertiveness and self-seeking are temptations to all those in 92
- 93. positions of greatpower in society." [Note: Payne, p. 18.] "Their sin was particularly egregious since they were supposed to be teaching morality and representing the people of God (1 Samuel 2:22-25; cf. 2 Chronicles 17:7-9)." [Note: Heater, p. 120.] Verses 11-36 B. The Contrast between Samuel and Eli's Sons 2:11-36 Samuel's innocence and the godlessness of Eli's sons contrast strongly in this pericope (section of text). Samuel would succeed and become a channel of God's blessing. Eli's sons would fail, would become a source of frustration to Eli and the Israelites, and would ultimately perish. "The section [1 Samuel 2:11 to 1 Samuel 4:1] poignantly illustrates the theme of 'Hannah's Song' as it is epitomized in 1 Samuel 2:7 b, 'he brings low, and also exalts'. For it is under the auspices of God who has determined the ruin of Hophni and Phinehas that Samuel makes his mark." [Note: Robert P. Gordon, I & II Samuel: A Commentary, p. 81.] LANGE, "Samuel’s Service before the Lord in Contrast with the Abominations of the Degenerate Priesthood in the House of Eli 1 Samuel 2:11-26 I. The conduct of the sons of Eli In contrast with Samuel, the “servant of the Lord.” Vers.‚ 11–17. 11And Elkanah went to Ramah to his house. And the child did minister [ministered12] unto the Lord [Jehovah] before Eli the priest. Now [And] the sons of 93
- 94. Eli 13 weresons of Belial [wicked men]; they knew not the Lord [Jehovah]. And[FN22] the priest’s custom [the custom of the priests] with the people was that, when any man offered sacrifice, the priest’s servant came, while the flesh was in seething, with 14 a[FN23] flesh-hook of three teeth in his hand; [,] And he (om. he) struck it into the pan, or kettle, or cauldron or pot; all that the flesh-hook brought up the priest took for himself.[FN24] So they did in Shiloh unto all the Israelites that came thither 15 Also [Even] before they burnt the fat, the priest’s servant came, and said to the man that sacrificed, Give flesh to roast for the priest; for he will not have sodden 16 flesh of thee, but raw. And if any [the] man said unto him, Let them not fail to burn[FN25] the fat presently, and then take as much as thy soul desireth; [,] then he would answer [say] him. [om. him[FN26]], Nay, but thou shalt give it me [om. me] now; and if not, I will take it by force. Wherefore [And] the sin of the young men 17 was very great before the Lord [Jehovah]; for men abhorred the offering of the Lord [Jehovah]. II. Samuel as minister before the Lord. 1 Samuel 2:18-21 18But [And] Samuel ministered before the Lord [Jehovah], being [om. being] a 19 child, girded with a linen ephod. Moreover [And] his mother made him a little coat [tunic], and brought it to him from year to year, when she came up with her 20 husband to offer the yearly sacrifice. And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife, and said, The Lord [Jehovah] give thee seed of this woman for the loan which is lent to the Lord [in place of the gift which was asked for Jehovah[FN27]]. And they went unto their own home [to his[FN28] place]. And the Lord [Jehovah] visited Hannah, so that [and] she conceived, and bare three sons and two daughters. And the child Samuel grew before the Lord [Jehovah]. III. Eli’s conduct towards his worthless sons. 1 Samuel 2:22-26 22Now [And] Eli was very old, and [ins. he] heard all that his sons did unto all Israel, and how [that] they lay with the women that assembled [served[FN29]] at the 23 door of the tabernacle of the congregation [meeting (or assembly)]. And he said unto them, Why do ye such things? for I hear of your evil dealings [deeds] by24[from] all this people. Nay, my sons; for it is no good report that I hear; ye 25 94
- 95. make the Lord’speople [Jehovah’s people are made] to transgress. If one man sin against another [If a man sin against a man], the judge [God[FN30]] shall judge[FN31] him; but if a man sin against the Lord [Jehovah], who shall intreat10 for him ? Notwithstanding [And] they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because 26 the Lord would slay them [for it was Jehovah’s will to slay them]. And the child Samuel grew on and was in favour [grew in stature and favour[FN32]] both with the Lord [Jehovah] and also [om. also] with men. LANGE, "1. 1 Samuel 2:11-16. In 1 Samuel 2:11 the Sept. again clearly shows the effort to combine explanations with the translation of the Heb. text, rendering: “ and they left him there, and they went away.” [The Vat. MS. reads in both instances “she” instead of “they.”—Tr.]. There is the less need to change the Heb. text to accord with this, because, as Bצttcher (ubi sup. p69) rightly remarks, “the Elkanah” of the former is quite sufficient, since this name would suggest to every reader Elkanah and his household, and the only one that remained behind is mentioned immediately afterwards. From 1 Samuel 1:21 Elkanah can be thought of only together “with his whole house.”—The child “was ministering to the Lord,” or “serving the Lord.” These words express the whole work which the growing boy Samuel, conformably to his consecration, had to perform, certain duties connected with the service of God being laid upon him. “Before Eli,” that Isaiah, under his supervision, and according to his appointment. 1 Samuel 2:12. The sons of Eli were sons of worthlessness;[FN33] their character and conduct forms the sharpest contrast with what they ought to have been before the whole people as highest in position, as children of the High-priestly House. Observe the sharp asyndeton in this short sentence: they knew not the Lord, that Isaiah, they did not live in the fear of the Lord, they did not trouble themselves about Him; comp. Job 18:21. This godlessness and irreligiousness is the source of their moral worthlessness, which is afterwards described. The two together give the religious-moral characteristics of Eli’s sons. K&D, "Samuel the servant of the Lord under Eli. Ungodliness of the sons of Eli. - 1Sa_2:11 forms the transition to what follows. After Hannah's psalm of thanksgiving, Elkanah went back with his family to his home at Ramah, and the boy (Samuel) was serving, i.e., ministered to the Lord, in the presence of Eli the priest. The fact that nothing is said about Elkanah's wives going with him, does not warrant the interpretation given by Thenius, that Elkanah went home alone. It was taken for granted that his wives went with him, according to 1Sa_1:21 (“all his house”). ָהוֹחְת־י ֶא ת ֵרֵ,שׁ which signifies literally, both here and in 1Sa_3:1, to serve the Lord, and which is used interchangeably with יי ֵינ ְת־פּ ֶא ת ֵרֵשׁ (1Sa_2:18), to serve in the presence of the Lord, is used to denote the duties performed both by priests and Levites in connection with the 95
- 96. worship of God,in which Samuel took part, as he grew up, under the superintendence of Eli and according to his instruction. Eli’s Wicked Sons 12 Eli’s sons were scoundrels; they had no regard for the Lord. BARNES, "Sons of Belial - See the marginal reference note. The phrase is very frequent in the books of Samuel. In the New Testament, Paul contrasts Christ and Belial, as if Belial were the name of an idol or the personification of evil 2Co_6:15. This probably led to the use of the term “Belial” in the the King James Version, instead of expressing its meaning, which is “mischief, wickedness.” CLARKE, "The sons of Eli were sons of Belial - They were perverse, wicked, profligate men; devil’s children. They knew not the Lord. “They know! nor would an angel show Him; They would not know, nor choose to know Him.” These men were the principal cause of all the ungodliness of Israel. Their most execrable conduct, described 1Sa_2:13-17, caused the people to abhor the Lord’s offering. An impious priesthood is the grand cause of the transgressions and ruin of any nation; witness France, Germany, Spain, Ac., from 1792 to 1814. GILL, "Now the sons of Eli were sons of Belial,.... Not that Eli their father was Belial, a wicked man; but though they had so good a father, they were very wicked men, unprofitable abandoned wretches, that cast off the yoke of the law of God, and gave themselves up to all manner of wickedness: they knew not the Lord; not that they had no knowledge of God in theory, or were real atheists, but they were so practically; they denied him in works, they had no love to 96
- 97. him, nor fearof him, and departed from his ways and worship, as much as if they were entirely ignorant of him; so the Targum,"they did not know to fear before the Lord,''or serve him; or, as Kimchi,"they did not know the way of the Lord,''that is, practically. HENRY, " Let us now see how ill things went in Eli's family, though seated at the very door of the tabernacle. The nearer the church the further from God. 1. The abominable wickedness of Eli's sons (1Sa_2:12): The sons of Eli were sons of Belial. It is emphatically expressed. Nothing appears to the contrary but that Eli himself was a very good man, and no doubt had educated his sons well, giving them good instructions, setting them good examples, and putting up many a good prayer for them; and yet, when they grew up, they proved sons of Belial, profane wicked men, and arrant rakes: They knew not the Lord. They could not but have a notional knowledge of God and his law, a form of knowledge (Rom_2:20), yet, because their practice was not conformable to it, they are spoken of as wholly ignorant of God; they lived as if they knew nothing at all of God. Note, Parents cannot give grace to their children, nor does it run in the blood. Many that are sincerely pious themselves live to see those that come from them notoriously impious and profane; for the race is not to the swift. Eli was high priest and judge in Israel. His sons were priests by their birth. Their character was sacred and honourable, and obliged them, for their reputation-sake, to observe decorum. They were resident at the fountain-head both of magistracy and ministry, and yet they were sons of Belial, and their honour, power, and learning, made them so much the worse. They did not go to serve other gods, as those did that lived at a distance from the altar, for from the house of God they had their wealth and dignity; but, which was worse, they managed the service of God as if he had been one of the dunghill deities of the heathen. It is hard to say which dishonours God more, idolatry or profaneness, especially the profaneness of the priests. Let us see the wickedness of Eli's sons; and it is a sad sight. JAMISON, "1Sa_2:12-17. The sin of Eli’s sons. Now the sons of Eli were sons of Belial — not only careless and irreligious, but men loose in their actions, and vicious and scandalous in their habits. Though professionally engaged in sacred duties, they were not only strangers to the power of religion in the heart, but they had thrown off its restraints, and even ran, as is sometimes done in similar cases by the sons of eminent ministers, to the opposite extreme of reckless and open profligacy. ELLICOTT, " (12) Sons of.—The word Belial is printed here and 1 Samuel 1:16, as though Belial were the name of some pagan deity, but it simply signifies “worthlessness.” It is a common term in these records of Samuel, being used some nine or ten times. It is rarely found in the other historical books. “Sons of Belial” signifies, then, merely “sons of worthlessness,” worthless, good-for-nothing men. The Speaker’s Commentary ingeniously accounts for the use of Belial in the English Version here, and in other places in the Old Testament, by referring to the contrast 97
- 98. drawn by St.Paul between Christ and Belial, as if Belial were the name of an idol. or the personification of evil (2 Corinthians 6:15). They knew not the Lord.—The whole conduct of these high priestly officials showed they were utter unbelievers. They used their sacred position merely as affording an opportunity for their selfish extortions; and, as is so often the case now, as it was then, their unbelief was the source of their moral worthlessness (see 1 Samuel 2:22). “Hophni and Phinehas (the two sons of Eli) are, for students of ecclesiastical history, eminently suggestive characters. They are true exemplars of the grasping and worldly clergy of all ages. “It was the sacrificial feasts that gave occasion for their rapacity. It was the dances and assemblies of the women in the vineyards and before the sacred feast that gave occasion for their debaucheries. They were the worst development of the lawlessness of the age, penetrating, as in the case of the wandering Levite of the Book of Judges, into the most sacred offices. “But the coarseness of these vices does not make the moral less pointed for all times. The three-pronged fork which fishes up the seething flesh is the earliest type of grasping at pluralities and Church preferments by base means, the open profligacy at the door of the Tabernacle is the type of many a scandal brought on the Christian Church by the selfishness or sensuality of the ministers.”—Dean Stanley, On the Jewish Churchy Lecture 17, Part I. PETT, "1 Samuel 2:12 ‘Now the sons of Eli were worthless men; they did not know YHWH.’ These men who had the responsibility for ministering to YHWH on behalf of Israel are described as ‘worthless men’. No wonder then that Israel languished. And the result was that ‘they did not know YHWH’. We know from 1 Samuel 3:7 that this refers to the fact that YHWH did not reveal His word to them. Thus those who came to Shiloh seeking spiritual assistance and guidance went away empty. We must not, however, see Israel as totally empty of such guidance for, as 1 Samuel 2:27 reveals, YHWH still had local prophets (‘men of God’) who would pronounce His word. Throughout the ages this has always been so. God has always had His ‘local prophets’. But the central place at which that guidance should have been made 98
- 99. available was empty.The fountain had dried up. It was a pattern that would be revealed again and again throughout history, NISBET, "‘LOOK ON THIS PICTURE AND ON THAT’ ‘Now the sons of Eli were sons of Belial; they knew not the Lord.… And the child Samuel grew on, and was in favour both with the Lord, and also with men.’ 1 Samuel 2:12-26 The sacred historian dwells with evident pleasure on the beautiful, holy boyhood of the child who served before the Lord, wearing a linen ephod, and who in the visitations of the night, thrilling to the Divine voice which called him by his name, answered fearlessly, ‘Speak, Lord; for Thy servant heareth.’ Yet from the same Tabernacle, from the same tutelage, from the same influences, came forth also the sons of Eli; and ‘the sons of Eli were men of Belial; they knew not the Lord.’ I. The training the same, the product how different; the school the same, the boys whom it educated so fearfully contrasted.—Such contrasts seem strange, but they are in reality matters of daily experience. Daily from the same home we see boys go forth, some to live noble, self-denying lives, others to live lives that come to nothing, and do deeds as well undone. So too, often, from happy conditions come base characters, from degraded environments strong, sweet natures struggle into the light. II. Our inference from this is, that the personal devotion of the heart, the personal surrender of the individual will, can alone save a man or make him holy.—A man’s life may be influenced, but it is not determined, by the circumstances. No aid, save that which comes from above to every man, can help him to climb the mountain- path of life, or enter the wicket-gate of righteousness. Nor, on the other hand, can any will or power except his own retard his ascent or forbid his ingress. On ourselves, on the conscious exercise of our own free will, depends our eternal 99
- 100. salvation or ruin. DeanFarrar. Illustrations (1) ‘Many men can only see the things which are palpable to their outward eyes. The eyes of their understanding are darkened by sin. They have no vision of God, no consciousness of another world, no sense of the Divine meaning and purpose of life. God could never speak to His people through such foul-living men as Eli’s sons. Spiritually blinded by their iniquity, they had no discernment of the things of God. It is a melancholy thing when the ministers of God are “blind leaders of the blind.”’ (2) ‘What a contrast between the sweet God-appointed child priest, and the priest of title and descent! On the one God’s favour rested, giving him favour with man; but the others had already committed the sin concerning which it is impossible to utter the prayer of faith (v. 25 R.V., 1 John 5:16). And God did more than Hannah had asked or thought.’ (3) ‘So natural is the connection between reverence and faith that the only wonder is how any one can for a moment imagine he has faith in God, and yet allow himself to be irreverent towards Him. Hence even heathen religions have considered faith and reverence identical. Those who have separated from the Church of Christ have in this respect fallen into greater than pagan error. They have learned to be familiar and free with sacred things, as it were, on principle. They have considered awe to be superstition and reverence to be slavery.’ K&D, "1Sa_2:12 But Eli's sons, Hophni and Phinehas (1Sa_2:34), were לַַעיּ ִל ְב ֵינ ְ,בּ worthless fellows, and knew not the Lord, sc., as He should be known, i.e., did not fear Him, or trouble themselves about Him (vid., Job_18:21; Hos_8:2; Hos_13:4). 100
- 101. PULPIT, "1 Samuel2:12 Now the sons of Eli were sons of Belial, i.e. worthless men (see on 1 Samuel 1:16). They knew not Jehovah. He had never been revealed to their consciences, and so his fear had no influence upon their lives. The next words, in 1 Samuel 2:13, are difficult, but lit. mean, "The legal right of the priests, towards, or as respects, the people." On this account the Vulgate and several commentators couple the sentence with what precedes: "they knew neither Jehovah, nor their own legal rights." But the word also in 1 Samuel 2:15 is incompatible with this rendering; for if what is mentioned there be illegal, so must also the practice be which is recorded here. But neither does custom give the sense; for the Hebrews has not priest's (sing.) as the A.V but of the priests, of all priests generally, and not of Eli merely and his sons. The right translation is that given by the Sept; Syriac, and Chaldee, namely, "the due of the priests from the people," on which see Le 7:31-35. In the original this is put absolutely "And as to the priests' due from the people, when," etc; but our language requires some insertion to make it read more smoothly. "And as to the due of the priests from the people, the manner of its exaction was as follows: When," etc. But besides the due and legal portion, which, nevertheless, they took in an illegal way, they demanded a part of the flesh reserved for the feast of the offerer, and to which they had absolutely no right (see Le 8:31; 2 Chronicles 35:13). The legal due of the priest was the right shoulder and the wave breast; but before he took them they were to be consecrated to God by the burning of the fat upon the altar (Le 1 Samuel 3:5; 1 Samuel 7:1-17 :31, 34). It is worth observing that the people seem well acquainted with the words of the Law, and are indignant because the priests, its proper guardians, do not abide literally by them. This contempt of the Law distressed their religious susceptibilites, while the cupidity of Eli's sons offended their moral nature. And so men abhorred the offering of Jehovah. Lit. it is the minchah, the unbloody sacrifice, or meat offering, but it is put here forevery kind of sacrificial offering. BI 12-17, "Now the sons of Eli were sons of Belial. Indulgent home life I. The sins it induces. The sons, Hophni and Phinehas, are the more prominent, so we will contemplate, 1. Their conduct and character. They appear in an official capacity; but the official 101
- 102. must be viewedin its association with the personal, A degenerate priest is but the natural outgrowth of the degenerate man. The evil is in the moral constitution of these men, and whatever they do, wherever they go, it will appear. (1) They were audacious. (Ver. 12.) The children of Satan, and yet in the temple of God. They knew not the Lord. There are certain qualifications needful to the right discharge of every occupation, and he is a bold man who will undertake the duty without the fitness. What verdict would society pass upon anyone who should pursue the career of a doctor, without having studied the principles of anatomy, ignorant of the laws of medicine? Death to the patient would in all probability be the result. Much more criminal he who will engage to remedy the malady of the immortal soul when ignorant of its antidote. “They knew not the Lord.” They were in the very place surrounded by indications of the Divine—how wilful their ignorance! The history of their religious life was embodied in the ark; they could not look upon its ancient timbers without seeing in every board the mercy and providence of God. But their hearts were out of sympathy with these holy associations, and instead of stimulating to devotion, habitual contact with such sanctities led to criminal familiarity. When it is said that they knew not the Lord, it cannot mean that they doubted the reality of His existence. Faint gleams of His essential life had shone upon their intellects. Though in the sunlight, they saw not the beauties it revealed. Probably when at first they entered upon the Temple duties it was with feeble steps—the pallor of a revealed dread would blanch their cheeks; but now fear had lost its tremor in the cool hardihood of habitual sin. What a degree of defiance does their conduct disclose! (2) They were covetous. (Vers. 18, 14.) What a contradiction is an avaricious priesthood! how strangely out of harmony with the royal beneficence of its Institutor, and the noble munificence of its intended exercise. A devoted ministry looks more to the Divine remuneration than to the human, and does not strike its “fish hook” into the “caldron” of the worshipper. So instead of stimulating the religious sentiments of penitent souls, and lifting them to God, they perverted the design of their office by making themselves the object of its toil. “The priest took for himself.” Such a class of men have almost unlimited scope for the exercise of their purpose. The strongest instincts of the soul are those which pertain to God and His worship. Hence when claims are presented to the mentally weak and morally credulous, such demands have but to be uttered to be obeyed. How mean thus to make religion a means of personal gain! (3) They were despotic. (Ver. 16.) Coercion is operating without its sphere when brought to bear on matters of religion. Spiritual life and devotion are essentially free, both as regards the principle of its action and the form of its homage. “I will take it by force” of these wicked priests. A religion that cannot establish its claim by motive must be weak. Force is always the weapon of the morally imbecile. (4) They were adulterous. (Ver. 22.) (5) They brought contempt upon religion. (Ver. 17.) Men failed to make a distinction between the priests and the religion whose interests they wore pretending to serve. Nature is inherently beautiful, but if viewed through a piece of stained glass its perfection would be marred by an unnatural tint. So if we desire to behold the loveliness of piety we must not regard it as presented through any coloured media, but by direct contact and inspection. Religion to be 102
- 103. correctly estimated mustbe felt; it is not a thing for the eye to admire, but for the heart to appreciate. Still, ungodly men have their ideals of rectitude, often sharply defined, and such, seeing the sacrilege of the priests,” abhorred the offering of the Lord.” (2) The conduct and character of Eli. As a parent he was over-indulgent (1Sa_ 13:18). This statement is demonstrated even by his rebukes. Eli was “very old,” and the slightest vexation would be harassing to his feeble energies, but especially when occasioned by the ill conduct of his sons. What a sad reality!—the father old in years, the sons old in sin! What a reflection upon his discipline and example! (1) The method of Eli’s reproof. He reproves them (1) Collectively—“Ye.” Should not each have been taken to the private chamber, that correction might have been adapted to disposition and age. The reproof was, therefore, indiscriminate. He reproves (2) By interrogation (Ver. 23); (3) By assertion (Ver. 24); (4) By argument (Ver. 25). (2) The Effect of his reproof. “They hearkened not.” Eli would be reminded that correction had come too late; though the plastic nature of childhood might have yielded to his touch, he had now to deal with sterner material. God’s controversy with an indulgent parent (Ver. 27). Eli is held responsible for the sins of his family. “Unto Eli.” He is charged with (1) Ingratitude (Ver. 28); (2) With insult (Ver. 29). II. The sorrows it entails. 1. God revokes the mandate of Eli’s election, and asserts the universal principle of his action (Ver. 30). Eli’s election was not unalterable, or irrespective of personal conduct. A motto for the warehouse, “Them that honour Me I will honour.” The punishment predicted. This was the cloud before the storm. (1) It was humiliating (Ver. 31). The once priestly family is to be divested of all authority or power. “I will cut off thine arm.” (2) It was irreparable (Ver. 32). (3) It was eternal. A new line of priests was to be established which should be “forever.” How the prophetical becomes historical! It is a page of war which issues in (1) National defeat (1Sa_4:10); (2) Social consternation—“All the city cried out.” (3) Spiritual declension (Ver. 22). (4) Family extinction (Vers. 17-20). While Eli sat on the gate, above it sat the Eternal God. So one evil family contained the germ of the nation’s overthrow. 103
- 104. Lessons: (1) Parental disciplineshould be firm as kind. (2) The welfare of the nation and church depend upon family training. (3) A respect of God the truest way to promotion. (4) The sorrowful termination of even a good man’s life. (5) The awful extinction of an impious priesthood. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Eli’s house The notices of little Samuel, that alternate in this passage with the sad accounts of Eli and his house, are like the green spots that vary the dull stretches of sand in a desert; or like the little bits of blue sky that charm your eye when the firmament is darkened by a storm. We see evil powerful and most destructive; we see the instrument of healing very feeble—a mere infant. Yet the power of God is with the infant, and in due time the force which he represents will prevail. It is just a picture of the grand conflict of sin and grace in the world. It was verified emphatically when Jesus was a child. It is to be noticed that Eli was a descendant, not of Eleazar, the elder son of Aaron, but of Ithamar, the younger. Why the high priesthood was transferred from the one family to the other, in the person of Eli, we do not know. Evidently Eli’s claim to the priesthood was a valid one, for in the reproof addressed to him it is fully assumed that he was the proper occupant of the office. From Eli’s administration great things would seem to have been expected; all the more lamentable and shameful was the state of things that ensued. 1. First our attention is turned to the gross wickedness and scandalous behaviour of Eli’s sons. Hophni and Phinehas take their places in that unhonoured band where the names of Alexander Borgia, and many a high ecclesiastic of the Middle Ages send forth their stinking savour. They are marked by the two prevailing vices of the lowest natures—greed and lechery. It is difficult to say whether the greater hurt was inflicted by such conduct on the cause of religion or on the cause of ordinary morality. As for the cause of religion, it suffered that terrible blow which it always suffers whenever it is dissociated from morality. The very heart and soul is torn out of religion when men are led to believe that their duty consists in merely believing certain dogmas, attending to outward observances, paying dues, and “performing” worship. What kind of conception of God can men have who are encouraged to believe that justice, mercy, and truth have nothing to do with His service? 2. It is often very difficult to explain how it comes to pass that godly men have had ungodly children. There is little difficulty in accounting for this on the present occasion. There was a fatal defect in the method of Eli. His remonstrance with his sons is not made at the proper time. It is not made in the fitting tone When disregarded, it is not followed up by the proper consequences. We must not forget that, however inexcusable their father was, the great guilt of the proceeding was theirs. How must they have hardened their hearts against the example of Eli, against the solemn claims of God, against the holy traditions of the service, against the interests and claims of those whom they ruined, against the welfare of God’s chosen people! Could anything come nearer to the sin against the Holy Ghost? No wonder though their doom was that of persons judicially blinded and hardened. They were 104
- 105. given up toa reprobate mind, to do those things that were not convenient. 3. But it is time we should look at the message brought to Eli by the man of God. The house of Eli would suffer a terrible degradation. He (this includes his successors in slice) would be stript of “his arm,” that is, his strength. No member of his house would reach a good old age. One word respecting that great principle of the Kingdom of God announced by the prophet as that on which Jehovah would act in reference to His priests—“Them that honour Me I will honour, but they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed.” It is one of the grandest sayings in Scripture. It is the eternal rule of the Kingdom of God, not limited to the days of Hophni and Phinehas, but, like the laws of the Medea and Persians, eternal as the ordinances of heaven. However men may try to get their destiny into their own hands; however they may secure themselves from this trouble and from that; however, like the first Napoleon, they may seem to become omnipotent, and to wield an irresistible power, yet the day of retribution comes at last; having sown to the flesh, of the flesh also they reap corruption. What a grand rule of life it is, for old and young. (W. G. Blaikie, D. D.) The sons of Eli Eli was high priest of the Jews when the ark of the Lord was in Shiloh. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, were priests of the Lord. Their office was holy, but their character was corrupt. They touched sacred things with unworthy hands. The incident shows but too plainly the vital difference between the spiritual and the official. Hophni and Phinehas were officially among the highest men of their day. They bore a holy name, they pronounced holy words, they were clothed in emblematic robes. Yet Hophni and Phinehas were men of Belial. The outside was beautiful; the inside was full of corruption and death. Is there not a lesson here to teachers of Christian truth? It is possible for a man to have a pulpit, and to have no God; to have a Bible, and no Holy Ghost; to be employing his lips in uttering the eloquence of truth, when his heart has gone astray from all that is true and beautiful and good. Is there not a lesson here to professors of Christ? We bear the holy name, and men have a right to expect the holy deed. We need instruction upon the great question of spiritual discipline. When a man who professes to know Christ is found drunk in the streets, we expel him from the Church, and call that discipline; when a man is convicted of some heinous crime, we cut him off from the fellowship of the Church, and call that the discipline of Christian fellowship. It is nothing of the kind; that is mere decency. There is not a club in the world that cares one iota for its own respectability that would not do the same thing. Ours is to be Christian discipline. Yet even here is a mystery—a strange and wondrous thing. Hophni and Phinehas, officially great and spiritually corrupt; minister after minister falling, defiling his garments, and debasing his name; professor after professor pronouncing the right word with the lips, but never realising it in the life. Such is the history of the Church. In the face of all this, God still employs man to reveal the truth to other men, to enforce his claims upon their attention. Instead of in a moment of righteous anger sweeping the Church floor, so that not a footstep of man might remain upon it, end then calling the world around him, and speaking personally face to face—he still employs men to teach men, to “allure to brighter worlds and lead the way.” The incident shows the deadly result of corruption in influential quarters. All quarters, indeed, are influential; yet some are known to be more influential than others, therefore we adopt this form of expression. The priests were sons of Belial. What was the consequence? The people 105
- 106. abhorred the offeringof the Lord. The minister is a bad man. What is the consequence? His character is felt through all the congregation. We should remember three things in connection with this advice. 1. The natural tendency of men to religious laxity and indifference. 2. The effect of insincerity upon doctrine. Sincerity is itself an argument. Is it possible to speak the truth with a liar’s heart? If his lips pronounce the truth, if his heart contradict it, and his life blaspheme it, what wonder if men—who have a natural tendency towards religious indifference—should believe the life and deny the teaching! 3. The peculiarity of moral teaching in requiring personal illustration. Men cannot understand merely theoretic morals; they must have them personified; they must have them taught by incarnation, and illustrated in daily life. The artist may teach you to paint a beautiful picture! yet he may have no regard for moral truth, His non- regard for moral truth may not interfere, so far as you can see, with his ability and earnestness as a mete artist. It is not so in the Church of God. A man’s character is his eloquence; a man’s spiritual reality is the argument that wins in the long run. The lesson is to Churches. What are we in our corporate capacity? Are we holy? If’ not we are helping to debase and ruin the world; we have taken God’s leverage to help to undo God’s work! The terribleness of a moral leader falling! On the other hand, we cannot admit the plea that bad leaders are excuse enough for bad followers, when that plea is urged in relation to Christian teaching and life. Nor can we allow that exceptional inconsistency should vitiate the whole Church. We go into an orchard and point to one bit of blemished fruit, and say, “Because there is a blemish upon that piece of fruit the whole orchard is decayed and corrupt.” Who would believe it? There can be found a light coin in every currency in civilisation. Suppose we took up a standard coin under weight and said, “Because this is not of the standard weight, your whole currency is defective, and, as a nation of financiers, you are not worthy of trust.” Who would believe it? Such a theory is instantly destroyed by the fact that Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church. We do not say, “Look at Christians.” We say, “Look at Christ.” Then, such a theory is never urged but by men who are in search of excuses for their own corruptness. We are not to be followers of Hophni and Phinehas. The priest is not God; the minister is not Jesus Christ; the professor is not the Redeemer of the world. We must, therefore, insist upon the honest investigation of great principles on the one hand, and specially insist upon the calm, severe scrutiny and study of our Saviour’s own personal life and ministry. We have a written revelation. To that revelation our appeal must be made; to the law and to the testimony must be our challenge. (J. Parker, D. D.) The sons of Eli We may justly regard this as affording the motto for a very instructive and mournful history, left to give warning of the weakness into which even good men are apt to fall, and of the manner in which a righteous God often punishes the failure of His servants in duty, through the consequences arising out of their own neglect. It is not, accordingly, said, nor is it to be supposed that Eli’s weakness, however blameable, furnished excuse for the wickedness of his children. I. The aggravated guilt with which Eli’s sons were chargeable. Hophni and Phinehas are, 106
- 107. in this portionof sacred history, marked out as examples of what is vicious and depraved. Not contented with committing wickedness in secret, they had reached a state of regardlessness, sinning against the Lord publicly, and with a high hand. Nor was it a time in the history of Israel when the conscience of the people was peculiarly alive. The fervour of grateful feeling for the past kindness of God had passed away; there seemed instead to be prevailing forgetfulness of the great purpose, for the advancement of which they had been so favoured, namely, the keeping alive of God’s worship amidst surrounding ignorance and idolatry. Both the civil and religious polity of the nation were in a state of disorder. In Eli’s person the two highest offices then existing in the state were united—for the long space of forty years he occupied over Israel the position, not of judge alone, but of high priest also. But defective as Eli’s conduct towards his family appears to have been—many as were the temptations to which they were exposed, the guilt of Hophni and Phinehas was marked by peculiar aggravation; they had misused great advantages. To know the truth and yet to reject it; to be told of God’s claims on our obedience, and to refuse compliance with them, is to begin in youth a course which often leads to a rebellious and profligate manhood, conducting, perhaps, to a premature grave, or prolonged to an unhonoured and miserable age. Such appears to have been the case with Eli’s sons. They had abused great advantages, and incurred no small measure of responsibility. They were not ignorant of Jehovah’s claims, nor of the holiness of heart and life which He required; their guilt accordingly was conspicuous and undeniable. The lives of Eli’s sons, who were so near to the altar, might have been dedicated to Heaven. The “sons of Eli were sons of Belial:” had reached a frightful ripeness in depravity and maturity in crime. They seemed to have lost sight of the distinction between good and evil, to have forgotten the existence of a God, who “judgeth righteously.” That wickedness was indeed great. There is applied to them in the text such a title as indicates no ordinary proficiency in what was offensive to God, and opposed to His law. They are called “sons of Belial,” as though distinguished on account of the spirit of evil which they manifested. But can we suppose that depravity to have been at once attained? On the contrary, may they not have trembled with the fear and struggled with the reluctance of the less experienced transgressor? II. We proceed to notice the ineffectual reproof of his sons on the part of Eli, and the punishment with which their wickedness was followed. At this stage of the history mention is first made of Eli as having reproved the shameful conduct of his sons. He was old; his faculties may have failed, and his perception have been dulled, yet surely he could not have been altogether unaware of what was going on. Instead of using his official power to put a stop to their enormities, his duty both as a father and a legislator—instead of the severity of censure and reprimand that were called for, all that Eli said was quite disproportioned to what was demanded by the exigencies of the case. They were his sons, but dear as they had been, if reprimand were fruitless, should they not have been removed, considering the sacred office they held, from the possibility of further transgressing? In this respect also Eli failed, adding to past neglect what was in effect equivalent to a betrayal of that cause to which, with all his faults and failings, he was strongly attached. III. Let us now attempt to draw from the text one or two practical lessons. 1. We have here a lesson for parents and others, having a sphere of authority and influence. The service of the Lord is still that from which the corrupt heart recoils with unwillingness. How often has the tyranny of evil habit been suffered, as in the case of Eli’s household, to become confirmed, without adequate attempt to check its 107
- 108. growth. How frequentlyis the period allowed to pass, during which a “good foundation” might have been laid, in habits of piety and the fear of God. 2. We have also here a more general lesson of warning to such as persevere in conduct denounced by Scripture, alike by positive precepts, and by means of warning examples. (A. Bonar.) File priests and the pure child The change in Samuel’s daily life and circumstances, when his mother left him behind in Shiloh, must have been like that which many a boy is brought to when he first leaves the shelter of home, and begins to find his way in new associations, among new faces, without the old supports and protection. Samuel, however, was too young when his mother first left him to become much stained by the sin that was round him in Shiloh, for the iniquity was too vile, too mature, too gross for him at that early age to know its real meaning and horror; but the danger of infection, of his very life blood, his inmost soul being poisoned and all his future life defiled, was, if we look with only human expectation, most imminent and sad. Between the tabernacle of the Lord at Shiloh and his father’s house at Ramah, there was a difference great and bad enough to blight any life. In place of Elkanah there was Eli; in place of his mother’s pure faith and tender love there were the sons of Eli and the women who came to the tabernacle; instead of home sanctity there was the misery of priestly, official religion, together with the almost inevitable degradation of holiest things. The Lord keeps the feet of His saints when they are surrounded with vile dangers and sad spiritual perils. I can easily understand how Luther, in his dark days of conflict and battle for truth and purity and Christ against apostacy and formalism and a priesthood as dark and vile as that of the two sons of Eli, should often turn to those early chapters of the first book of Samuel, and should rise strengthened for the Lord and the struggle against spiritual wickedness in high places and impure error. I. Samuel was endangered by priestly profanation of Divine ordinances. Just as some of the sweetest flowers smell the foulest when dead, so it was found that these men and their sacred office became rank and foul, defiling all that came to the sanctuary, and depraving even the most sacred things of the Most High. The priesthood, the sacrifices, the holy seasons, the holy places, the bright feasts that God had appointed, they turned to their own vile uses. Those things and offices of religion that Samuel had been taught to regard as most sacred he must have found, if old enough to think at all, systematically outraged and violated; and religion, sooner or later, would be thought by him to be an imposition and its services deceptive. Not that for him or for any young mind to reason or think so would have been or would now be wise; but it would have been human, natural, and not to be wondered at. For it ever has been a common error of young lives to confound principles with persons. Sometimes I have heard the evil lives of the children of pious parents, or of ministers of the Gospel, accounted for by the grim comment—“they are behind the scenes of church life,” and of Christian life. But there ought to be no seeing behind the scenes. If truly in Christ, ye are children of the light and of the day, and ought to walk in the light, as He is in the light. Here it may be well to distinctly, recognise the greater danger there is of the profanation of holy things and sacred duties where there is a ceremonial system than where there is a steady and consistent recognition of the belief that the religion which is most acceptable to God and most consistent with the mind of Christ is that which is least ceremonial, least ritual, 108
- 109. least priestly, which,having the smallest possible sanctity in institutions and days and offices, must, if it would be consistent and worthy the name of a religion, insist to the very utmost on the greatest possible purity and holiness in hearts and souls. II. Another of Samuel’s dangers was from priestly sensuality. In thus arranging the risks of Samuel at Shiloh I wish be keep in our minds the perils that souls as dear to us as Hannah’s child was to her may and do have to encounter when they leave the immediate protection of home. I would not say any more on this part of the subject if it were not for the great, the gross dangers that even children’s lives now meet in the impurities of the streets, the vile sensuousness, bordering on sensuality and licentiousness, of much popular literature, and, with some, in the daily pollution in business places and elsewhere of those who already carry the plague spot about with them, and, like the plague-maddened wretches of old, delight in staining and contaminating others. It is such pernicious associations, such horrid perils, that so frequently lead to the deepest profanation of parts of our life that should be regarded as the most sacred and dealt with most purely. It is such infection that in many cases utterly destroys the influence of a mother’s parting counsels, or a father’s almost divine commands. III. Another danger of Samuel rose from the priestly rapacity of the sons of Eli. There have been covetous, worldly, rapacious ministers of religion in all ages, but there never have been so many as when and where a priestly system has gone its own way and developed its own life. Earthly greed and rapacity press as closely on the attention of the young in modern business and social life, as did Samuel’s life on him. The judgment of most things and men by a money standard; the public unscrupulousness of so many as to the ways and means they adopt so long as the end of gain is reached; the social customs that increasingly make money the principal thing; the prodigious wealth of our times, and the infatuated efforts of the rich to become richer, to add house to house and field to field;—all these things produce an atmosphere, if I may so say, that is charged with danger. No man’s vileness will warrant you failing away from the truth. No hypocrite’s sin, no minister’s unworthiness, will acquit any young life of guilt in backsliding from the hope and promise of early, pious days. It will now, perhaps, help us to see how Samuel lived in the midst of the sins of Shiloh. 1. And we know, first of all—That Samuel lived uncontaminated by the profanity, the covetousness, and the lust that were so near him. Now learn from this history, that there is no necessity to sin put on anyone anywhere. You cannot help running the risk, but having allowed this much, all has been allowed. If you have sinned it is because you have been careless or wilful, and not because you could not help sinning. Egypt, Shiloh, and Babylon put greater pressure on the young heroes who there fought for the Lord than we have to bear; yet they did not sin. Neither need we. 2. Again: We are told that Samuel grew in Divine grace and human favour with such vile surroundings. God gives this to you that are tempted as a hope and a promise to check our laments over unfortunate circumstances and temptations. You may grow in grace anywhere, just as you may sin anywhere. You may grow in grace on the borders of the pit; and you may sink into the pit from the house of God. Samuel grew in grace: what shall we do? 3. Moreover, Samuel grew thus by grace that we may have. The strongest of us will live as helplessly as a child that cannot yet walk, if we go forth in our own strength, and will utterly fail; while the weakest of us and those of us whose lot in life is full of spiritual hazard and care may have all the more the full and strong confidence that 109
- 110. the Lord willkeep the feet of His saints and will strengthen us with every kind of might, while the wicked shall soon be silent, in darkness. (G. B. Ryley.) Degradation at the altar As garments to a body, so are ceremonies to religion. Garments on a living body preserve the natural warmth; put them on a dead body and they will never fetch life. Ceremonies help to increase devotion; but in a dead heart they cannot breed it. These garments of religion upon a holy man are like Christ’s garments on his own holy body; but joined with a profane heart, they are like Christ’s garments on his crucifying murderers. (Ralph Brownrig.) Sons of Eli, Sons of Belial That would seem to be impossible. Eli was a holy man; Eli was a priest. Eli was not intellectually a strong man, but morally he was righteous and faithful up to a very high degree, tie was not much of a ruler at home; still he was substantially a good man. Belial represents corruption, darkness, the devil, the unholy genius of the universe; anything that indicates selfishness, baseness, or corruption of character. Now read the text:—The sons of Eli the holy priest were sons of Belial the bad spirit, the evil genius. We are always coming upon these conflicts, ironies, impossibilities. At the same time there is the fact, solemn, tragical, tremendous, that the sons of a good man may be bad men, and that good men themselves may be surprised or insidiously led into the deepest, gravest evils. Unless we live and move and have our being in God we cannot realise all our privileges and turn them into solid and beneficent character. There may be something in physical descent, and there ought to be in spiritual descent. Eli ought not to have had bad sons. Bad people ought never to come out of good homes. The danger is that Eli himself may be charged with the responsibility. It is so difficult for an ill-judging and prejudiced human nature to distinguish between cause and effect. Do not suppose that you will be a good man because your father was a good man, and your mother a good woman. You may upset the whole process of heredity; you may create a point of departure in your own development. It lies within the power, but not within the right, of every man to say, From the date of my birth there shall be black blood in our family; I will live the downward life, I will make hospitality in the house of evil spirits. So easy is it to destroy, so tempting is it to make bad fame. We see thin not only religiously, in the distinctive sense of that term, but we see this inversion and perversion of heredity along all the lines of life and within all the spheres of human experience. A civilised man, a son of civilisation, may be the most barbarous man upon the face of the earth. It does not lie within the power of a savage to be so barbarous as a civilised man can be. The sons of Eli were sons of Belial. The corresponding sentence in the lower levels of history is, the sons of civilisation are sons of barbarism. So we might proceed to further illustration and say, The sons of education are sons of the greatest ignorance. Who can be so ignorant as a well-informed man when he has given himself up to the service of evil?” It is not ignorance of the base and vulgar type that can be excused on the ground of want of privilege and want of opportunity, but it is that peculiar ignorance which knowing the light hides it, which knowing the right does the wrong. His education is an element in his condemnation. Sometimes we can say the sons of refinement are sons of vulgarity. The whole point is this: that our heredity may be broken in upon, our ancestral privileges 110
- 111. may be thrownaway,—sons of Eli may be sons of Belial. We hold nothing moral by right of ancestry. Every man should hold his property by right of labour, by right of honest moral conquest. Whatever you have, young man, take it at the spear point. You cannot hand a good character to others. You can set up a good reputation for goodness, and that ought to be a suggestion and a stimulus and a direction and a comfort, but you cannot hand on your character as you band on your acres and your pounds sterling. Every man has to conquer the alphabet as if no other man had ever conquered it before. Why not amplify that idea and carry it throughout the whole scheme of character, and see how we are called upon to work for what we have, and not to depend upon ancestral blessings and privileges. Do not then say, My father was good, my mother was good, therefore I need not take any interest in these matters myself: part of their virtue is laid up for me, I may draw upon it by-and-bye. All that reasoning is vicious, false, and spiritually destructive. A double damnation is theirs who had great advantages to begin with and who did not rise to the nobleness and greatness of their opportunities. What some men had to begin with! how much! They had such roomy homes, such libraries, such kindness and love on the part of parents and friends; they were born to all manner of social advantages so called. Where are they today? What have they done? Did they not begin with too much? Were they not overburdened? Possibly some of you may have begun too well. You are not altogether to be blamed for having fallen as you have done. I have applicants for bounty now from men whose fathers were worth a hundred thousand pounds. These are men who have wasted a whole inheritance of ancestral repute for wisdom and goodness. Yet I cannot altogether blame them; the parental Eli cannot altogether wholly escape responsibility. They had too much, things came too easily; “Easy come, easy go,” is the motto which experience has tested and endorsed. With how little have some other men begun, and yet look at them today. (J. Parker, D. D.) Corrupt lives contagious Men of corrupt lives at the head of religion, who are shameless in their profligacy, have a lowering effect on the moral life of the whole community Down and down goes the standard of living Class after class gets infected. The mischief spreads like dry rot in a building; ere long the whole fabric of society is infected with the poison. (W. G. Blaikie, D. D.) They knew not the Lord.— Sinful and childlike ignorance of God (compare with 1Sa_3:7):—Hophni and Phinehas did not know the Lord; their lives showed it. Samuel did not know the Lord, and his actions showed it also. But as between the illustrative acts, so also between the meaning of the words in the two cases, there is as wide a difference as it is possible to conceive. It will help us if we here remember how wide a ground in Scripture this expression “to knew” or “not to know the Lord” coverses The first form is at times a synonym for salvation, for the whole course of perfect redemption and complete sanctification. The second, the negative form, is one of the intensest expressions that Scripture uses to state the condition of a sinful soul, and for showing the origin of some of the darkest enormities that have ever degraded the name 111
- 112. of religion. TheNew Testament puts this before us very definitely. When Christ would express His perfect Albion and intercourse with the Father even on earth, He said, “I am not come of Myself, but He that sent Me is true; whom ye know not, but I know Him.” “This is life eternal, that they might know Thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent. O righteous Father, the world tins not known Thee, but I have known Thee, and these have known that Thou hast sent me.” John accounts for worldly antagonism to the saints of old in this way—“The world knoweth us not because it knew Him not.” I. That the expression “not knowing the Lord” may imply and account for every kind and degree of sin. This is sinful ignorance of God. In the case now before use, it explains some of the most degrading transgressions of which man can be guilty. 1. But this sinful ignorance of God may co-exist with full knowledge of the truth of God—that is, intellectual knowledge, received by means of education, by example of others, by home training, by social custom or general habit. You may see this in the example of the two young priests. It is certain that they knew the law of the Lord which is perfect. They knew the truth of God, the ways of the Lord, the expectation and hopes of the Almighty that were associated with their priesthood and the offering of sacrifice. They knew the truth, but they knew not God. Their hearts and His were at enmity. Let us make the same distinction for ourselves, between knowing the truth of God and knowing the Lord; between knowing what God has said and knowing God Himself. Is it not one of the saddest facts that some of the worst lives are those that like Hophni and Phinehas know the way of the Lord, have had holy training and gentle nurture, many associations with God’s house, much hearing the Word, and still show that they know not God? Not the knowledge of truth or forms of truth, not correct beliefs or anything of such kind can be depended on to put us right with our God. 2. Notice, again, that there is an ignorance of God that is sinful in its consequences, but is at the same time not guilty. We can understand the vast transgressions of great cities, the brutal tendencies of so large a mass of the population by remembering their inheritance of gross ignorance and animalism in body and mind, their entailed heritage of utter ignorance of God, of inability almost to realise or even to recognise a God and Father of love, or see any meaning in the cross whereon their sins were borne. Is not some of the responsibility resting with Christians, on whose part there has been neglect of extending the light of the glory of God. 3. We must further note that there are cases in which ignorance of the Lord is in it, self a greater transgression than the worst sins that it may beget or account for. These two priests ware as evil in some things as men could be. But more shameful than their deepest impiety was that which was the cause of it—even their wilful ignorance of God. There is practically no restraint left that can touch the heart. To know God is to have now the root of eternal life within us; not to know God is to have the seed of eternal death growing in us now, and in the world to come to be altogether defiled. II. Not knowing the Lord may comprise and account for every degree of immaturity in the spiritual life. There is a sinful ignorance, as we have seen; and now we have the ignorance of immaturity, of the childlike state. Of this state Samuel the child is the illustration. Samuel had had the preparatory training of his mother’s love, the reverent guiding of his life along the way that literally leads to God; but still the moment of 112
- 113. intelligent revelation ofGod to him had not yet come. His love to the Lord had grown like a little seedling plant; now it was to be transplanted into fuller soil, freer air—to have snore root room, more life room altogether. Stronger and more vigorous and bracing winds were to breathe their blessing upon it; hotter sunshine was to stimulate it; elements snore maturing were to lie about the roots. Soon the day of revelation, the night of the opening of heaven in solemnity to his young soul, came; but in prospect of that visitation by which his life was fixed forever, Samuel did not know the Lord. He rested till then as in the arms of God; he lived on God as once he had hung upon his mother’s breast—not knowing the love that held him though he lived in it and by it; not seeing clearly the face that bowed over him in unspeakable affection, though his own features bore the same lines and carried the same marks. He did not yet know; but this was the ignorance of imperfect growth, of incomplete development. To some there may be a special need of considering this aspect of Samuel’s life, and a particular advantage in noting its obvious meaning. For this certainly means that there may be life in God before there is intelligent recognition of it. The father sees his image in the child before the little one recognises it. The Lord was in our life, and we knew it not; nor did we know Him till He Himself drew aside the veil. Or, as it seemed at times, we rambled, as a child might in the tabernacle, into that which is within the veil, into the very Holy of Holies, and there, instead of mighty glory and awful power, we found One gentler than any of earth, a voice speaking more softly than a loving woman, saying, “My son, give Me thy heart!” and, as to presences, we could not see in the Holy Place, “This is My beloved Son.” We knew not God, but he knew us as His. “I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known Me. I girded thee, though thou hast not known Me.” “Then shall we know if we follow on to know the Lord.” It may be Chat we are all involved, to some extent, in blame, for we have not attained that knowledge which depends on earnest seeking after God. God will not teach the souls that will not wait on Him. God cannot show His beauty to eyes that are turned away from Him. He can reveal His secret only to those that fear Him. If we give up life’s strength, and all the power of our days, to one or to many inferior earthly things, giving to the Lord none of our strength, how can we expect the Lord’s light and knowledge, with the consequent blessing of our advance in holiness, to be ours? (G. B. Ryley.) 13 Now it was the practice of the priests that, whenever any of the people offered a sacrifice, the priest’s servant would come with a three-pronged fork in his hand while the meat was being boiled 113
- 114. BARNES, "The Lawof Moses defined exactly what was to be the priest’s portion of every peace offering Lev_7:31-35, as it also gave express directions about the burning of the fat Lev_7:23-25, Lev_7:31. It was therefore a gross act of disobedience and lawlessness on the part of Hophni and Phinehas to take more than the Law gave them. Incidental evidence is afforded by this passage to the existence of the Levitical law at this time. CLARKE, "When any man offered sacrifice - That is, when a peace-offering was brought, the right shoulder and the breast belonged to the priest, the fat was burnt upon the altar, and the blood was poured at the bottom of the altar; the rest of the flesh belonged to the offerer. Under pretense of taking only their own part, they took the best of all they chose, and as much as they chose. GILL, "And the priest's custom with the people was,.... Not what was according to the will and law of God, but which the sons of Eli had introduced; and in which they were followed by the rest of the priests, and so it became an established custom, and had the force of a law, statute, or judgment, as the word signifies: that when any man offered sacrifice; not any sort of sacrifice, for if it was a burnt offering, it was wholly consumed by fire, and in that the following custom could not take place; and if it was a sin offering, that was eaten by the priests, and so there was no need of taking such a method as after related; but a peace offering, part of which belonged to the Lord, the fat that was burnt, and the breast and shoulder to the priest, and the rest to the owner, who made a feast of it for his family and friends: the priest's servant came while the flesh was in seething; that is, while those parts were boiling for the owner and his family; which was done in some part of the tabernacle, as afterwards in the temple: with a flesh hook of three teeth in his hand; with a three forked instrument, with which he was sent by order of the priest that slew the sacrifice, and offered it, to whom belonged the parts before mentioned, allowed him by the law; but not content with these, he sent his servant, while the rest were boiling, with such an instrument as here described, to draw up more out of the boiling pot. HENRY 13-17, " They profaned the offerings of the Lord, and made a gain to themselves, or rather a gratification of their own luxury, out of them. God had provided competently for them out of the sacrifices. The offerings of the Lord made by fire were a considerable branch of their revenue, but not enough to please them; they served not the God of Israel, but their own bellies (Rom_16:18), being such as the prophet calls greedy 114
- 115. dogs that cannever have enough, Isa_56:11. [1.] They robbed the offerers, and seized for themselves some of their part of the sacrifice of the peace-offerings. The priests had for their share the wave-breast and the heave shoulder (Lev_7:34), but these did not content them; when the flesh was boiling for the offerer to feast upon religiously with his friends, they sent a servant with a flesh-hook of three teeth, a trident, and that must be stuck into the pot, and whatever that brought up the priest must have (1Sa_2:13, 1Sa_ 2:14), and the people, out of their great veneration, suffered this to grow into a custom, so that after awhile prescription was pleaded for this manifest wrong. [2.] They stepped in before God himself, and encroached upon his right too. As if it were a small thing to weary men, they wearied my God also, Isa_7:13. Be it observed, to the honour of Israel, that though the people tamely yielded to their unwarrantable demands from them, yet they were very solicitous that God should not be robbed: Let them not fail to burn the fat presently, 1Sa_2:16. Let the altar have its due, for that is the main matter. Unless God have the fat, they can feast with little comfort upon the flesh. It was a shame that the priests should need to be thus admonished by the people of their duty; but they regarded not the admonition. The priest will be served first, and will take what he thinks fit of the fat too, for he is weary of boiled meat, he must have roast, and, in order to that, they must give it to him raw; and if the offerer dispute it, though not in his own favour (let the priest take what he pleases of his part) but in favour of the altar (let them be sure to burn the fat first), even the priest's servant had grown so very imperious that he would either have it now or take it by force, than which there could not be a greater affront to God nor a greater abuse to the people. The effect was, First, That God was displeased: The sin of the young men was very great before the Lord, 1Sa_2:17. Nothing is more provoking to God than the profanation of sacred things, and men serving their lusts with the offerings of the Lord. Secondly, That religion suffered by it: Men abhorred the offerings of the Lord. All good men abhorred their management of the offerings, and too many insensibly fell into a contempt of the offerings themselves for their sakes. It was the people's sin to think the worse of God's institutions, but it was the much greater sin of the priests that gave them occasion to do so. Nothing brings a greater reproach upon religion than ministers' covetousness, sensuality, and imperiousness. In the midst of this sad story comes in the repeated mention of Samuel's devotion. But Samuel ministered before the Lord, as an instance of the power of God's grace, in preserving him pure and pious in the midst of this wicked crew; and this helped to keep up the sinking credit of the sanctuary in the minds of the people, who, when they had said all they could against Eli's sons, could not but admire Samuel's seriousness, and speak well of religion for his sake. JAMISON, "the priests’ custom with the people — When persons wished to present a sacrifice of peace offering on the altar, the offering was brought in the first instance to the priest, and as the Lord’s part was burnt, the parts appropriated respectively to the priests and offerers were to be sodden. But Eli’s sons, unsatisfied with the breast and shoulder, which were the perquisites appointed to them by the divine law (Exo_29:27; Lev_7:31, Lev_7:32), not only claimed part of the offerer’s share, but rapaciously seized them previous to the sacred ceremony of heaving or waving (see on Lev_7:29); and moreover they committed the additional injustice of taking up with their fork those portions which they preferred, while still raw. Pious people revolted at such rapacious and profane encroachments on the dues of the altar, as well as what should have gone to constitute the family and social feast of the offerer. The truth is, the priests 115
- 116. having become haughtyand unwilling in many instances to accept invitations to those feasts, presents of meat were sent to them; and this, though done in courtesy at first, being, in course of time, established into a right, gave rise to all the rapacious keenness of Eli’s sons. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:13. When any man offered sacrifice — Brought his peace- offerings to be offered at the altar. While the flesh was in seething — Or boiling. As the Lord’s part of the peace-offerings was burned upon the altar, so the priests’ and offerers’ parts were to be boiled. And when the temple was built, there were certain rooms in the court of the people, wherein they had liberty to boil the flesh, in order that they might feast with God at his own house. And the like rooms, no doubt, there were in the outward court of the tabernacle. HAWKER, "(13) And the priests' custom with the people was, that, when any man offered sacrifice, the priest's servant came, while the flesh was in seething, with a fleshhook of three teeth in his hand; (14) And he struck it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot; all that the fleshhook brought up the priest took for himself. So they did in Shiloh unto all the Israelites that came thither. (15) Also before they burnt the fat, the priest's servant came, and said to the man that sacrificed, Give flesh to roast for the priest; for he will not have sodden flesh of thee, but raw. (16) And if any man said unto him, Let them not fail to burn the fat presently, and then take as much as thy soul desireth; then he would answer him, Nay; but thou shalt give it me now: and if not, I will take it by force. (17) Wherefore the sin of the young men was very great before the LORD: for men abhorred the offering of the LORD. I include all these verses within one point of view, and a sad view they exhibit of the horrible state of the sons of Eli in their conduct before the Lord. Alas, alas! what a wretched mind must these young men have possessed, by which their sin was not only great before the Lord, but even the minds of the people were led away thereby to abhor the offering of the Lord. I would have the Reader observe, how the Lord speaks of such awful characters, Malachi 2:8-9. LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:13. This is not to be rendered: “And the custom of the priests with the people was this”—this would certainly require simply טַפּ ְשׁ ִ[מFN34] ֶחז ְו without יםֲִנהֹכַּה [“this is the custom” without “ the priests”], comp. Genesis 11:6 (Bצttcher); nor is it: “the right (that Isaiah, the assumed right) of the priests in respect to the people was as follows” (Keil), for טַפּ ְשׁ ִמ [“right”] alone cannot be so understood; but the words are to be connected with the preceding: they troubled 116
- 117. themselves not aboutGod, nor about the real, true right of the priests in respect to the people, that Isaiah, “about what was the legal due of the priests from the people” (Thenius). [The construction of this difficult clause adopted by Erdmann (with Vulg, Cahen, Wellhausen, Thenius, and perhaps Sept.) is open to grave objections. The reply to Keil is correct; טָפּ ְשׁ ִמ cannot well mean “assumed right.” The objection to Bצttcher’s translation (where read םָטָפּ ְשׁ ִמ ֶהז instead of Erdmann’s טַפּ ְשׁ ִמ ֶהז) is forcible in so far as we should expect ְהז to introduce the clause (comp. Deuteronomy 18:3); but the possibility of the omission of the pronoun, and of an apposition of the two clauses must be admitted. To the translation of מ׳ by “legal right” Wellhausen properly objects that the ַםגּ (even) in 1 Samuel 2:15 introduces a graver outrage, and therefore the proceeding described in 1 Samuel 2:13 must be illegal.—But against Erdmann’s rendering it is to be said that the meaning assigned to ידע (know) “trouble one’s-self about” is rare and difficult; it is found only in poetical passages. The phrase “to know the Lord” occurs, and always in the sense of intimate sympathetic apprehension; but this sense will not suit the .מ׳ Moreover, if מ׳ here means “right” we should expect the prep. ת ֵא ֵ“מfrom” (as Deuteronomy 18:3) instead of ת ֵא “ with ” the latter must be retained here, though the former is read in9 MSS. and in LXX, Syr, Chald. Further, the narrative Isaiah, in this construction, introduced very abruptly (“when any Prayer of Manasseh, etc.” .(טָפּ ְשׁ ִמ means not only “right,” but also “ custom, manner;” see 2 Kings 11:14; Judges 13:12. The “custom” here described was not the legal right, but was in force under, apparently introduced by, the sons of Eli, the priests )הכ׳(;1 Samuel 2:13 details one imposition of the priests, and a more serious imposition is properly introduced ( 1 Samuel 2:15) by “even” )ַםגּ ).—We retain, therefore, the rendering of Eng. A. V. (with Philippson, Bib. Comm, and others).—Tr.]. Then follows the statement of the priests’ legal right.—The connection required that the people’s part in the offering should now be distinctly set forth, in order to put the unseemly conduct of Eli’s sons in its true light. Therefore the participle “sacrificing” in connection with the indefinite subject “every Prayer of Manasseh,” stands first in absolute construction, like the Lat. Abl. absolute (comp. Gesen. § 145, 2, Rem.), = “when any man offered, then came, etc.” Ewald, § 341 e.: “ If the subject of the circumstantial sentence is wholly undefined, then the mere combination of the participle with the subject suffices to express a possible case ( Genesis 4:15).” Here is vividly portrayed the grasping selfish conduct of the priests in the preparation of 117
- 118. the sacrificial mealafter the offering was presented, which had already become the rule (“so they did to all the Israelites”.(—But still further. 1 Samuel 2:15. Even before the offering, before (in accordance with the law, Leviticus 3:3-5) the fat was burned that it might be offered to the Lord as the best portion, they committed a robbery on the meat, which they wanted only יַ,ה that Isaiah, raw, fresh, full of juice and strength, in order to roast it. [Bib. Comm. points out that 1 Samuel 15-2:13 repeat the Language of the Law, and thus give evidence to its existence. See Leviticus 35-7:31 ; Leviticus 25-7:23 ; Leviticus 7:31; Leviticus 17:5; also Exodus 29:28; Deuteronomy 18:3. Philippson: “Roast was common in heathen sacrifices, and even now the Orientals do not like to eat boiled meat.”—Tr.]. 1 Samuel 2:16. The remonstrance of the offerer based on the legal regulation, of which they should be the guardians, is set aside. יּוֹםַכּ = “at this time, now,” as in Genesis 25:31; 1 Kings 22:5. The Qeri “not” is preferable to the Kethib “to him:” “no, but now thou shalt give it;” threats were combined with violent seizure. Rude force was added to lawlessness. 1 Samuel 2:17. The “young men ” are not the servants of the priests (Keil) but the priests themselves, the sons of Eli. Their arbitrary conduct was “a very great sin before the Lord,” because the fat burned on the altar pertained to the Lord, and their legal portion of the sacrifice-meat fell to them only after the burning of the fat. What made their sin so great was the fact that they brought the offerings into contempt with the people, in so far as the wicked conduct of the priests took away in the eyes of the people their true significance as offerings to the Lord. Minchah (הָחְנ ִ)מ “means here not the meat-offering as the adjunct to the bloody offerings, but the sacrificial gift in general as an offering to the Lord” (Keil). In the succeeding narrative Samuel’s “service before the Lord” is contrasted with this wicked conduct of Eli’s sons in relation to the offering. PETT, "1 Samuel 2:13-14 ‘And the custom of the priests with the people was, that, when any man offered sacrifice, the priest’s servant came, while the flesh was boiling, with a flesh-hook of three teeth in his hand, and he struck it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot. All that the flesh-hook brought up the priest took for himself. So they did in Shiloh to all the Israelites who came there.’ 118
- 119. The Law hadlaid down clear instruction about the priest’s portion, which consisted of the breast and shoulder (Leviticus 7:29-34). But these two men took no notice of the Law. Instead of simply accepting the breast and shoulder, whenever a sacrifice was offered they sent their servant with a three pronged fork, and when the flesh that had been taken off the sacrifice was still boiling, in went the fork, and whatever came out was claimed by the priests. This may have been additionally to the breast and shoulder, or it may simply be that the fork was designed in such a way as to ensure the collection of much larger portions. Either way they were taking more than was allotted to them. This was what Shiloh had come to under their priesthood. A place of daylight robbery. And no one dared to argue with God’s ‘holy’ priests. In the same way we also should ask ourselves whether we are similarly robbing God. For we too are His servants, and all the wealth that is committed to our care is His. The danger for us also is that we can use for our own purposes what we should really see as His, for as Jesus informed His disciples when He directed their attention to the widow who gave her mites in the Temple, our giving is judged on the basis, not of how much we give, but of what we keep for ourselves. Others of us want more than God intends for us, and spend time that we should be spending in His service on obtaining more wealth for ourselves. However, here the priests got tired of boiled meat and so they devised another plan in order to satisfy themselves. K&D, "1Sa_2:13-14 “And the right of the priests towards the people was (the following).” Mishpat signifies the right which they had usurped to themselves in relation to the people. “If any one brought a sacrifice (ח ֶַבז ַח ֵבֹז ישׁ ִל־אָכּ is placed first, and construed absolutely: 'as for every one who brought a slain-offering'), the priest's servant (lit. young man) came while the flesh was boiling, with a three-pronged fork in his hand, and thrust into the kettle, or pot, or bowl, or saucepan. All that the fork brought up the priest took. This they did to all the Israelites who came thither to Shiloh.” 119
- 120. 14 and wouldplunge the fork into the pan or kettle or caldron or pot. Whatever the fork brought up the priest would take for himself. This is how they treated all the Israelites who came to Shiloh. CLARKE, "Kettle - caldron, or pot - We know not what these were, nor of what capacity; nor is it of any consequence. GILL, "And he struck it into the pan, or kettle, or cauldron, or pot,.... Whatever vessel was made use of, larger or lesser, according to the quantity of flesh the owner boiled for himself and friends, the trident the priest's servants brought with him, he struck into the boiler to the bottom; of it: all that the fleshhook brought up the priest took for himself; as his own property; whereas no part of it at all belonged to him, he having had the breast and shoulder delivered to him in the first place; and yet, by this method, all that he could drag up with this three forked instrument he claimed as his own; which might be much, that would hang upon three teeth of it, or in which they were fastened; and, according to Abarbinel, each of them would bring up a pound of flesh, and perhaps more: so they did in Shiloh, unto all the Israelites that came thither; to offer their sacrifices, which was the proper place for them, the tabernacle and altar being there; and men of all ranks and degrees were treated alike, princes and people, rich and poor; the custom universally obtained, and all sorts of men met with the same usage. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:14-15. All that the flesh-hook brought up, &c. — This was a new custom, which they had profanely introduced. For, not content with the breast and right shoulder, allowed them by God, they took also part of the offerers’ share; besides which, they snatched their part before it was heaved and waved, contrary to Leviticus 7:34. Also before they burnt the fat — Which entirely belonged to God with the other parts that were to be burned with it. The priest’s servant came, &c. — This was a high and profane contempt of God, and an additional injury; for they took such parts as they liked best while it was raw, and before that which 120
- 121. belonged to Godhad been offered to him. 15 But even before the fat was burned, the priest’s servant would come and say to the person who was sacrificing, “Give the priest some meat to roast; he won’t accept boiled meat from you, but only raw.” CLARKE, "Before they burnt the fat - They would serve themselves before God was served! This was iniquity and arrogance of the first magnitude. He will not have sodden flesh - He chooses roast meat, not boiled; and if they had it in the pot before the servant came, he took it out that it might be roasted. GILL, "Also before they burnt the fat,.... Which belonged to the Lord, and was to be offered to him by fire, in the first place, as it ought to be; and the order of sacrificing required that he should have his part first before the priest or the owner: but so impious were the priests become, that the priest's servant came, and said to the man that sacrificed; not to the priest that offered, but to the man that brought his sacrifice to be offered by the priest: give flesh to roast for the priest; meaning, not what was his by law, as the breast and shoulder, though for these he ought to have stayed until the fat was offered to the Lord; but other parts of the peace offering, which he had no right unto, for roasting or boiling, and yet in an imperious manner demanded it by his servant: for he will not have sodden flesh of thee, but raw though this was not the only reason of this demand, because they liked roast meat better than boiled; but because the three forked flesh hook did not always bring up the best pieces out of the boiling pot; 121
- 122. and therefore heresolved to have flesh raw, that he might have the best, as well as dress it to his own liking. ELLICOTT, " (15) Before they burnt the fat.—This was a still graver offence against the ritual of the sacrifice. A contemptuous insult was here offered to the Lord. This fat was not to be eaten or taken by any one; it was God’s portion, to be burnt by the priest on the altar (Leviticus 3:16; Leviticus 7:23; Leviticus 7:25; Leviticus 7:30-31). In all these strange rites and ceremonies there was a higher symbolism involved. This was ruthlessly set at nought and trampled on by these reckless, covetous guardians of the worship of Israel. Portions of the sacrifice fell legally to the ministering priests in lieu of fee. It was fair “that they which ministered at the altar should live of the altar.” The “heave leg” and the “wave breast” of the slaughtered victim were theirs by right, and these the sacrificing priest was to receive after the fat portion of the sacrifice had been burnt upon the altar. But to take the flesh of the victim, and roast it before the symbolic offering had been made, was a crime which was equivalent to robbing God. It dishonoured the whole ceremony. He will not have sodden flesh.—The meaning of this is, these priests and their attendants insisted on having the best part of the sacrificed victim raw, not boiled— that is, fresh, full of juice and strength—before the offering had been made. PETT, "1 Samuel 2:15-16 ‘Yes, before they burnt the fat, the priest’s servant came, and said to the man who sacrificed, “Give flesh to roast for the priest, for he will not have boiled flesh from you, but raw.” And if the man said to him, “They will surely burn the fat first, and then take as much as your soul desires,” then he would say, “No, but you must give it to me now, and if not, I will take it by force.” ’ 122
- 123. This second breachof the Law was even more flagrant than the first. They actually demanded that they be given the raw flesh before the fat, which had to be given to YHWH, had been burnt. Presumably therefore it was before it had been removed. This was sheer blasphemy. At such a gross breach of the Law the people protested. The Law emphasised that the fat must first be given to YHWH and burned on the altar. It was sacred. Then the priests could have as much as they wanted. But they were then threatened that if they did not do as they were told force would be used so that the priests would get their way. None, of course, could prevent it. No one would dare to strike a holy priest or his servant. That would have been sacrilege. So they had to give way. Thus the two priests and their servants blatantly insulted YHWH by ignoring all His requirements, taking advantage of their privileged position. K&D, "1Sa_2:15-16 They did still worse. “Even before the fat was consumed,” i.e., before the fat portions of the sacrifice had been placed in the altar-fire for the Lord (Lev_3:3-5), the priest's servant came and demanded flesh of the person sacrificing, to be roasted for the priest; “for he will not take boiled flesh of thee, but only י ַ,ח raw, i.e., fresh meat.” And if the person sacrificing replied, “They will burn the fat directly (lit. 'at this time,' as in Gen_ 25:31; 1Ki_22:5), then take for thyself, as thy soul desireth,” he said, “No ( ל for ֹא,)ל but thou shalt give now; if not, I take by force.” These abuses were practised by the priests in connection with the thank-offerings, with which a sacrificial meal was associated. Of these offerings, with which a sacrificial meal was associated. Of these offerings, the portion which legally fell to the priest as his share was the heave-leg and wave-breast. And this he was to receive after the fat portions of the sacrifice had been burned upon the altar (see Lev_7:30-34). To take the flesh of the sacrificial animal and roast it before this offering had been made, was a crime which was equivalent to a robbery of God, and is therefore referred to here with the emphatic particle ַםגּ, as being the worst crime that the sons of Eli committed. Moreover, the priests could not claim any of the flesh which the offerer of the sacrifice boiled for the sacrificial meal, after burning the fat portions upon the altar and giving up the portions which belonged to them, to say nothing of their taking it forcibly out of the pots while it was being boiled. 16 If the person said to him, “Let the fat be burned first, and then take whatever you want,” 123
- 124. the servant wouldanswer, “No, hand it over now; if you don’t, I’ll take it by force.” GILL, "And if any man said unto him, let them not fail to burn the fat presently,.... Or stay till they have offered the fat, as the Targum; let that be done in the first place, which may be quickly done, in a very little time, and let as much haste be made as can be to do it: and then take as much as thy soul desireth; by which it appears that the men that brought the sacrifice had more religion at heart, and were more concerned for the honour and glory of God than the priest; being willing to suffer in their property, but could not bear that the Lord should be dishonoured, and so rudely treated: they were willing the priests should take what they pleased of theirs, though they had no right to any; only they desired the Lord might be served first, which was but reasonable: then he would answer him, nay, but thou shall give it me now, and if not, I will take it by force; signifying, he would not stay till the fat was burnt, and the Lord had his portion, but he would have it directly; and if he would not give it him freely, he would take it whether he would or not; to such a height of insolence and impiety were the priests arrived, as to put it in the power of their servants to make such wicked demands, and treat God, and those that brought their sacrifices to him, in such a contemptuous manner. HENRY, "They stepped in before God himself, and encroached upon his right too. As if it were a small thing to weary men, they wearied my God also, Isa_7:13. Be it observed, to the honour of Israel, that though the people tamely yielded to their unwarrantable demands from them, yet they were very solicitous that God should not be robbed: Let them not fail to burn the fat presently, 1Sa_2:16. Let the altar have its due, for that is the main matter. Unless God have the fat, they can feast with little comfort upon the flesh. It was a shame that the priests should need to be thus admonished by the people of their duty; but they regarded not the admonition. The priest will be served first, and will take what he thinks fit of the fat too, for he is weary of boiled meat, he must have roast, and, in order to that, they must give it to him raw; and if the offerer dispute it, though not in his own favour (let the priest take what he pleases of his part) but in favour of the altar (let them be sure to burn the fat first), even the priest's servant had grown so very imperious that he would either have it now or take it by force, than which there could not be a greater affront to God nor a greater abuse to the people. The effect was, First, That God was displeased: The sin of the young men was very great before the Lord, 1Sa_2:17. Nothing is more provoking to God than the profanation of sacred things, and men serving their lusts with the offerings of the Lord. Secondly, That religion suffered by it: Men abhorred the offerings of the Lord. All good men abhorred 124
- 125. their management ofthe offerings, and too many insensibly fell into a contempt of the offerings themselves for their sakes. It was the people's sin to think the worse of God's institutions, but it was the much greater sin of the priests that gave them occasion to do so. Nothing brings a greater reproach upon religion than ministers' covetousness, sensuality, and imperiousness. In the midst of this sad story comes in the repeated mention of Samuel's devotion. But Samuel ministered before the Lord, as an instance of the power of God's grace, in preserving him pure and pious in the midst of this wicked crew; and this helped to keep up the sinking credit of the sanctuary in the minds of the people, who, when they had said all they could against Eli's sons, could not but admire Samuel's seriousness, and speak well of religion for his sake. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:16-17. Nay, but thou shalt give it me now, &c. — This was the very height of haughty impiety. That such submissive language did not prevail with them to have so much respect for God, as to permit his portion to be presented to him in the first place, especially as they offered to the priest more than his share afterward, manifested excessive profaneness and contempt of things sacred. To what pitch of wickedness may not a man arrive who has shaken off the fear of God, and all sense of his presence and power! Men abhorred the offering of the Lord — Nothing brings religion so much into contempt with the people as the open profaneness of those that are ministers of it. The validity, however, and efficacy of God’s ordinances, do not depend altogether on the piety of those that minister in them. So that it was a sin in the people to neglect divine institutions because of the wickedness of the priests. But it was a still much greater sin in the priests to give them occasion so to do. 17 This sin of the young men was very great in the Lord’s sight, for they[b] were treating the Lord’s offering with contempt. BARNES, "The offering of the Lord - Minchah, here in the general sense of “gift or offering” to God (compare Mal_1:10-11; Mal_3:3). In its restricted sense, it is used of 125
- 126. the meat offerings,the unbloody sacrifices, and is then coupled with bloody sacrifices, sacrifices of slain beasts. (See 1Sa_2:29.) CLARKE, "Wherefore the sin of the young men was very great - That is, Hophni and Phinehas, the sons of Eli. Men abhorred the offering - As the people saw that the priests had no piety, and that they acted as if there was no God; they despised God’s service, and became infidels. A national priesthood, when the foundation is right, may be a great blessing; but if the priesthood becomes corrupt, though the foundation itself stand sure, the corruption of the national manners will be the unavoidable consequence. GILL, "Wherefore the sin of the young men was very great before the Lord,.... That is, the sons of Eli; for they were the ringleaders who set these bad examples, which other priests followed, and therefore the sin is ascribed to them; and which was sadly aggravated by taking what was not their own, and by taking it in a forcible manner, and before the Lord had his part in the offering, and all this done in the tabernacle, in the presence of God; which plainly showed that they had not the fear of God before their eyes, nor any sense of his omniscience and omnipresence, any more than of his holiness and justice: for men abhorred the offering of the Lord; it was irksome and disagreeable to them to bring their sacrifices, when they saw the law of God was not attended to, and the rules of sacrificing were not observed; such contempt of God, such abuse of sacrifices, such injury done to the sacrificers, and such covetousness and sensuality in the priests, that it even set the people against sacrifices, and made them loath them, and neglect to bring them. And this aggravated the sin of the young men, though the sacrificers were not excused hereby, 1Sa_2:24. ELLICOTT, "(17) The sin of the young men was very great.—Grave peccatum sacerdotum ob scandalurn datum laicis (“the sin of the priests was a great one, because it put a stumbling-block in the way of the people”).—A. Lapide, quoted by Wordsworth. Religion was being brought into general disrepute through the conduct of its leading ministers; was it likely that piety, justice, and purity would be honoured and loved in the land of Israel when the whole ritual of the sacrifices was openly scoffed at in the great sanctuary of the people by the chief priests of their faith? PETT, "1 Samuel 2:17 126
- 127. ‘And the sinof the young men was very great before YHWH, for the men despised the offering of YHWH.’ The writer sums up the situation. The sin of these young men, Hophni and Phinehas (1 Samuel 2:34), was very great before YHWH, in that by their actions they were demonstrating that they despised the offering of YHWH. (This was, of course, a later Phinehas than the one in Numbers 25:11). And the result was that the offerings would become despised by the people (Malachi 2:8-9). The whole sacrificial system was being brought into disrepute because of the scandalous behaviour of these two priests. And it seems that Eli did nothing about it. 18 But Samuel was ministering before the Lord— a boy wearing a linen ephod. 127
- 128. BARNES, "Girded witha linen ephod - This was the usual dress of the priests. It does not appear whether Levites wore an ephod properly. Possibly it was a mark of Samuel’s special dedication to the Lord’s service that he wore one. (See the marginal reference). The ephod was sometimes used as an idolatrous implement Jdg_8:27. CLARKE, "Girded with a linen ephod - This the Targum translates כרדוט אסיר דבוץ asir cardut debuts, “Girded with a cardit of byssus, or fine linen.” The word cardut they seem to have borrowed from the Greek χειριδωτος, a tunic, having χειριδας, i.e., sleeves that came down to, or covered, the hands. This was esteemed an effeminate garment among the Romans. See Buxtorf’s Talmudic Lexicon. GILL, "But Samuel ministered before the Lord,.... The ministration of Samuel, though a child, is observed both before and after the account of the ill behaviour and wickedness of Eli's sons; partly to the shame and disgrace of them, and as serving to aggravate their sin, and make it appear the more black and heinous; and partly to his honour and reputation, that he was not corrupted and turned aside from God by their evil practices. The phrase here used is different from that in 1Sa_2:11 there he is said to minister before Eli, under his direction and guidance, but here before the Lord; being now engaged in higher services, and which he could perform without the assistance of Eli, as in the presence of God more immediately; it seems to have respect to him when more grown in age, stature, knowledge, and experience, though here related: yet still being "a child"; not got out of his childhood, or arrived to manhood: girded with a linen ephod; such as priests used to wear, but not Levites in common, nor extraordinary persons on extraordinary occasions, see 1Sa_22:18. This seems to be a peculiar favour, and a special honour which Eli granted to Samuel when so very young, on account of the grace of God bestowed on him in a wonderful manner; and because brought up in the tabernacle as a holy person, and a Nazarite; and because his birth was foretold, and he asked of God, as his name signified, as Procopius Gazaeus observes. JAMISON, "1Sa_2:18-26. Samuel’s ministry. But Samuel ministered before the Lord, being a child — This notice of his early services in the outer courts of the tabernacle was made to pave the way for the remarkable prophecy regarding the high priest’s family. girded with a linen ephod — A small shoulder-garment or apron, used in the sacred service by the inferior priests and Levites; sometimes also by judges or eminent 128
- 129. persons, and henceallowed to Samuel, who, though not a Levite, was devoted to God from his birth. BENSON,"1 Samuel 2:18. But Samuel ministered before the Lord — Though he was very young, yet he carefully and faithfully performed such offices in God’s tabernacle as he was capable of discharging, and did not follow the bad example of others. Girded with a linen ephod — A garment used in God’s service, and allowed, not only to the inferior priests and Levites, but also to eminent persons of the people, and therefore to Samuel, who, though not a priest, was both a Levite and a Nazarite from his birth. COKE, "1 Samuel 2:18. Girded with a linen ephod— As the birth, appointment, and ministry of Samuel were extraordinary, he was therefore indulged with an extraordinary dress. Schachus conjectures, that from hence was derived the latin clavus among the Romans, which was a vestment peculiar to their senators and presidents. It was brought by Tullus Hostilius from the Etruscans when he conquered them, whose ancient language agrees so much with the Hebrew, that we may easily believe they derived many things from them. See Mirotheca, cap. 3: sect. 43. ELLICOTT, " (18) Ministered . . . being a child.—A striking contrast is intended to be drawn here between the covetous, self-seeking ministrations of the worldly priests and the quiet service of the boy devoted by his pious mother and father to the sanctuary service. Girded with a linen ephod.—The ephod was a priestly dress, which Samuel received in very early youth, because he had, with the high priest’s formal sanction, been set apart for a life-long service before the Lord. This ephod was an official garment, and consisted of two pieces, which rested on the shoulders in front and behind, and were joined at the top, and fastened about the body with a girdle. HAWKER, "(18) But Samuel ministered before the LORD, being a child, girded with a linen ephod. (19) Moreover his mother made him a little coat, and brought it to him from year to year, when she came up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice. As Rameh was not above ten or eleven miles from Shiloh, probably more frequent communication took place between Samuel and his pa rents. The Holy Ghost only 129
- 130. takes occasion inthis place to remark how Samuel was annually clothed from the attention of his mother. The linen ephod he wore was the distinction of the Levites. CONSTABLE, "2. Hannah's godly influence on Samuel and its effect 2:18-21 In the previous paragraphs two statements about the main characters described them and framed the paragraph: they did not regard the Lord, and they despised the Lord's offerings (1 Samuel 2:12; 1 Samuel 2:17). Likewise in this one the writer described Samuel as "before the Lord" at the beginning and at the end (1 Samuel 2:18; 1 Samuel 2:21). Even though he was very young and his service was probably menial at this time (cf. 1 Samuel 3:15), Samuel lived sensitively before God. The writer did not stress this sensitive spirit here; he only hinted at it. However it comes out clearly later (e.g., ch. 4). In the central part of this section (1 Samuel 2:18-19) the writer documented the support and encouragement to serve the Lord that Samuel received from his parents. The linen ephod was a priestly garment, as was the robe (cf. Exodus 28:31; 2 Samuel 6:14). [Note: N. L. Tidwell, "The Linen Ephod: 1 Sam. II 18 and 2 Sam. VI 14," Vetus Testamentum 24:4 (October 1974):505-7.] Hannah dressed Samuel as a little priest showing that she respected this office and wanted her son to grow up valuing it. Similarly, today, sometimes parents buy things for their children that will give them a love for those things and encourage them to pursue interest in them (e.g., a football, a child's cooking set, etc.). Hannah's obedience resulted in God blessing Elkanah and Hannah even more (1 Samuel 2:20-21). Among other blessings, God gave Hannah five additional children by overcoming her barrenness and making her fertile (cf. Exodus 1:21; Psalms 127:3). Furthermore, Samuel continued to develop in a promising manner (cf. Luke 2:40; Luke 2:52). LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:18. The “Ephod” can mean nothing but a garment resembling in form the High-priest’s ephod, consisting of two pieces which rested on the shoulders in front and behind, were joined at the top and held about the body by a girdle. Therefore it is said also: Samuel was girded with the ephod, comp. Exodus 28:7-8. In distinction from the material of the High-priest’s ephod, it was made of the same material as the other priestly garments, white linen (דַ.)בּ That the priests 130
- 131. then all worethis ephod appears from 1 Samuel 22:18. It was the sign of the priestly calling, and was worn during the performance of the priestly functions. David was thus clothed, according to 2 Samuel 6:14, when he brought back the Ark, and in connection with this ceremony performed quasi-priestly functions. As the mention of this priestly dress of Samuel is connected expressly and directly with the reference to his calling as minister in the Sanctuary before the Lord, it is thus intimated that Hebrews, called to this life-long service, received therewith an essentially priestly calling. [Bib. Comm.: The word minister is used in three senses in Scripture: 1) Of the service of both Priests and Levites rendered unto the Lord, Exodus 28:35, etc.; 2) of the ministrations of the Levites as rendered to the Priests, Numbers 3:6; Numbers 3) of any service, as that of Joshua to Moses, that of Elisha to Elijah, that of the angels in heaven, 2 Samuel 13:17; Psalm 103:21, etc. The application of it to Samuel accords most exactly with his condition as a Levite.— Tr.]. 1 Samuel 2:19. While the ephod was the High-priestly dress, which the boy received on the part of the Sanctuary (Thenius), the little meןl[FN35](יל ִﬠ ְ)מ was his every-day dress, which his mother renewed for him once a year, when she came with her husband to the Sanctuary to present the annual offering. The unbroken connection which the household thus maintained with the Sanctuary prevented any estrangement between the child Samuel and the house of his parents.—The Impf. “made” ()תּעשה indicates a continued customary action, and thus answers to the Latin tense which is so called in a stricter sense. PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:18 But Samuel ministered. While the misconduct of Eli's sons was thus bringing religion into contempt, and sapping the nation's morals, Samuel was advancing in years and piety, and was gaining that education which made him fit to retrieve the evil of their doings. He is still styled na'ar, a boy; for the word, according to the Rabbins, may be used up to fifteen years (1 Samuel 1:24). In the sense of servant there is no limit of age; and as it is the word translated "young men" in 1 Samuel 2:17, it probably means there not Eli's sons, but the servants by whose instrumentality their orders were actually carried out. Samuel's dress, an ephod of white linen, was probably that worn by the Levites in their ordinary ministrations; for the ephod of the priests was richer both in material and colour (Exodus 28:6-8). As being thus the simplest ministerial garment, it was apparently worn also by laymen when taking part in any religious service, as by David when he danced before the ark (2 Samuel 6:14). 131
- 132. PETT, " TheContrasting Behaviour Of Samuel and His Family (1 Samuel 2:18-21). In total contrast the young Samuel, dressed similarly to a priest even though still a child, ministered before YHWH, and continued to grow in righteousness. He must have been both bewildered and grieved at what he saw. And no doubt he came in for some stick because of it. But in contrast with the house of Eli, Samuel’s family were greatly blessed. It demonstrated that there were still some who looked faithfully to YHWH. K&D, "1Sa_2:17 Such conduct as this on the part of the young men (the priests' servants), was a great sin in the sight of the Lord, as they thereby brought the sacrifice of the Lord into contempt. ץ ֵאִ,נ causative, to bring into contempt, furnish occasion for blaspheming (as in 2Sa_12:14). “The robbery which they committed was a small sin in comparison with the contempt of the sacrifices themselves, which they were the means of spreading among the people” (O. v. Gerlach). Minchah does not refer here to the meat-offering as the accompaniment to the slain-offerings, but to the sacrificial offering generally, as a gift presented for the Lord. 1 Samuel 2:18‘But Samuel ministered before YHWH, being a child, girded with a linen ephod.’ “Samuel ministered before YHWH.” We are not told what Samuel’s duties consisted of, but he clearly carried them out faithfully. And there in the Tabernacle he diligently served YHWH, and wore a linen ephod, which distinguished him as a ‘holy’ child, a child set apart wholly to the worship of YHWH. An ephod was a garment which went over the head and covered the shoulders and was secured round the waist. It was mainly distinctive of the priests (1 Samuel 2:28; 1 Samuel 22:18), although it could be worn by others when engaged in sacred activities (2 Samuel 6:14). There was a special ephod for ‘the Priest’ (the High Priest) or whoever was standing in for him (Exodus 28:6 ff). Thus the ephod demonstrated that Samuel was continually engaged in sacred duties. There is no suggestion, however, that he offered sacrifices at this stage. BI, But Samuel ministered before the Lord. Early piety I. the mother’s devotion. II. Samuel’s early piety. 1. It arose first from a mother’s piety. It was the mother’s act by means of which all 132
- 133. his early impressionswere of sacred things. It has been said that the secret of greatness is ordinarily to be traced to mothers. The influence of the mother is the most powerful upon the young life—it springs from purest love. We owe Augustine to Monica’s prayers, and in modern times there are those who have bold us what was the source of their success—a mother’s training. 2. But influence has its limits. Samuel, as a child, “ministered before the Lord.” He accepted his vocation, and rose to its demands. 3. Samuel ministered to God as a Levite. Some have thought he was a priest, because he offered sacrifices; but he offered sacrifice by “a special commission” from God, because of the degeneracy of the priesthood. In the same way, sacrifices were offered in different places, instead of one, not because the Levitical laws were unknown, but because it was not possible to keep to one spot until the ark was recovered and settled in its final resting place. God is not bound by His own laws or ordinary modes of acting, whether in the sphere of nature or of grace, and sometimes directly asserts His supremacy. 4. That Samuel was a Levite is seen from the fact that his father was a Levite (1Ch_ 6:27). He is described as an Ephrathite, because his family resided in Ephraim. Further, he was not of the sons of Aaron. And the “linen ephod,” according to some writers, was a Levitical vestment. This, however, seems doubtful. Both the ephod and the “little coat,” which was a long outer garment, were not exclusively sacerdotal vestments, so that it cannot be gathered from the mention of them that Samuel had an “irregular priesthood.” In the Psalms he is not included amongst priests: “Moses and Aaron among His priests;” but “Samuel among them that call upon His Name” (Psa_99:6). 5. Samuel, besides being a Levite and a Nazarite, was the first of a new order, “the goodly fellowship of the Prophets.” St. Peter puts him first (Act_3:20): “all the prophets from Samuel.” The stream of communication between God and man had almost dried up (1Sa_3:1). III. Lessons. 1. Parents may learn from Hannah’s devotion the blessedness of offering their children to God, and that in no grudging spirit, but as realizing with Hannah the nobleness of a life consecrated to God, and the blessings which were brought thereby to His people. 2. Children should learn from Samuel never to put off the service of God to later life, when it is more difficult and less enthusiastic. Samuel, when he was gray-headed, had the happiest reflection when he looked back upon early faithfulness (1Sa_ 12:1-25.) 3. Repentance after a youth misspent is a means of return to God, and may be the basis of future holiness; but preserved innocence has a beauty, and a greatness, and a buoyancy, and a likeness to Christ, the “Holy Child,” which the penitent prodigal knows not. (Canon Hutchings, M. A.) The ministering child One of our poets has beautifully remarked that “the child is father to the man;” and the 133
- 134. remark is astrue as it is beautiful. Just as youth is characterized, so will manhood be distinguished. Youth is the period of impressions, when the heart is tender, and the features begin to be developed. Like the tree which grows as it was influenced when a sapling, man is moulded by the bias of his childhood. “The boyhood of great men” illustrates this in a striking degree. In the days of his romping boyhood, it is said Cromwell had so little respect for dignity that he struck prince Charles while they were playing together at Hitchinbrook; at which hospitable mansion rested the royal caravan which conveyed James to the throne of England. And in after years no sanctity of royalty could restrain the triumphant Oliver from bringing Charles to the scaffold. When Nelson in his eager birds’ nesting had placed himself in a position of danger, near a river which he could not cross, and had caused much alarm to his relatives, his reply to an angry grandmamma, who expressed her wonder that fear had not driven him home, was, “Fear, grandmamma! I never saw fear! who is he?” And this is the most expressive character of that great Admiral, whose career was so brilliant, and whose death was so brave. Mozart, when a child of seven years, composed a concerto for the harpsichord, and died when only thirty-five, with immortality on his memory and his music. Though piety is not a birthright, and has been frequently ingrafted on a wild career, yet none will wonder that Samuel’s childhood, so beautiful in piety and promise, should result in a godly manhood, a blessing his parents, his country, and his Church. Let us, then, contemplate Samuel in this interesting period of his history, and mark how the good seed took root and evinced its verdure, and how parental godliness sought to bless and comfort a young man from home. It would be no small trial to Elkanah and Hannah to leave their cherished son in the tabernacle of Shiloh, where abandoned priests were ministering. God cared for Samuel, and kept him from the evil of his times. He was “one of the cares of Providence,” and never wanted any good thing. Resident in the sanctuary, he was to be trained for the ministry; and though a child, he was clad with a linen ephod. In the Levitical dispensation the ephod, which the priest wore, attested the same great truth. Whenever he drew near to consult the Lord and to offer sacrifice, he put on the linen ephod (1Sa_14:3; 1Sa_23:9.) Then he could plead on behalf of men, and act as mediator. It sanctified his person, and made him a type of Him who was to come. In the New Testament Church there is an ephod for all to wear who would approach God. It is the spotless robe of the Redeemer’s righteousness. This is the symbol of acceptance, and guarantees admission at all times to the presence chamber of Jehovah. Samuel was young in years. He could not know much of divine things; but he was capable of experiencing the divine blessing. He was more than a dedicated child He was born from above. An illustrious ancestry did not so much ennoble him as did this heavenly birth. It exalted him to a place in that family whose names are written in heaven. Samuel ministered before the Lord. He was occupied in the tabernacle service. Levites did not usually begin their service until they were twenty-five years of age, but Samuel was taken into active office in his very childhood. The son of his adoption seemed better than Eli’s sons by blood. It revived the hearts of all the godly throughout the land, when Samuel in his youthful beauty was seen in the holy place. It is ever interesting to see youth in the service of Christ. “Perhaps,” says Matthew Henry, “he attended immediately on Eli’s person—was ready to him to fetch and bring as he had occasion; and that is called ministering to the Lord . . . He could light a candle, or hold a dish, or run on an errand, or shut a door; and because he did this with a pious disposition of mind, it is called ministering to the Lord, and great notice is taken of it.” We have not now a tabernacle such as was in Shiloh, nor have we such services as Samuel was called upon to render; but in the Church of God there is a sphere wide enough for the most active energy, 134
- 135. diversified enough formany workers, and simple enough for the youngest to undertake. The hearts of parents often beat anxiously for their absent children. Hannah’s prayers would also often follow him, and her hands were busily occupied with providing for his wants. As a prudent wife, “she sought wool and flax, and wrought willingly with her hands,” and made a coat for her boy to wear at Shiloh. Her heart was with him in the tabernacle; and as she wrought with her distaff, or wove her web, or plied needle and thread, she thought of her absent son. You may have absent children who, amidst the business and sin of great cities, are much exposed. Have a care over them. Remember their case every day at your family altar. Write often to them words of truth and soberness. It is specially useful to see them often. Some who have been early from home and separated from friends may read these pages. You had in the beginning of youth days to rough “life’s tempestuous sea.” Think often of home. There is a charm in that little word. Think of a parent’s yearning heart on behalf of the absent. Letters are the electric wires of families; “they bear in their bosoms some message of love,” and make the heart thrill. Hannah was an industrious wife and mother. Among the many virtues of female character this is not the least. In the portrait of a virtuous woman sketched by King Lemuel in the last chapter of the Book of Proverbs, out of twenty-two verses descriptive of female excellence, eleven refer to industry; and of these eleven scarcely one points to labour that is net useful. Many fritter their time away in labours that bring no profit, but she whom the Bible delights to honour is industrious in well-doing. It is to be remembered, however, that the duties of a house and family have proved snares to many who, like Martha, have been cumbered with such serving, and distracted with many cares. Where there are habits of order and of prayer, these evils may be avoided, and while “not slothful in business,” the Christian matron may be also “fervent in spirit, serving the Lord.” Hannah was not so occupied with domestic duties as to be absent from the sanctuary and the feast of the passoverse The loan which Elkanah and Hannah gave to the Lord when they left Samuel at Shiloh was not lost. It had its blessed recompense. God is never in debt to His people, and he has graciously promised a recompense. It may not be always realized in this life, but it shall be at the resurrection of the just. What an encouragement to well-doing, and to sacrifice for the Lord’s cause! (R. Steel.) Childhood and service A sweet picture! Here is a child who came into the world, as it were, through the very gate of prayer. So to speak, he was the direct creature of intercession. His mother went immediately to God’s house for him; actually went straight up to God, and asked Him for the child. Here, then, is a child-prophet, and that fact is pregnant with the deepest signification. That a child should have any place in God’s temple, and especially that a child should hold office in that temple, is a circumstance which should arrest our attention. 1. God’s interest in human life begins at the earliest possible period. When does God’s interest in human life begin? When does Christ’s heart begin to yearn in pity over all human creatures? Is it when they are five years old, or ten; does He shut up His love until they are twenty-one? The question may appear quaint, but I press it. When does Christ’s interest in human life begin? I contend that His interest relates to life, not to age; to birth, not to birthdays. As soon as a child is borne that great redeeming heart yearns with pitying love. I do then encourage all parents to bring 135
- 136. their children earlyto the temple; to lend them unto the Lord before they can give themselves away; and what know we, but that the mother’s loan may be confirmed by the man’s own gift! 2. “Moreover his mother made him a Little coat, and brought it to him from year to year, when she came up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice.” Great rivers bays often Little sources. The river of a whole year’s joy came out of making this little coat. It seems a very simple circumstance to put down in the world’s great volume that Hannah made Samuel a little coat every year! Mark, then, how age must work for childhood, strength must toil lovingly and helpfully for weakness. The resources of life must be expended on the children of need. This is the way to obtain happiness; namely, by making those mound us happy. He who sends joy down to the roots of society, shall find that joy reproducing itself in the solaces and comforts of his own life. The making of this little coat caused the hours to fly speedily; and the gift of it, at the appointed time, enriched the giver more then it enriched the wearer. So it is that giving is getting, and that scattering may, be the truest consolidation of wealth. 3. Now let us advance a step, and see how this child proceeds. In the ensuing chapter he is still called a child—a ministering child. Experience has taught me to have more faith in children than in adults! Children are more like God than men and women are. Children are unsophisticated, straightforward, simple, trustful, joyous, loving; adults are often crooked, crafty, double-minded, selfish, moody, rancorous, and vile. I sympathise with the poet when he wishes that he could go back to God through his “yesterdays.” Alas, there is no way to heaven except through our tomorrows; and as we get older by travelling through these tomorrows, we often lose the simplicity and beauty of childhood, and engross ourselves with engagements which tend rather to degrade and unfit us for the high society of heaven. 4. According to the opening verse of the third chapter, “the word of the Lord was precious in those days; there was no open vision.” That which is rare is precious. The word of the Lord did not shine forth in noon-day glory; it was like a glimmer on the horizon. God’s kingdom on the earth begins with small demonstrations. It is small as a mustard seed. Oftentimes in the Gospel narrative it is likened to all minutest things. In our day there is open vision. The whole heaven is blazing with light. But who cares today, when England is flooded with the celestial glory? We, as a nation, being exalted to heaven with multitudinous privileges, are not unlikely to be cast down into hell, through our perversion and personal neglect. It is a beautiful picture this of Eli and Samuel engaged in temple service. Here we have extreme age and extreme youth united in the same labour. It is as if sunrise mud sunset had found a meeting point; here is all the brightness of the one and all the gorgeous colouring and solemn pomp of the other. What is the lesson? The lesson I see is that God has work for all classes. I. Looking at this scene, we have, first of all, almighty God calling man at an unlikely time. The time is night: deep sleep has fallen upon man, and in the time of rest and unconsciousness the voice from heaven sounds. Why not in the temple, and why not in open day? This is like God, the darkness and the light are both alike unto Him. II. In the next place we have almighty God calling an unlikely person. We should have thought that it would have been more probable that God would have called the aged prophet rather than the ministering child. But the first shall be last and the last first. (J. Parker, D. D.) 136
- 137. A child’s ministry Samuelwas very, very young; but Samuel’s little efforts to minister to the Lord were precious; and are here recorded by God Himself. Is it only the grown up, strong children in a family, who are noticed, and approved of, by their parents? Do not your father and mother love the little infant that can but just creep about? and if it does but put forth its little arm, to show its affection for them, do they not notice it, and look very pleased? Oh, yes, you know they do; nay, you sometimes imagine that they think more of the little ones than of you great ones, and take more notice of any feeble effort that the youngest makes, than of all your great doings; and I could almost think that if our heavenly Father has Peculiar favourites in his family, it is his little infants, whom he has taught to stretch out the desires of their souls after him. It is his Samuel and his Timothy, who from childhood have known and loved the Scriptures and the God of the sacred Scriptures. But, perhaps you think, Samuel could not help being devoted to the Lord and serving him, when he was left so young at the temple, with good old Eli and good people around him. My dear child, if you were to get a bramble, and plant it in some very good ground, and put good trees all round it, would you expect your bramble to become a good tree likewise? You smile at the very idea. But does not God tell you in his word, that our hearts are like thorns and brambles, and that no power, short of his, can make a myrtle or a rose grow up instead of the thorn? Nay, does not daily experience teach us the same lesson? While we look at the holy child Samuel with delight and love, our hearts ache while looking at the two wicked sons of Eli; abusing the office of priest, and causing the way of truth to be evil spoken of. You are none of you fond of a thorn or thistle, I dare say; if they catch you when you are walking or running, they will prick or scratch you— and you get no fruit from them: but when they get in among your favourite fruit trees or flowers, and choke them up, and hinder their growth, they make you doubly angry with them. Now this was the state of things with the wicked sons of Eli: they were not only like worthless thorns, but, by growing up among the people of the Lord, and ministering in holy things, they stopped the growth of the faithful, and even caused the Lord’s people to transgress. We gladly turn awhile from so awful a subject to look at the dear child Samuel. “Samuel ministered before the Lord, being a child, girded with a linen ephod. Moreover, his mother made him a little coat, and brought it to him from year to year, when she came up with her husband So offer the yearly sacrifice.” We have here the tender affection of the mother pointed out, with the blessed firmness of the Christian. While she brings him his little coat of her own making, as a token of her love, she expresses no desire to take back the loan which she had lent unto the Lord—the loan of her only child—it, it cheerfully leaves him time after time, and returns to her home, where she had not a child to receive or to cheer her. But who was ever a loser by lending unto the Lord? look l whatsoever he layeth out in cheerful, humble confidence, it shall be restored a hundredfold into his bosom. (Helen Plumptre.) Moreover his mother made him a little coat. A talk to mothers We have three separate statements of the nature of a little child. The first is that, in some way, it is utterly depraved and lost; not capable of conceiving one good thought, saying 137
- 138. one good word,or doing one good thing. This statement, to my mind, is untrue. It clashes with the loftiest revelation ever made to our race about the child-nature. Jesus said, “Suffer the little children to come auto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.” If the child is utterly depraved, and of such is the kingdom of heaven, wherein does the kingdom of heaven differ from the kingdom of hell? The second theory is one that I have heard from some liberal Christians—that the heart and nature of a little child are like a fresh garden mould in the springtime. Nothing has sprung out of it: but the seeds of vice are already bedded down into it; and we must plant good seeds, and nurse them until there is a strong growth of the better promise— carefully, all the while, weeding out whatever is bad as it comes to the surface. At the first glance this seems to be about the truth. Still, I fear it has not come so much out of that true philosophy which is founded on a close observation of our nature, as it has come out of a desire not to differ so very far from those who denounce us heartily as unchristian. Such an idea of the child-nature is, after all, a moderate theory of infant depravity; and as such I reject it, so far as it gives any preoccupation and predominance to sin, and accept the third theory, as the true and pure gospel about the child-nature; namely, that the kingdom of heaven, in a child, is like unto a man that sowed good seed in his field; but afterward, while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went away; and when the blade sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. The good seed is sown first. The good is primary, and purely good; the bad is secondary, and not totally bad. And every little child ministers before the Lord, and every mother makes his garments from year to year. I propose to speak briefly on the nature and possibilities of this mother influence, what it is, and what it may be. 1. And note, first of all, that while in afterlife the father may come to an equal or even stronger influence over the child—in the plastic morning of life, when the infant soul puts on its first robes of joy and love and faith and wonder, the hand of the mother alone is permitted to give them their rich quality and texture. 2. Then, secondly, while it is eminently true that the little child has such rich endowment, and you have such a wonderful preeminence, it is also true that the possibilities open out two ways—you may greatly blight his life, or you may greatly bless it. The garments that mothers fit on to the spirits of little children, like the garments that they fit to the outward form, only more certainly, have a great deal to do with that child’s whole future life. Let me give you instances that are kept in the archives of the world. What would you judge to be the foremost thing in Washington? The obvious answer is, his perfect, spotless, radiant integrity. Now it is an instructive fact for mothers that of the few books that have come down to us with which the mother of Washington surrounded her boy in early life, the one most worn and well used is a book on morals, by that eminent pattern of the old English integrity, Sir Matthew Hale; and the place where that book opens easiest, where it is most dog eared and frail, is at a chapter on the great account which we must all give of the deeds done in the body. Before that boy went out of his home his mother took care to stamp the image and superscription of integrity deeply on his soul. What, after his great genius, would you mention as the most notable thing in William Ellery Channing? We answer at once, his constant loyalty to a broad, free, fearless examination of every question that could present itself to him; a frank confession of what he believed to be true about it, no matter what was said against it; and an active endeavour to make that truth a part of his life. Channing testified, with a proud affection, of his mother: “She had the firmness to examine the truth, to speak it, and 138
- 139. to act uponit, beyond all women I ever knew.” And so it was that, when her frail boy must go out into the battle, she had armed him with the breastplate of righteousness and the helmet of salvation. And so one might go reciting instances almost endlessly, if it were needful, to show how true it is that the mother makes the man. What, then, positively, shall the mother do who will do her best? I will answer this question first by noting what she shall not do. And I cannot say one thing before this—that the spiritual garment she fashions for her little ones from year to year shall not be black. All mothers know how long before their children can utter a word they can read gladness or gloom in the mother’s face. Let her smile, and the child will laugh; let her look sad, and it will weep. Now, some mothers, if they have had great troubles or are much tried in their daily life, get into a habit of sadness that is like a second nature. They talk with unction of who is dead, and how young they were, and how many are sick, and what grief is abroad altogether on the earth. And the child listens to all that is said. The mother may think he does not care; but, if my own earliest memories are at all true to the common childhood, he does care. These things chill him through and through. Then I would ask that the garment of spiritual influence, which you are ever fashioning, shall not be of the nature of a straight jacket. Has your boy a heavy foot, a loud voice, a great appetite, a defiant way, and a burly presence altogether? Then thank God for it, more than if your husband had a farm where corn grows twelve feet high; your child has in him the making of a great and good man. The only fear is that you will fail to meet the demand of this strong, grand nature and try to break where you ought to build. The question for you to solve, mother, is not how to subdue him, but how to direct him. Dr. Kane was a wonder of boisterous energy in childhood, climbing trees and roofs, projecting himself against all obstacles, until he got the name of being the worst boy in all Branch town; but time revealed the divinity of this rough life, when he bearded the ice king in his own domain, and made himself a name in Arctic exploration second to none. I shall not speak in any material sense; but, when the child begins to think, he at once begins to question. He is set here in a great universe of wonder and mystery, and he wants to know its meaning and the meaning of himself. But some mothers, when their children come to them with their questions in all good faith, either treat the question with levity, or get afraid, and reprove the little thing for asking. Mothers, this is all wrong. This is one of your rarest opportunities to clothe the spirit of your child in the fresh garments that will make him all beautiful, as he stands before the Lord. Then, as this primitive woman would be evermore careful to meet the enlarged form of her child, as she went to see him stand before the Lord from year to year, will you be careful to meet the enlarged spirit of your child? I do fear for the mother who will not note how her child demands and needs ever new and larger confidences. (R. Collyer.) A coat for Samuel 1. Hannah stands before you, then, today, in the first place, as an industrious mother. There was no need for her to work. Elkanah, her husband, was far from poor. She is industrious from principle as well as from pleasure. God would not have a mother become a drudge or a slave; He would have her employ all the helps possible in this day in the rearing of her children. But Hannah ought never to be ashamed to be found making a coat for Samuel. Most mothers need no counsel in this direction. The wrinkles on their brow, the pallor on their cheek, attest that they are faithful in their maternal duties. Indolent and unfaithful mothers will make 139
- 140. indolent and unfaithfulchildren. You cannot expect neatness and order in any house where the daughters see nothing but slatterness and upside-downativeness in their parents. The mothers of Samuel Johnson, and of Alfred the Great, and of Isaac Newton, end of Saint Augustine, and of Richard Cecil, and of President Edwards, for the most part were industrious, hardworking mothers. 2. Again: Hannah stands before you today as an intelligent mother. From the way in which she talked in this chapter, and from the way she managed this boy, you know she was intelligent. There are no persons in a community who need to be so wise and well-informed as mothers. O, this work of culturing children for this world and the next. This child is timid, and it must be roused up and pushed out into activity. 3. Again: Hannah stands before you today as a Christian mother. 4. Again, and lastly: Hannah stands before you today the rewarded mother. For all the coats she made for Samuel; for all the prayers she offered for him; for the discipline she exerted over him, she got abundant compensation in the piety, and the usefulness, and the popularity of her son Samuel; and that is true in all ages. Every mother gets full pay for all the prayers and tears in behalf of her children. (T. De Witt Talmage.) The little coat I. We have here—the sacred toil of a mother. 1. House labour consecrated by love and worship. Serve God, then, in toiling for your children. Offer to the Lord the sacrifice of your weariness for them and you will find that God will not be “unrighteous to forget your work of faith and labour of love” in your ministering to those whom you have tried to make His saints. 2. We have here not only labour blessed by love and worship, but also household love consecrated by religion. “Love is of God;” and that home affection is not worthy the name, of which the beginning, continuance, and end are not in God. 3. And now in a return of blessing we have religion beautified by loving labour. Religion and common labour are not only not incongruous, they give to one another added dignity, blessedness, and comeliness. II. The dutiful, pious memorial of a son, I have already presumed what we have fair warrant for:—that we have this story either by Samuel’s own writing in this book, or through his communication of the story to others. Either positron implies on Samuel’s part a tender remembrance that must not be lightly passed by. Though you can think only of a lowly home and homely people as your life’s guides; yet, if like Samuel you can remember common work done lovingly for you, it is worth your remembering and honouring. The same truth is to be held by fathers and mothers. No man or woman can leave to children a more honourable memory than that of hard work, of faith, and diligent labour of love in or for the home, in and for the Lord. (G. B. Ryley.) 140
- 141. 19 Each yearhis mother made him a little robe and took it to him when she went up with her husband to offer the annual sacrifice. BARNES, "A little coat - The robe of the ephod was also one of the garments worn by the High Priest (see Exo_28:31 note). This pointed mention of the ephod and the robe as worn by the youthful Samuel, seems to point to an extraordinary and irregular priesthood to which he was called by God in an age when the provisions of the Levitical law were not yet in full operation, and in which there was no impropriety in the eyes of his contemporaries, seeing that nonconformity to the whole Law was the rule rather than the exception throughout the days of the Judges. CLARKE, "Made him a little coat - קטן מעיל meil katon, a little cloak, or surtout, an upper garment: probably intended to keep him from the cold, and to save his other clothes from being abused in his meaner services. It is probable that she furnished him with a new one each year, when she came up to one of the annual sacrifices. GILL, "Moreover, his mother made him a little coat,.... Suitable to his stature; this was an outer coat to wear over others, and this also was such an one as the priests wore; it is the same word that is used for the priest's robe, Exo_28:4, and this, it is very likely, was altogether of her own spinning, and weaving, and making up; which were works women did in those times: and this Hannah did partly out of her great love to her son Samuel, and partly to lessen the expense that Eli, or the congregation, were at in the maintenance of him; and the Talmudists (q) observe, that a priest might wear a garment, and minister in it, if his mother made it; and they give instances of priests, Ishmael and Eleazar, for whom their mothers made garments: and brought it to him from year to year; for it seems this was only to be worn at festivals, and not on common days; and therefore she did not leave it with him, but took it home with her, and brought it again at the returning festival: when she came up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice: whether at 141
- 142. the passover, orat Pentecost, or at the feast of tabernacles; and it is very probable she came with her husband at them all, yearly; for though she was not by the law obliged thereunto, yet her religious zeal and devotion, and her great desire to see her son as often as she could, induced her to come. HENRY, "In these verses we have the good character and posture of Elkanah's family, and the bad character and posture of Eli's family. The account of these two is observably interwoven throughout this whole paragraph, as if the historian intended to set the one over against the other, that they might set off one another. The devotion and good order of Elkanah's family aggravated the iniquity of Eli's house; while the wickedness of Eli's sons made Samuel's early piety appear the more bright and illustrious. I. Let us see how well things went in Elkanah's family and how much better than formerly. 1. Eli dismissed them from the house of the Lord, when they had entered their little son there, with a blessing, 1Sa_2:20. He blessed as one having authority: The Lord give thee more children of this woman, for the loan that is lent to the Lord. If Hannah had then had many children, it would not have been such a generous piece of piety to part with one out of many for the service of the tabernacle; but when she had but one, an only one whom she loved, her Isaac, to present him to the Lord was such an act of heroic piety as should by no means lose its reward. As when Abraham had offered Isaac he received the promise of a numerous issue (Gen_22:16, Gen_22:17), so did Hannah, when she had presented Samuel unto the Lord a living sacrifice. Note, What is lent to the Lord will certainly be repaid with interest, to our unspeakable advantage, and oftentimes in kind. Hannah resigns one child to God, and is recompensed with five; for Eli's blessing took effect (1Sa_2:21): She bore three sons and two daughters. There is nothing lost by lending to God or losing for him; it shall be repaid a hundred-fold, Mat_19:29. 2. They returned to their own habitation. This is twice mentioned, 1Sa_2:11, and again 1Sa_2:20. It was very pleasant to attend at God's house, to bless him, and to be blessed of him. But they have a family at home that must be looked after, and thither they return, cheerfully leaving the dear little one behind them, knowing they left him in a good place; and it does not appear that he cried after them, but was as willing to stay as they were to leave him, so soon did he put away childish things and behave like a man. 3. They kept up their constant attendance at the house of God with their yearly sacrifice, 1Sa_2:19. They did not think that their son's ministering there would excuse them, or that that offering must serve instead of other offerings; but, having found the benefit of drawing near to God, they would omit no appointed season for it, and now they had one loadstone more in Shiloh to draw them thither. We may suppose they went thither to see their child oftener than once a year, for it was not ten miles from Ramah; but their annual visit is taken notice of because then they brought their yearly sacrifice, and then Hannah fitted up her son (and some think oftener than once a year) with a new suit of clothes, a little coat (1Sa_2:19) and every thing belonging to it. She undertook to find him with clothes during his apprenticeship at the tabernacle, and took care he should be well provided, that he might appear the more decent and sightly in his ministration, and to encourage him in his towardly beginnings. Parents must take care that their children want nothing that is fit for them, whether they are with them or from them; but those that are dutiful and hopeful, and minister to the Lord, must be thought worthy of double care and kindness. 4. The child Samuel did very well. Four separate times he is 142
- 143. mentioned in theseverses, and two things we are told of: - (1.) The service he did to the Lord. He did well indeed, for he ministered to the Lord (1Sa_2:11, 1Sa_2:18) according as his capacity was. He learned his catechism and was constant to his devotions, soon learned to read, and took a pleasure in the book of the law, and thus he ministered to the Lord. He ministered before Eli, that is, under his inspection, and as he ordered him, not before Eli's sons; all parties were agreed that they were unfit to be his tutors. Perhaps he attended immediately on Eli's person, was ready to him to fetch and bring as he had occasion, and that is called ministering to the Lord. Some little services perhaps he was employed in about the altar, though much under the age appointed by the law for the Levites' ministration. He could light a candle, or hold a dish, or run on an errand, or shut a door; and, because he did this with a pious disposition of mind it is called ministering to the Lord, and great notice is taken of it. After awhile he did his work so well that Eli appointed that he should minister with a linen ephod as the priests did (though he was no priest), because he saw that God was with him. Note, Little children must learn betimes to minister to the Lord. Parents must train them up to it, and God will accept them. Particularly let them learn to pay respect to their teachers, as Samuel to Eli. None can begin too soon to be religious. See Psa_8:2, and Mat_21:15, Mat_21:16. (2.) The blessing he received from the Lord: He grew before the Lord, as a tender plant (1Sa_ 2:21), grew on (1Sa_2:26) in strength and stature, and especially in wisdom and understanding and fitness for business. Note, Those young people that serve God as well as they can will obtain grace to improve, that they may serve him better. Those that are planted in God's house shall flourish, Psa_92:13. He was in favour with the Lord and with man. Note, It is a great encouragement to children to be tractable, and virtuous, and good betimes, that if they be both God and man will love them. Such children are the darlings both of heaven and earth. What is here said of Samuel is said of our blessed Saviour, that great example, Luk_2:52. JAMISON, "his mother made him a little coat, and brought it to him from year to year — Aware that he could not yet render any useful service to the tabernacle, she undertook the expense of supplying him with wearing apparel. All weaving stuffs, manufacture of cloth, and making of suits were anciently the employment of women. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:19. His mother made him a little coat — The ephod, being used only in the service of God, was no doubt provided at the public expense. But for his ordinary wearing apparel Hannah took care to provide, that she might still express her piety in contributing to his maintenance at the house of God. ELLICOTT, " (19) A little coat.—The “little coat”—Hebrew, m’il—was, no doubt, closely resembling in shape the m’il, or robe worn apparently by the high priest, only the little m’il of Samuel was without the costly symbolical ornaments attached to the high priestly robe. This strange, unusual dress was, no doubt, arranged for the boy by his protector 143
- 144. and guardian, Eli,who looked on the child as destined for some great work in connection with the life of the chosen people. Not improbably the old man, too, well aware of the character of his own sons, hoped to train up the favoured child—whose connection with himself and the sanctuary had begun in so remarkable a manner— as his successor in the chief sacred and civil office in Israel. PETT, "1 Samuel 2:19 ‘Moreover his mother used to make him a little robe, and used to bring it to him from year to year (literally ‘from days to days’), when she came up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice (the sacrifice of days’).’ The ‘little robe’ was similar to the garment that ‘the Priest’ wore under the ephod. A new one was brought by his mother every time that she attended the regular feasts, which she did regularly in order to offer a sacrifice through her husband. She never forgot her son, and she never neglected to worship YHWH. PULPIT. "His mother made him a little coat. The coat, meil, was worn by priests (Le 1 Samuel 8:7), by kings and their sons (1 Samuel 18:4), by prophets (ibid. 1 Samuel 28:14), and even by women (2 Samuel 13:18). It was an under garment of wool, woven throughout without seam, with holes for the head and arms, and reaching nearly to the ground: when used by women it had sleeves (ibid.). Under it they had a tunic or shirt fitting so closely that a man simply so clad was considered naked (1 Samuel 19:24), and over it priests and Levites wore the ephod, and so also David on the occasion mentioned above (1 Chronicles 15:27). The meil seems, moreover, to have often been a handsome dress, as that of the priests was of purple blue, with embroidery of pomegranates in three colours, and golden bells (Exodus 28:31-34); and when made of delicate materials for the use of the rich, it and the tunic are the soft luxurious clothing spoken of in Matthew 11:8. As the meal was the ordinary dress of all classes of people, it was made for Samuel at home, and can have no special meaning; but the ephod shows that he was brought up in the daffy practice of holy duties. This annual present, however, of clothing made by the mother's hands proves that the dedication of her son to God was not allowed to interfere with home affections, and both parents and child must have looked forward with joy to happy meetings at each recurrence of the family visit to the sanctuary. K&D, "1Sa_2:19 144
- 145. The small ילִע ְמ also (Angl. “coat”), which Samuel's mother made and brought him every year, when she came with her husband to Shiloh to the yearly sacrifice, was probably a coat resembling the meןl of the high priest (Exo_28:31.), but was made of course of some simpler material, and without the symbolical ornaments attached to the lower hem, by which that official dress was distinguished. 20 Eli would bless Elkanah and his wife, saying, “May the Lord give you children by this woman to take the place of the one she prayed for and gave to[c] the Lord.” Then they would go home. CLARKE, "Eli blessed Elkanah - The natural place of this verse seems to be before the 11th; after which the 21st should come in; after the 21st, perhaps the 26th should come in. The subjects in this chapter seem very much entangled and confused by the wrong position of the verses. GILL, "And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife,.... Not only the first time they brought Samuel to him, and left him with him; but every year they came to worship, as the Jewish commentators mostly interpret it: and said, the Lord give thee seed of this woman; children by her, year after year: for the loan which is lent to the Lord; instead of Samuel, who was asked of the Lord and given to him again; and as they were thereby in some measure deprived of him, and could not always enjoy him, and be delighted with him, Eli prayed for them, and gave them his benediction as a priest, that they might be favoured with other children, who might be of delight and service to them when in old age: and they went unto their own home; at Ramah, as in 1Sa_2:11 or to his place (r), Elkanah's; hence Kimchi concludes that Hannah was of another city originally; but the Targum is,"to their place;''and indeed, what was now the place or home of the one, was of the other. 145
- 146. JAMISON, "Eli blessedElkanah and his wife — This blessing, like that which he had formerly pronounced, had a prophetic virtue; which, before long, appeared in the increase of Hannah’s family (1Sa_2:21), and the growing qualifications of Samuel for the service of the sanctuary. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:20-21. Eli blessed Elkanah, &c. — This benediction given in his character of high-priest, and that by a divine suggestion, was followed by the desired effect, and verified what Hannah had uttered in her prophetical song. The Lord visited Hannah — None are losers by what they dedicate to the Lord, or employ in such a manner as is pleasing in his sight. The child Samuel grew — Not only in age and stature, but especially in wisdom and goodness. Before the Lord — Not only before men, who might easily be deceived, but in the presence and judgment of the all-seeing God. This will generally be the case with those children whose parents dedicate them early to the Lord, and endeavour to instil into their minds the true and genuine principles of piety and virtue. ELLICOTT, "(20, 21) And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife. . . . And the Lord visited Hannah.—The blessing of Eli, a blessing which soon bore its fruit in the house of the pious couple,—his training of Samuel, and unswerving kindness to the boy (see following chapter),—his sorrow at his priestly sons’ wickedness,—his passionate love for his country, all indicate that the influence of the weak but loving high priest was ever exerted to keep the faith of the people pure, and the life of Israel white before the Lord. There were evidently two parties at Shiloh, the head- quarters of the national religion: the reckless, unbelieving section, headed by Hophni and Phinehas; and the God-fearing, law-loving partisans of the old Divine law, under the influence of the weak, but religious, Eli. These latter kept the lamp of the loved faith burning—though but dimly—among the covenant people until the days when the strong hand of Samuel took the helm of government in Israel. HAWKER, "(20) And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife, and said, The LORD give thee seed of this woman for the loan which is lent to the LORD. And they went unto their own home. (21) And the LORD visited Hannah, so that she conceived, and bare three sons and two daughters. And the child Samuel grew before the LORD. How much those gain, who give unto the Lord! Solomon's observation is well founded; He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the Lord: and look what he hath given, he will pay him again. Proverbs 19:17. 146
- 147. LANGE, "1 Samuel2:20. Eli’s blessing[FN36] refers to two things: to the act of consecrating the son to the service of the Lord, and to the compensation which Eli wished the Lord to make for the son who was offered to the Lord. Keil explains the ל ַא ָשׁ (asked [Eng. A. V. “lent”]) as 3 pers. singular instead of 2 pers. singular or plural “from the indefinite form of speech (comp. Ewald, § 249 b with § 319 a) which the narrator chose because, though it was Hannah who in Eli’s presence had obtained Samuel from the Lord by prayer, yet Eli might assume that the father, Elkanah, had shared the wish of his pious wife.” But the circumstance which alone permits such change of person, or rather of gender, in the subject, namely, the indefiniteness of the subject as indicated by the context, does not exist here, since such indefiniteness is undoubtedly excluded by 1 Samuel 1:27-28. Bצttcher properly takes the verb form with altered points as 3 sing. fem. “she asked.”[FN37]—The sing. pronoun in “his place” (for which we should expect “their place”) does not require the change of “they went” into “the man went,” as Bצttcher and Thenius prefer, following the Sept. ךבὶ ἀנῆכטום ὁ ἄ;םטסשנןע the singular suffix (after the plural verb) is explained “by the fact that the place of residence is determined by the husband or owner of the house.” PETT, "1 Samuel 2:20 ‘And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife, and said, “YHWH give you seed of this woman for the petition which was asked of YHWH.” And they went to their own home. It would seem that Eli watched out for Samuel’s parents and gave them his personal attention. No doubt Samuel had won his heart, and he was undoubtedly thankful to have him ministering in the Sanctuary. Thus when he offered sacrifice on their behalf he blessed Elkanah and his wife, and prayed that God would continue to answer her petition by giving her more children. And with that blessing they went to their own home. PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:20, 1 Samuel 2:21 The Lord give thee seed, etc. The manner in which Eli blesses Elkanah shows that this surrender of a very young child to religious service was not looked upon as imposing a burden upon the sanctuary, but as the bestowal of a valued gift. Loan and lent by no means give the whole sense, which is in fact beyond the power of our language to express; for the Hebrew is remarkable for its manner of saying a great 147
- 148. deal in afew words, by using them indefinitely. Besides the sense, then, of lending the child to God, the Hebrews also conveys the idea of Samuel having been obtained by prayer, but by prayer for Jehovah. Hannah had not asked simply for a son, but for a son whom she might dedicate to God. And now Eli prays that Jehovah will give her children to be her own (see on 1 Samuel 1:28). K&D, "1Sa_2:20 The priestly clothing of the youthful Samuel was in harmony with the spiritual relation in which he stood to the high priest and to Jehovah. Eli blessed his parents for having given up the boy to the Lord, and expressed this wish to the father: “The Lord lend thee seed of this woman in the place of the one asked for (הָל ֵא ְשּׁ ַ,)ה whom they (one) asked for from the Lord.” The striking use of the third pers. masc. ל ַאָשׁ instead of the second singular or plural may be accounted for on the supposition that it is an indefinite form of speech, which the writer chose because, although it was Hannah who prayed to the Lord for Samuel in the sight of Eli, yet Eli might assume that the father, Elkanah, had shared the wishes of his pious wife. The apparent harshness disappears at once if we substitute the passive; whereas in Hebrew active constructions were always preferred to passive, wherever it was possible to employ them (Ewald, §294, b.). The singular suffix attached to מ ק ְמ ִל after the plural כוּ ְל ָה may be explained on the simple ground, that a dwelling-place is determined by the husband, or master of the house. 21 And the Lord was gracious to Hannah; she gave birth to three sons and two daughters. Meanwhile, the boy Samuel grew up in the presence of the Lord. BARNES, "See the marginal references. The words “before the” Lord have special reference to his residence at the tabernacle. 148
- 149. GILL, "And theLord visited Hannah,.... In a way of mercy, approving and confirming the blessing of Eli; or rather granting the blessing he prayed for, by giving her power to conceive, bear, and bring forth children, as the following words explain it: so that she conceived and bare three sons and two daughters; whereby the prophecy of Hannah was fulfilled, 1Sa_2:5, and was no doubt matter of great joy to her, though of these children we nowhere else read, nor even of their names. Josephus (s) says, Elkanah had other sons by Hannah, and three daughters; which agrees not with the text: and the child Samuel grew before the Lord: in age and stature, in grace and goodness, and improved much in the worship and service of God, both in the theory and practice of it; or became great with him, high in his esteem and favour, and was blessed with much of his presence, and with large gifts of his grace. COFFMAN, "HANNAH'S OTHER CHILDREN "And the Lord visited Hannah, and she conceived and bore three sons and two daughters. And the boy Samuel grew in the presence of the Lord." We like the Good News Bible's rendition of the last sentence here, "And Samuel grew up in the service of the Lord." COKE, "1 Samuel 2:21. And the child Samuel grew before the Lord— See 1 Samuel 2:26 and Luke 2:52. As he increased in stature, he increased in wisdom; as parents may be assured will always be the case with those children whom they dedicate early to the Lord, and into whose young minds they carefully instill the divine precepts of religion and truth. LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:21. י ִכּ is neither with Bunsen to be translated: “When now Jehovah visited Hannah she conceived,” nor with Thenius to be complemented by “it came to pass,” nor to be referred to “ and Eli blessed” )1 Samuel 2:20), according to the view of Keil, who inserts a sentence (“Eli’s word was fulfilled,” or “they went home blessed”) in order to retain the causal meaning, but it is to be considered as strengthening the following assertion, with reference to the blessing in 1 Samuel 2:20, and = “indeed,” “in fact,” immo [German, ja, in der that]. See Ewald, § 310 c and § 330 b. Comp. Isaiah 7:9; Isaiah 32:13; Job 8:6.[FN38]— Samuel’s growth “before the Lord” indicates not only that he remained in the Sanctuary, but also that (as the condition of his calling) he grew in fellowship of heart and life with God. 149
- 150. III. 1 Samuel2:22-26. The chief thing in the content of this section is the description of Eli’s conduct towards his sons. But at the same time their worthlessness in relation to the Sanctuary in yet another direction is brought to view. They desecrated the latter not only by the wickedness described in 1 Samuel 2:12-17, but also by their unchaste dealing with the women who served at the Sanctuary. Wherein consisted their service at the door of the Tent of Assembly is not said in Exodus 38:8, where they are mentioned. They formed a body, which was regularly and formally drawn up (אוֹת ְבֹ)צ at the door of the Tent for the performance of its duty, which consisted “probably in the cleansing of the vessels used in offerings.” Since, therefore, they were persons dedicated to the holy God, the wickedness of Eli’s sons, who seduced to the service of fleshly lust these persons destined for the service of the Lord, appears in so much the stronger light.—The wickedness of Eli’s sons in what pertained to the sanctuary attached itself to the whole people, who were to hold themselves a holy people to the Lord through this Sanctuary and through the offering and persons connected with it.—Eli’s conduct in connection with their misdeeds is in the beginning by the words “and Eli was very old” represented as the weakness of old age, not thereby to excuse or justify his slackness, but to explain it. PETT, "1 Samuel 2:21 ‘And YHWH visited Hannah, and she conceived, and bore three sons and two daughters. And the child Samuel grew before YHWH.’ And so partly in response to her prayer, and we are no doubt intended to see partly due to the blessing of the Priest, YHWH again ‘visited’ Hannah, and the result was that she conceived and bore three sons and two daughters. God was giving her a family to fill the gap that Samuel’s departure had unquestionably left. God is no man’s debtor. Meanwhile her first child, Samuel, ‘grew before YHWH’. He grew in His presence both physically and spiritually, for he was separated totally to YHWH. PULPIT, "1Sa_2:21 The particle י ִ,כּ “for” (Jehovah visited), does not mean if, as, or when, nor is it to be regarded as a copyist's error. It is only necessary to 150
- 151. supply the thoughtcontained in the words, “Eli blessed Elkanah,” viz., that Eli's blessing was not an empty fruitless wish; and to understand the passage in some such way as this: Eli's word was fulfilled, or still more simply, they went to their home blessed; for Jehovah visited Hannah, blessed her with “three sons and two daughters; but the boy Samuel grew up with the Lord,” i.e., near to Him (at the sanctuary), and under His protection and blessing. BI, "And the child Samuel grew before the Lord. Growth the best test “Where there is life there will be growth, and if grace be true, it will surely increase. A painted flower keepeth always at the same pitch and stature; the artist may bestow beauty upon it, but he cannot bestow life. A painted child will be as little ten years hence as it is now” What need there is to observe the wide distinction between the picture and the living thing! Of painted likenesses of Christians we have more than enough; nor is the manufacture of portraits a difficult operation: what we want is the real thing and not the artistic imitation. Manton saith well that growth is the test. Many professors must be forever beginning again: they stick where they were, or thought they were. They were anxious about their souls, and are so still. (C. H. Spurgeon.) 22 Now Eli, who was very old, heard about everything his sons were doing to all Israel and how they slept with the women who served at the entrance to the tent of meeting. 151
- 152. BARNES, "Women thatassembled - Or, “Served.” See the marginal reference and note. Probably such service as consisted in doing certain work for the fabric of the tabernacle as women are accustomed to do, spinning, knitting, embroidering, mending, washing, and such like. CLARKE, "They lay with the women that assembled - It is probable that these were persons who had some employment about the tabernacle. See the note on Exo_ 38:8, where the Hebrew text is similar to that in this place. GILL, "Now Eli was very old,.... It is very probable he was now about ninety years of age, since when he died he was ninety eight, 1Sa_4:15 which is observed to show his incapacity for the discharge of his office, and inspection into public affairs; which gave his sons opportunity of acting the wicked part they did without reproof, and with impunity, Eli knowing nothing of it; and accounts in some measure for the gentle reproof he gave them, when he did know of it; for being old, he was not so full of spirit and vigour, and more given to tenderness and mercy; besides, his sons were grown up and married, and he had less authority over them; though he ought to have considered himself not as a father only, but as an high priest and judge of Israel, and performed his office as such; however, it must be a great affliction to him in his old age, and added to the weight of it, that his sons should behave so unworthily as they did: and heard all that his sons had done unto Israel; who, besides what was by the law allowed them, took flesh out of the pot as it was boiling, and demanded raw flesh to roast before the fat was offered to the Lord; and in this manner they used all, without distinction, that came with their sacrifices: and how they lay with the women that assembled at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation; not that they lay with them at the door in a public beastly manner; but the women that came thither they decoyed into their own apartments, or into some of the courts of the tabernacle, and there debauched them: who these women were, and what their business at the tabernacle, is not easy to say; some think they came about business which belonged to women to do there, as to wash and clean the rooms, to sew and spin, and the like; but one would think that these latter works should be done, not at the door of the tabernacle, but in some apartment in it, or rather at their own houses, for the use of it: the Targum is, that they there assembled to pray, which is more likely, and that they were devout women; who came there in large numbers, for the word used has the signification of armies; to perform religious exercises in fasting, and praying, and bringing sacrifices to be offered for them; though they do not seem to be such, as was Anna the prophetess, Luk_2:37 who made their abode in the tabernacle, and served God night and day with fastings and prayers, since these were only at the door of the tabernacle; nor were there in the tabernacle conveniences for such persons, as afterwards in the temple. The Jews, for the most part, 152
- 153. by these understandnew mothers, who came with their offerings for purification, attended with many other women, their relations, friends, and neighbours, and which especially, when several met together on such an occasion, made a crowd at the door of the tabernacle; and some are of opinion that these men did not lie with them, or debauch them, according to the literal sense of the word; but that they delayed the offering of their nests of doves they brought, so that they were forced to stay all night, and could not return home; and because by this means they were restrained from their husbands, it is reckoned as if these men had lain with them (t); and which they think is confirmed, in that the man of God sent to Eli, after mentioned, takes no notice of this lewdness of theirs, only of their ill behaviour as to sacrifices, but the text is so express for their debauchery, that it cannot be denied. HENRY, "(2.) They debauched the women that came to worship at the door of the tabernacle, 1Sa_2:22. They had wives of their own, but were like fed horses, Jer_5:8. To have gone to the harlots' houses, the common prostitutes, would have been abominable wickedness, but to use the interest which as priests they had in those women that had devout dispositions and were religiously inclined, and to bring them to commit their wickedness, was such horrid impiety as one can scarcely think it possible that men who called themselves priests should ever be guilty of. Be astonished, O heavens! at this, and tremble, O earth! No words can sufficiently express the villany of such practices as these. 2. The reproof which Eli gave his sons for this their wickedness: Eli was very old (1Sa_2:22) and could not himself inspect the service of the tabernacle as he had done, but left all to his sons, who, because of the infirmities of his age, slighted him, and did what they would. However, he was told of the wickedness of his sons, and we may well imagine what a heart-breaking it was to him, and how much it added to the burdens of his age; but it should seem he did not so much as reprove them till he heard of their debauching the women, and then he thought fit to give them a check. Had he rebuked them for their greediness and luxury, this might have been prevented. Young people should be told of their faults as soon as it is perceived that they begin to be extravagant, lest their hearts be hardened. Now concerning the reproof he gave them observe, (1.) That it was very just and rational. That which he said was very proper. [1.] He tells them that the matter of fact was too plain to be denied and too public to be concealed: “I hear of your evil dealings by all this people, 1Sa_2:23. It is not the surmise of one or two, but the avowed testimony of many; all your neighbours cry out shame on you, and bring their complaints to me, expecting that I should redress the grievance.” [2.] He shows them the bad consequences of it, that they not only sinned, but made Israel to sin, and would have the people's sin to answer for as well as their own: “You that should turn men from iniquity (Mal_2:6), you make the Lord's people to transgress, and corrupt the nation instead of reforming it; you tempt people to go and serve other gods when they see the God of Israel so ill served.” [3.] He warns them of the danger they brought themselves into by it, 1Sa_2:25. He intimates to them what God afterwards told him, that the iniquity would not be purged with sacrifice nor offering, 1Sa_3:14. If one man sin against another, the judge (that is, the priest, who was appointed to be the judge in many cases, Deu_17:9) shall judge him, shall undertake his cause, arbitrate the matter, and make atonement for the offender; but if a man sin against the Lord (that is, if a priest profane the holy things of the Lord, if a man that deals with God for others do himself affront him) who shall entreat for him? Eli was himself a judge, and had often made intercession for transgressors, but, says he, “You that sin against the Lord,” that 153
- 154. is, “against thelaw and honour of God, in those very things which immediately pertain to him, and by which reconciliation is to be made, how can I entreat for you?” Their condition was deplorable indeed when their own father could not speak a good word for them, nor could have the face to appear as their advocate. Sins against the remedy, the atonement itself, are most dangerous, treading under foot the blood of the covenant, for then there remains no more sacrifice, Heb_10:26. (2.) It was too mild and gentle. He should have rebuked them sharply. Their crimes deserved sharpness; their temper needed it; the softness of his dealing with them would but harden them the more. The animad-version was too easy when he said, It is no good report. he should have said, “It is a shameful scandalous thing, and not to be suffered!” Whether it was because he loved them or because he feared them that he dealt thus tenderly with them, it was certainly an evidence of his want of zeal for the honour of God and his sanctuary. He bound them over to God's judgment, but he should have taken cognizance of their crimes himself, as high priest and judge, and have restrained and punished them. What he said was right, but it was not enough. Note, It is sometimes necessary that we put an edge upon the reproofs we give. There are those that must be saved with fear, Jud_1:23. 3. Their obstinacy against this reproof. His lenity did not at all work upon them: They hearkened not to their father, though he was also a judge. They had no regard either to his authority or to his affection, which was to them an evident token of perdition; it was because the Lord would slay them. They had long hardened their hearts, and now God, in a way of righteous judgment, hardened their hearts, and seared their consciences, and withheld from them the grace they had resisted and forfeited. Note, Those that are deaf to the reproofs of wisdom are manifestly marked for ruin. The Lord has determined to destroy them, 2Ch_25:16. See Pro_29:1. Immediately upon this, Samuel's tractableness is again mentioned (1Sa_2:26), to shame their obstinacy: The child Samuel grew. God's grace is his own; he denied it to the sons of the high priest and gave it to the child of an obscure country Levite. JAMISON 22-24, "the women that assembled at the door of the tabernacle — This was an institution of holy women of a strictly ascetic order, who had relinquished worldly cares and devoted themselves to the Lord; an institution which continued down to the time of Christ (Luk_2:37). Eli was, on the whole, a good man, but lacking in the moral and religious training of his family. He erred on the side of parental indulgence; and though he reprimanded them (see on Deu_21:18), yet, from fear or indolence, he shrank from laying on them the restraints, or subjecting them to the discipline, their gross delinquencies called for. In his judicial capacity, he winked at their flagrant acts of maladministration and suffered them to make reckless encroachments on the constitution, by which the most serious injuries were inflicted both on the rights of the people and the laws of God. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:22. Now Eli was very old — And therefore unfit either to manage his office himself, or to make a diligent inspection into the carriage of his sons, which gave them opportunity for their wickedness. All that his sons did to Israel — Whom they injured in their offerings, and alienated from the service of 154
- 155. God. At thedoor of the tabernacle — The place where all the people, both men and women, waited when they came up to the service of God, because the altar on which their sacrifices were offered was by the door. COFFMAN, "ELI WAS UNWILLING OR UNABLE TO CORRECT HIS SONS "Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons were doing to all Israel, and how they lay with the women who served at the entrance to the tent of meeting. And he said to them, "Why do you do such things? For I hear of your evil dealings from all the people. No, my sons; it is no good report that I hear the people of the Lord spreading about. If a man sins against a man, God will mediate for him; but if a man sins against the Lord, who can intercede for him"? But they would not listen to the voice of their father; for it was the will of the Lord to slay them." With regard to whether or not Eli was able to control his sons, it is likely that, in his advanced age, control would have been impossible, and yet, when the unnamed prophet came and pronounced judgment against him, it was evident that there was indeed some element of blame on Eli's part. Porter commented that, "The indignation of Eli at this point was ineffectual following a lifetime of disciplinary inaction."[18] Of course, the result of Eli's son's wickedness was a widespread public scandal that was disastrous in its effect upon God's people. "At the entrance to the tent of meeting." It should be noted that the words "temple" (1 Samuel 1:9) and "tent of meeting" (1 Samuel 2:22) are used interchangeably in this part of 1Samuel. The temple of Solomon was not constructed until long afterward; nevertheless, the tabernacle was often called "the temple." For it was the will of the Lord to slay them. Keil pointed out that, "This means that Hophni and Phinehas were already given up to the judgment of hardening."[19] ELLICOTT, " (22) Now Eli was very old.—The compiler of these Books of Samuel was evidently wishful to speak as kindly as possible of Eli. He had, no doubt, 155
- 156. deserved well ofIsrael in past days; and though it was clear that through his weak indulgence for his wicked sons, and his own lack of energy and foresight, he had brought discredit on the national sanctuary, and, in the end, defeat and shame on the people, yet the compiler evidently loved to dwell on the brightest side of the old high priest’s character—his piety, his generous love for Samuel, his patriotism, &c.; and here, where the shameful conduct of Hophni and Phinehas is dwelt on, an excuse is made for their father, Eli. “He was,” says the writer, “very old.” The women that assembled.—These women were evidently in some way connected with the service of the Tabernacle; possibly they assisted in the liturgical portion of the sanctuary worship. (Compare Psalms 68:11 : “The Lord gave the word, great was the company of female singers.”) Here, as so often in the world’s story, immorality follows on unbelief. In Psalms 78:60-64, the punishment of the guilty priests and the forsaking of the defiled sanctuary is recorded. The psalmist Asaph relates how, in His anger at the people’s sin, God greatly abhorred Israel, so that He “forsook the Tabernacle at Shiloh—even the tent that He had pitched among men. He delivered their power into captivity, and their beauty into the enemy’s hand. The fire consumed their young men, and their maidens were not given to marriage. Their priests were slain with the sword, and there were no widows to make lamentation.” HAWKER, "(22) Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons did unto all Israel; and how they lay with the women that assembled at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. (23) And he said unto them, Why do ye such things? for I hear of your evil dealings by all this people. (24) Nay, my sons; for it is no good report that I hear: ye make the LORD'S people to transgress. It doth not appear that Eli himself was concerned in this evil of his house. No doubt, he had educated his sons in the knowledge of the Lord. Perhaps he was too much relaxed in the discipline of his family; and his reproofs were not so sharp as they ought to have been. But Reader! do not fail to recollect, that grace is not hereditary. From what follows in the latter part of this chapter, it should seem that Eli did not enter into the full view of the enormity of his children's transgression. We do not hear of any prayers, or cries, he sent forth to God to reclaim them 156
- 157. PETT, " Eli’sSons Become Worse And Worse Until They Have ‘Sinned Unto Death’ (1 Samuel 2:22-25). While Samuel was growing and developing, Eli’s sons were shrivelling and disintegrating. By this time Eli was an old man. His time as Priest was coming to an end. And while Samuel cheered his godly heart continually, the news that he heard about his two sons grieved him greatly. Indeed it had become so serious that he determined to give them a severe warning. 1 Samuel 2:22 ‘Now Eli was very old, and he continued hearing all that his sons did to all Israel, and how they lay with the women who did service at the door of the tent of meeting.’ Notice the extent of the influence of these godless men, now somewhat older, but certainly no wiser. Indeed they had become even more sinful, for they not only continued to sin before all Israel, but they lay with the women who were in the service of YHWH, the women who did service at the door of the Tent of Meeting itself. This was not only adultery, but adultery carried out in the very face of YHWH. We do not know whether the women freely consented, but it is probable that they at least had pressure put on them by the priests, who may well have stated that it was their duty as servants of the Tabernacle, citing the example of Canaanite worship where ritual sex was prevalent. So they disgraced their office in a new way. We do not know what kind of sacred service these women normally performed (compare Exodus 38:8), but they clearly had regular duties, which may have included the singing of Psalms and the cleaning of the surrounds of God’s house. Jephthah’s daughter had probably become one of them (Judges 11:37-40 - which may well have been intended to indicate that she lived in perpetual virginity, having been redeemed by the offering of a ram) and was possibly still alive at this time. And they were equally clearly sacred to YHWH. Thus the two men had found a way of committing sacrilege which went even beyond what they had done before. They 157
- 158. committed adultery beforeGod’s very face with the very women who were dedicated to YHWH. This may well have been due to Canaanite influence, for in the Canaanite religion sacred prostitutes were commonplace, but they knew perfectly well that it was inexcusable. “At the door of the tent of meeting.” This was particularly heinous as this was where people would come to YHWH for judgment on different issues (Exodus 29:42). It was where a woman who was accused of adultery would be tested out ‘before YHWH’ (Numbers 5:16). And yet now the very women who served there had been made into adulteresses, and that by the very priests of YHWH. PULPIT, "ELI'S COMPLICITY IN THE SINS OF HIS SONS (1 Samuel 2:22-26). 1 Samuel 2:22 Eli … heard all that his sons did. To the profanity and greed described in 1 Samuel 2:12-17 the sons of Eli added unchastity; and their sin was the greater because the women whom they corrupted were those dedicated to religious service (see Exodus 38:8). The order of ministering women instituted by Moses probably lasted down to the destruction of the temple, and Anna may have belonged to it (Luke 2:37); afterwards it appeared again in a more spiritual form in the widows and deaconesses of the Christian Church. The word rendered assembled means "arranged in bands," and shows not merely that they were numerous, but that they had regular duties assigned them, and each one her proper place and office. The frequent sacrifices, with the feasts which followed, must have provided occupation for a large number of hands in the cleaning of the utensils and the cooking of the food. But though Eli heard of the depraved conduct of his sons in thus defiling those who ministered in the tabernacle, he gives them but the faintest rebuke, and that apparently only because their misdeeds were in everybody's mouth; for the last clause of 1 Samuel 2:23 really is, "For I hear of your evil doings from all this people." Eli's old age may have increased his indifference, but his religious character could never have had much depth or earnestness, to allow him to regard such heinous sins so lightly. It seems even as if he chiefly felt the annoyance occasioned to himself by the expostulations urged upon him "from all this people." Still all that he says is wise and thoughtful. The sins of men in high station do not end with themselves; they make others also to transgress. And as Eli's sons were 158
- 159. Jehovah's ministers, andthey had led into wickedness those who also were bound to holy service, their misconduct was a sin against Jehovah himself. K&D, "Eli's treatment of the sins of his sons. - 1Sa_2:22. The aged Eli reproved his sons with solemn warnings on account of their sins; but without his warnings being listened to. From the reproof itself we learn, that beside the sin noticed in 1Sa_2:12-17, they also committed the crime of lying with the women who served at the tabernacle (see at Exo_38:8), and thus profaned the sanctuary with whoredom. But Eli, with the infirmities of his old age, did nothing further to prevent these abominations than to say to his sons, “Why do ye according to the sayings which I hear, sayings about you which are evil, of this whole people.” ים ִע ָר ם ֶיכ ֵר ְב ִת־דּ ֶא is inserted to make the meaning clearer, and ל־הָכּ ת ֵא ֵמ is dependent upon ַע ֵמֹשׁ. “This whole people” signifies all the people that came to Shiloh, and heard and saw the wicked doings there. 23 So he said to them, “Why do you do such things? I hear from all the people about these wicked deeds of yours. CLARKE, "Why do ye such things! - Eli appears to have been a fondly affectionate, easy father, who wished his sons to do well, but did not bring them under proper discipline, and did not use his authority to restrain them. As judge, he had power to cast them immediately out of the vineyard, as wicked and unprofitable servants; this he did not, and his and their ruin was the consequence. GILL, "And he said unto them, why do ye such things?.... As to impose upon the people that bring their offerings, by taking more than is due, and in a very indecent and imperious manner; and especially to defile the women when they came to worship: these were very scandalous sins, and deserved a more severe reprimand, and indeed a greater chastisement than by mere words; Eli should have rebuked them more sharply, and laid open the evil of their doings, and as a judge punished them for them: 159
- 160. for I hearof your evil doings by all this people; the inhabitants of Shiloh, or who came thither to worship, who were continually making their complaints to Eli; which still shows his backwardness to reprove them in the manner he did until he was obliged to it by the continual remonstrances of the people against the practices of his sons; he did not attend to the information he had from a few persons, until it became general. HENRY, "(1.) That it was very just and rational. That which he said was very proper. [1.] He tells them that the matter of fact was too plain to be denied and too public to be concealed: “I hear of your evil dealings by all this people, 1Sa_2:23. It is not the surmise of one or two, but the avowed testimony of many; all your neighbours cry out shame on you, and bring their complaints to me, expecting that I should redress the grievance.” [2.] He shows them the bad consequences of it, that they not only sinned, but made Israel to sin, and would have the people's sin to answer for as well as their own: “You that should turn men from iniquity (Mal_2:6), you make the Lord's people to transgress, and corrupt the nation instead of reforming it; you tempt people to go and serve other gods when they see the God of Israel so ill served.” [3.] He warns them of the danger they brought themselves into by it, 1Sa_2:25. He intimates to them what God afterwards told him, that the iniquity would not be purged with sacrifice nor offering, 1Sa_3:14. If one man sin against another, the judge (that is, the priest, who was appointed to be the judge in many cases, Deu_17:9) shall judge him, shall undertake his cause, arbitrate the matter, and make atonement for the offender; but if a man sin against the Lord (that is, if a priest profane the holy things of the Lord, if a man that deals with God for others do himself affront him) who shall entreat for him? Eli was himself a judge, and had often made intercession for transgressors, but, says he, “You that sin against the Lord,” that is, “against the law and honour of God, in those very things which immediately pertain to him, and by which reconciliation is to be made, how can I entreat for you?” Their condition was deplorable indeed when their own father could not speak a good word for them, nor could have the face to appear as their advocate. Sins against the remedy, the atonement itself, are most dangerous, treading under foot the blood of the covenant, for then there remains no more sacrifice, Heb_ 10:26. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:23-24. And he said, Why do ye do such things? — He reproved them, but far too gently, as these and the following words manifest. This might proceed partly from the coldness of old age, but it arose chiefly from his too great indulgence to his children. I hear of your evil dealings by all this people — Their wickedness was so notorious that there was a general complaint of it, which should have moved him to much greater severity than merely to reprove and chide them. He ought to have restrained them, and if he could not otherwise have done it, to have inflicted those punishments upon them which such high crimes deserved, according to God’s law, and which he, as high-priest and judge, was in duty bound to inflict without respect of persons. Nay, my sons, for it is no good report that I hear — This is the language of a father, not of a zealous judge. Ye make the Lord’s 160
- 161. people to transgress— By causing them to neglect and despise the service of God, and tempting them to lewdness. LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:23. The question: Why do ye such things? is but a feeble rebuke of their gross misdoings. It cannot be translated: “Why do ye according to the words which I hear” (Keil)? for the Heb. word (יכֶם ֵר ְב ִ)דּ cannot mean “reports about you,” nor could these reports be termed “evil,” since they would be true reports of evil deeds; but the proper rendering is: “Why do ye as these things?” that Isaiah, such things.[FN39] “For I hear of your evil dealings from all this people,” that Isaiah, those who came to the Sanctuary, and there saw the wickedness. PETT, "1 Samuel 2:23-24 ‘And he said to them, “Why do you do such things? For I hear of your evil dealings from all this people. No, my sons, for it is no good report that I hear. You make YHWH’s people to transgress. If one man sin against another, God will arbitrate for him, but if a man sin against YHWH, who will arbitrate for him?” Eli challenges his sons on their behaviour, but it was something that he should have done long before. He points out that he is hearing about their bad behaviour from everywhere. All are talking about it. (Possibly previously he had closed his ears to the ‘rumours’. But now they could be ignored no longer). And he reproves them because the report he is receiving is not good. Why, he asks, are they doing such things? Do they not realise that they are making YHWH’s people transgress? This was serious indeed, because, if a man sins against another, God will step in as arbitrator and judge, but when a man sins directly against YHWH who is there to arbitrate for him? And the answer is, no one. For there is no one whose plea would be sufficient in view of the greatness of the sin. “YHWH”s people’ may refer to the fact that the women with whom they had been sinning were specifically set apart to YHWH. Or it may simply mean ‘Israel’ as YHWH’s people. Either way it was to be seen as a serious matter. BI 23-24, "Nay, my sons: for it is no good report that I hear. 161
- 162. Weakness is wickedness Itdoes not often occur to us what shame and guilt belong to mortal vacillation and weakness. Too often a man’s weakness is accepted as a sufficient excuse for his sin. Outbursts of evil passion are excused because a man has a passionate nature. Vacillation is condoned, because a man by nature is pliant and indecisive. Inconsiderateness is held to be blameless, because a man is impulsive by natural disposition. That all this is wrong in judgment and false in principle, could not be more sternly taught than in the experience of Eli. Blameless and pure, humble and devout, there is no more beautiful character, in many of its aspects, to be found in Scripture than his; yet how stern the rebuke which is passed upon him, and how terrible the retribution! Plain it is that in God’s sight moral weakness is sin. At the Bar of Judgment “I cannot” finds no acceptance as a plea against “You must.” To say that you have not the strength, the courage, the resoluteness to do right is a confession which is itself a shameful wrong. It is the plea of a weakling, and weakness in God’s sight is wickedness. It is the plea of a coward, and moral cowardice is sin. (J. Bainton.) Paternal leniency I. Eli’s fatal leniency. 1. He saith over softly to them, “Why do ye such things?” (v. 23). This was to reprove them, saith Jerome, with the lenity of a father, not with the authority of a magistrate: ‘Tis an old saying, “Pity spoils a city”; sure I am it did so here, for it spoiled his family, causing the priesthood to be removed from it. 2. “I hear of your evil doings.” This was too gentle, to mention them in the general only, and not to particularise them with their detestable aggravations, he should have rebuked them, cuttingly, or sharply (Tit_2:15) with all authority. 3. “By all the people:” As if it were their report only, and that he was put on by the people to say what he said. 4. “Nay, my sons.” He should have set on his reproof, by saying “Ye act more like sons of Belial than my sons, the sons of the high priests of the Most High God.” 5. “‘Tis no good report:” He should have called it, the most dismal and diabolical, if he had had a right zeal for God’s glory, etc. 6. He was not willing to reprove them, but the clamours of others forced him to do it. 7. He did not rebuke them publicly (1Ti_5:20) for the public sins to make the plaster as broad as the wound. 8. It was only a verbal reproof, whereas he should have put them out of their priesthood and punished them for their adultery according to the law, without respect of persons as a judge, etc. 9. He did not rebuke them in time, but let them live long in sin. 10. He soon ceased chiding them, so ‘tis said, “He restrained them not,” (ch. 3:18.) II. Apology for Eli in this case is—That he now was very old, some suppose him to be now come to his ninetieth year, even in his dotage, so could not himself converse with his sons, so as to observe their maladministrations, and withal, he was dim-sighted, so could not so well see their sinful practices: his superannuation caused his frequent absence from the Tabernacle, which gave 162
- 163. a greater opportunityfor his sons’ wickedness, to whom the management of God’s worship was (in their father’s retirement) be trusted, and ‘tis not improbable, his sons did not much regard his reproofs, because he was old and over-worn, but themselves, being in their vigour, had married wives, and were fathers of children. And ‘tis commonly known that old ago doth incline men to mercy, so that it is no wonder if Eli seem rather to flatter than to chastise his sons. III. Judgement pronounced on Eli. The promise for the perpetuation of the priesthood to Aaron’s family (Exo_28:43; Exo_29:9) was conditional only so long as they did honour God therein, which condition the elder line of Aaron kept not in the case of Jephtah’s vow, therefore was the high priesthood transferred to the younger line, which now upon the like failure in the condition, made a new forfeiture thereof, by dishonouring God so notoriously in Eli’s sons. 1. This may be called breach of promise, as that is (Num_14:34) when the old generation were wasted in the wilderness, and yet the new one was brought into Canaan as God had promised. 2. This Man of God threatens the extirpation of Eli’s family (1Sa_2:31-32). His arm shall be cut off. 3. This Man of God threatens him with a rival in the place of the priesthood, which he or his posterity should behold with their eyes, to their great grief and regret (1Sa_2:32-33). 4. This Man of God threatens him with the violent, death of his sons before their father’s death (1Sa_2:34-35). 5. He threatens him with the poverty of his posterity (1Sa_2:36). They shall come crouching as Abiathar did (1Ki_2:26) when banished to Anathoth. (C. Ness.) Eli’s imbecility Ells are out of place in this world; they are only fit for the society of angels. Place one of them over a business. Oh, he is such a good man! Trusts everybody, dismisses nobody, lets every knave and idle fellow about the premises play tricks with him. By-and-bye the end comes, and you spell it with ruin. Such a dear, well-meaning man, and so unfortunate; you all pity him. Yes, such men are to be pitied, but mainly because they are so weak and easygoing. Good men, but not fit to be at the head of anything. Not fit to rule a kingdom or a lunatic asylum, or even a church, and perhaps, least of all, a home. It is a pity when domestic government gets into their hands. Such nice meal such angelic women! But, alas! they make a pitiable business of it if they become fathers and mothers. (J. G. Greenough.) Necessity of parental severity When George III wished his two sons, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of York, to be instructed, he sent for one of the most rigid disciplinarians of the day; and when the king and the teacher stood together, one would have been at a loss to know whether to admire more the majesty of royalty or the majesty of learning. The king gave a side glance at the two boys who stood at, his feet, and said to the stern doctor who stood before him, “Sir, I wish you to teach these, my two sons.” “And, please your majesty,” replied the teacher, “how do you wish these princes to be treated?” “Just treat them,” returned the king, “as you would treat the sons of a private gentleman; if they require it, flog them; just do with them as you do at Westminster School.” And so the doctor did; he let them know by hard experience that the rod was made for 163
- 164. the fool’s back.And when Louis XIV of France, one of the proudest kings that ever sat on the French throne, began to feel his inferiority in knowledge after he had arrived at the years of maturity, he complained to his courtiers that he was ignorant of many things which they knew. Upon which a nobleman near him ventured to hint that when a child he was wilful and wayward, and refused listen to the voice of instruction. “What!” he exclaimed, “was there not birch enough, in the forest of Fontainebleau?” (J. Hutchinson.) Laxity of parental authority Eli surely has his parallel in many a moral household which presents the spectacle of a father of exemplary life and character surrounded by children who, as they phrase it, take their own line in whatever form of dissipation or extravagance, or at best of aimless and frivolous living. The fault may be altogether with the child, but generally in this world when sons go wrong there are at least faults on both sides. And may it not be that in the critical years, when character was taking shape, and temptations were pressing hard with eager importunity, nothing was done, perhaps nothing was said to check, to rebuke, to guide, to encourage? The boy’s character was allowed to drift; it was allowed to drift by the man whose sense of responsibility as his father should have saved him from a mistake so ruinous. Authority need not be despotism; it may be tender and considerate to any extent, provided only that it is authority, and that its voice is not silent, nor its arm paralysed by a misplaced affection or by a want of moral courage, or by secret indifference, to the greatest issues which He before every human being. (Canon Liddon.) 24 No, my sons; the report I hear spreading among the Lord’s people is not good. GILL, "Nay, my sons,.... This seems to be too soft and smooth an appellation, too kind and endearing, considering the offence they were guilty of, and were now reproving for; rather they deserved to be called sons of Belial, the children of the devil, than sons of Eli, or brutes and shameless wretches, and such like hard names: for it is no good report that I hear; a very bad one; far from being good, scarce anything worse could have been said of them; to rob persons of the flesh of their offerings, when there was a sufficient allowance made for them by law, and to be so impious as to require what was not their due, and even before the Lord had his; and to debauch the women that came to religious worship, and that in the sacred place of worship, they also being priests of the Lord, and married men; sins very shocking and sadly aggravated, and yet Eli treats them in this gentle manner: 164
- 165. ye make theLord's people to transgress: by causing them to forbear to bring their sacrifices, being used in such an injurious and overbearing way; and by decoying the women into uncleanness, and by setting examples to others: or, "to cry out"; as in the margin of our Bibles, to exclaim against them for their exorbitant and lewd practices; so the Targum, "the people of the Lord murmur because so ill used by them:''this clause may be read in connection with the former, "it is no good report that I hear, which ye cause to pass through the Lord's people"; ye occasion the people to speak ill of you everywhere, in the camp of Israel, throughout the whole nation; the report as it is bad, it is general, is in everyone's mouth; so Maimonides (u) interprets it; with which Jarchi and others agree (w). LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:24. “Do not so (ל ַ)א my sons.” Not good is the “report,” or objectively “the thing heard;” this answers to the “evil dealings (or things).” The “I hear” )ַﬠ ֵמֹשׁ ) corresponds to the “report,” “thing heard” )הָﬠֻמ ְשׁ ) and [being a particip.—Tr.] shows that it constantly came to his ears. What follows is the explanation of the words: “it is no good report.” The words: “Jehovah’s people are made to transgress” (ים ִר ֲִבﬠ ַמ etc.), express the guilt which the sons of Eli incurred by their misdoing towards “the Lord’s people.” The difficulties in the explanation of the particip. (מ׳ “are causing to transgress”) have give occasion to attempts at alteration, which, however, are unsatisfactory. “Michaelis’ alteration (into ים ִר ְבֹע ֵ:)מ ‘the report which I hear incidentally (from people passing by) from God’s people.’ is against grammar;” so says Thenius. “But,” says Bצttcher rightly, “Thenius’ own reading (made from Sept. and Arab, and therefore insecure): ‘you plague, oppress the people of Israel’ )י׳ םַﬠ ם ֶתּ ַא ים ִד ֲִבﬠ ַמ ) is wholly without ground. For יד ֱִבﬠֶה means only ‘make to serve,’ ‘enslave,’ or ‘make to work,’ plague with work ( Exodus 1:13; Exodus 6:5). From the last in the later prophetic style ( Isaiah 43:23) has developed the meaning ‘weary,’ ‘burden,’ just as German: schaffen machen [‘to give trouble,’ lit. ‘to make to do’], נסנבס דלבפבקוים [‘to cause trouble’], and so always with the idea of ‘work’ as fundamental. Eli’s sons, it is true, robbed and dishonored the people ( 1 Samuel 2:13 sqq, 22); but they did not burden them in such a way that our term ‘give trouble’ would suit. The expression does not come up to the reality, for it is too narrow for the rebuke. And the addition of ‘ye’ )ם ֶתּ ַא ) here is both violent, and cannot be inferred from the Arab. text, where it was a necessity of Shemitic construction.” The view thus opposed by Bצttcher is maintained by Thenius (in his 2 d ed. also) to suit the connection perfectly, though, on the other hand, he declares that Ewald’s explanation, in which there is no change of text, must be accepted; this latter is held by Bצttcher to be the only one permitted by the language and matter, and he gives it thus: “to send forth a cry (קוֹל ,)ה׳ thence to cause to be called out, and to cause to trumpet forth (רָשׁוֹפ )ה׳ 165
- 166. are common expressions,appropriate to the simplest style, Exodus 36:6; Leviticus 25:9; Ezra 1:1; Ezra 10:7. Why then should not “send forth a report” )מוּע ְשׁ ה׳ ) be said as well as ‘send forth a voice’ )קוֹל ה׳ )? ‘The report which (as) I hear, God’s people are circulating,’ is quite proper; the plu. partcp. is joined to the collective ‘people’ as in 1 Samuel 13:15.” To this Thenius properly objects that it is a superfluous statement after 1 Samuel 2:23 (“which I hear from all the people”), and that we should here expect a more significant word. The train of thought requires after the declaration “not good,” etc, a statement of the ground of Eli’s judgment. The usual rendering: “ye make the Lord’s people to transgress,” satisfies the demands of the connection of thought. Only, as the pers. pron. (אתם “ye”) is wanting, the partcp. must be rendered impersonally: “people make … to transgress” (comp. ים ִחְלּ ַשׁ ְמ,1 Samuel 6:3, and ים ִר ְמֹא Exodus 5:16). The objection that the object of the transgression, which is elsewhere always fouud with this verb as exacter determination, is not here expressed (comp. 1 Samuel 15:24; Isaiah 24:5; 2 Chronicles 24:20; Numbers 14:41), cannot set aside the meaning: “cause to sin or transgress,” “because the exact definition is contained in the context” (Keil). The sin of the sons was, according to the context, very great before the Lord ( 1 Samuel 17-2:12 ), but was at the same time committed against the people of the Lord ( 1 Samuel 2:13; 1 Samuel 2:22) in reference to their holy calling, and had the destructive effect of bringing the Lord’s offering into contempt ( 1 Samuel 2:17). The “people of the Lord” not only knew and spoke of the wickedness of Eli’s sons, but were made by the latter partakers of their guilt, were seduced into transgression of the Law by those who ought to have watched over its fulfillment. PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:24, 1 Samuel 2:25 Ye make, etc. Eli's words are very obscure, but "Ye make Jehovah's people to transgress" is upon the whole the best rendering of the clause. Both the Sept. and Syriac have a different reading: "Ye make Jehovah's people cease to worship him" In the next verse there is no sufficient reason for supposing that Elohim, God, here means a judge. Elohim was the head of the theocracy, the ruler of Israel in all things, and he would set to rights these delinquencies of "one man against another" by the ordinary exercise of his judicial functions. So far all is easy, and we must translate, "If one man sin against another, God shall judge him." But in the last clause there is one of those plays upon words to which the Hebrew language, with its numerous conjugations, so readily lends itself (see on 1 Samuel 1:28); and it is rarely possible to transfer to another language the force of passages in which the sense depends upon the terms in the original having a double meaning. The verb rendered shall judge in the first clause is used again by Eli in the second, but in a different 166
- 167. conjugation, in whichits usual meaning is to pray. According to the lexicon, therefore, we must translate: "If a man sin against Jehovah, who shall pray for him?" But surely it was just the occasion in which the only remedy left was intercessory prayer. Bearing then in remembrance the use made by Eli of the verb in the first clause, we must translate: "Who shall act as judge for him?" "Who shall interpose as arbitrator between him and Jehovah to settle the quarrel?" The verb itself, moreover, is a rare and old-fashioned one, and apparently means to settle a dispute. So it is used of Phinehas, who by his righteous zeal put an end to the rebellion against God's laws; and accordingly in Psalms 106:30, where our version renders "executed judgment," the, Vulgate has placavit, appeased Jehovah's anger. The sense then is, In case of wrong done between man and man, God as the supreme Arbitrator settles the dispute; but where the two parties are God and man, what third power is there which can interfere? The quarrel must go on to the bitter end, and God, who is your opponent, will also punish you. The same idea is found in Job 9:33. Naturally to so mild a remonstrance, and founded upon so low a view of the Divine nature, the sons of Eli paid but slight attention, and by thus hardening themselves in sin they made their punishment inevitable, "because it pleased Jehovah to slay them." Man can bring upon himself neither good nor evil except by the working of God's will, and the punishment of sin is as thoroughly a part of God's will as the rewarding of righteousness. An intense conviction of the personality of God was the very foundation of the religious life of the Israelites, and lies at the root of the words of Eli here and of those of Job; and it was this which made them ascribe to God that hardening of the wicked in sin which is the sure means of their punishment. We ascribe it to the working of natural laws, which after all is but saying the same thing in a round about way; for the laws of nature, in things moral as well as in the physical world, are the laws of God. In verse 26, in contrast with Eli's sons ripening for punishment, and daily more abhorred to God and man, we have Samuel set before us advancing in age and "in favour with Jehovah and also with men," like him of whom in so many respects he was a type (Luke 2:52), our blessed Lord. K&D, "ַינ ָבּ ל ַ,א “Not, my sons,” i.e., do not such things, “for the report which I hear is not good; they make the people of Jehovah to transgress.” ים ֲִרע ַמ is written without the pronoun ם ֶתּ ַא in an indefinite construction, like ים ִח ְלַּשׁ ְמ in 1Sa_6:3 (Maurer). Ewald's rendering as given by Thenius, “The report which I hear the people of God bring,” is just as inadmissible as the one proposed by Bצttcher, “The report which, as I hear, the people of God are spreading.” The assertion made by Thenius, that יר ֱִבע ֶ,ה without any further definition, cannot mean to cause to sin or transgress, is correct enough no doubt; but it 167
- 168. does not provethat this meaning is inadmissible in the passage before us, since the further definition is actually to be found in the context. 25 If one person sins against another, God[d] may mediate for the offender; but if anyone sins against the Lord, who will intercede for them?” His sons, however, did not listen to their father’s rebuke, for it was the Lord’s will to put them to death. BARNES, "The sense seems to be, If one man sin against another, the judge shall amerce him in the due penalty, and then he shall be free; but if he sin against the Lord, who shall act the part of judge and arbiter for him? His guilt must remain to the great day of judgment. Because the Lord would slay them - There is a sense in which whatever comes to pass is the accomplishment of God’s sovereign will and pleasure, and all the previous steps, even when they involve moral causes, by which this will and pleasure are brought about, are in this sense also brought about by God. How this truth, which reason and revelation alike acknowledge, consists with man’s free will on the one hand; or, when the evil deeds and punishment of a sinner are some of the previous steps, with God’s infinite mercy and love on the other, is what cannot possibly be explained. We can only firmly believe both statements, (1) that God hath no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, and that He willeth not the death of a sinner, but rather that he should be converted and live; (2) that the sins and the punishments of sin are accomplishments of God’s eternal purpose (compare the marginal references, and Isa_6:9-10; Mar_4:12; Rom_9:15). It may be explained by saying that in the case of Hophni and Phinehas God’s will to kill them was founded upon His foreknowledge of their impenitence; while from another 168
- 169. point of view,in which God’s will is the fixed point, that impenitence may be viewed in its relation to that fixed point, and so dependent upon it, and a necessary step to it. CLARKE, "If one man sin against another - All differences between man and man may be settled by the proper judge; but if a man sin against the Supreme Judge, God himself, who shall reconcile him to his Maker? Your sin is immediately against God himself, and is the highest insult that can be offered, because it is in the matter of his own worship, therefore ye may expect his heaviest judgments. But if a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him? - This was a question of the most solemn importance under the old covenant, especially after the death of Moses, the mediator. The law had determined what sins should be punished with death; and it was supposed that there was not any appeal from the decision there pronounced. 1Jo_2:1 is an answer to this question; but it is an answer which the Gospel alone can give: My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not; but if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. Because the Lord would slay them - The particle כי ki, which we translate because, and thus make their continuance in sin the effect of God’s determination to destroy them, should be translated therefore, as it means in many parts of the sacred writings. See Noldius’s Particles, where the very text in question is introduced: Sed non auscultarunt, etc., Ideo voluit Jehova eos interficere; “But they would not hearken, etc.; Therefore God purposed to destroy them.” It was their not hearkening that induced the Lord to will their destruction. GILL, "If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him, &c. When one man does an injury to another in his person and property, the case is brought before the judge, he hears it, examines into it, and determines upon it, and does justice, orders that the injured person have satisfaction made him, and so the matter is ended: but if a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him? all sin is in some sense against God, as it is contrary to his nature, and a breach of his law, and especially bold, daring, presumptuous sins; but there are some sins that are more immediately and particularly against God, as sins against the first table of the law, which relate to the worship of God, and such were the sins of Eli's sons in the affair of sacrifices; all sin against God is aggravated by the perfections of his nature, and made tremendous, as being against a God of strict justice, of unspotted purity and holiness, and who is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent; and by the relation and connection there is between God and men, he is their Creator and Preserver, the God of their lives and mercies, and of all the blessings they enjoy, and yet sin against him! who will entreat the favour of God for such persons, ask pardon for them, and beseech the Lord to be propitious and merciful to them? who on earth will do it? such persons are scarce and rare, few care to stand up in the gap between God and sinners; in some cases they ought not, in others they cannot. Eli suggests by this question, that he could not, even for his own sons; and who in heaven can or will do it? not saints departed, who know nothing of 169
- 170. what is donebelow, nor angels, only the Lord Jesus Christ; he is the only Mediator between God and men, who has engaged his heart to approach unto God, and interpose between him and sinful men, and has made peace and reconciliation by his blood, and is become the propitiation for sin, and ever lives to make intercession for transgressors, and is always prevalent and successful in his mediation and intercession; excepting him, there is none to entreat for those that have sinned against the Lord, see 1Jo_2:1. In answer to this question, who shall entreat for him? the Jews say (x) repentance and good works; but these are insufficient advocates for a sinner, without the atoning sacrifice of Christ, who is propitiation for sin, and upon which a plea can only be founded: notwithstanding, they hearkened not unto the voice of their father; to his reproofs and counsels, his reasonings and expostulations; though his rebukes were so gentle, and this last reasoning of his so close and strong, so nervous and striking: because the Lord would slay them; it was his purpose and decree, his will and pleasure, to cut them off for their wickedness; wherefore he gave them up to a judicial blindness, and hardness of heart, as he did Pharaoh, so that they were proof against all advice, admonitions, and arguments used with them: some choose to read the words, "therefore the Lord would slay them" (y), because they were disobedient to the voice of their father; but the former sense is best; for his will to destroy them was not so much for their disregard to the reproofs of their father in which he himself was culpable, as for their breach of his laws. HENRY, "He shows them the bad consequences of it, that they not only sinned, but made Israel to sin, and would have the people's sin to answer for as well as their own: “You that should turn men from iniquity (Mal_2:6), you make the Lord's people to transgress, and corrupt the nation instead of reforming it; you tempt people to go and serve other gods when they see the God of Israel so ill served.” [3.] He warns them of the danger they brought themselves into by it, 1Sa_2:25. He intimates to them what God afterwards told him, that the iniquity would not be purged with sacrifice nor offering, 1Sa_3:14. If one man sin against another, the judge (that is, the priest, who was appointed to be the judge in many cases, Deu_17:9) shall judge him, shall undertake his cause, arbitrate the matter, and make atonement for the offender; but if a man sin against the Lord (that is, if a priest profane the holy things of the Lord, if a man that deals with God for others do himself affront him) who shall entreat for him? Eli was himself a judge, and had often made intercession for transgressors, but, says he, “You that sin against the Lord,” that is, “against the law and honour of God, in those very things which immediately pertain to him, and by which reconciliation is to be made, how can I entreat for you?” Their condition was deplorable indeed when their own father could not speak a good word for them, nor could have the face to appear as their advocate. Sins against the remedy, the atonement itself, are most dangerous, treading under foot the blood of the covenant, for then there remains no more sacrifice, Heb_ 10:26. JAMISON, "they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because - it should be therefore. 170
- 171. the Lord wouldslay them — It was not God’s preordination, but their own willful and impenitent disobedience which was the cause of their destruction. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:25. If one man sin against another, &c. — If only man be wronged, man can set the matter right, and reconcile the persons. If a man sin against the Lord — As you have done, wilfully and presumptuously; who shall entreat for him? — The offence is of so high a nature that few or none will dare to intercede for him, but will leave him to the just judgment of God. The words may be rendered, Who shall judge for him? Who shall interpose as umpire between God and him? Who shall compound that difference? None can or dare do it. And therefore he must be left to the dreadful but righteous displeasure of God. Eli reasoned well; but reasoning was not sufficient, nor any reproof he could have given in this case. It demanded a more serious interference; and he ought not to have referred their punishment unto God, when it was in his power to have punished them himself. They hearkened not, &c., because the Lord would slay them — Or, as the Hebrew may be rendered, Therefore the Lord would slay them. The sense, however, according to the common translation, is Scriptural and good. They had disregarded many admonitions, which, no doubt, their father had given them; they had now hardened their hearts, and sinned away their day of grace, and therefore God had given them up to a reprobate mind, and determined to destroy them, 2 Chronicles 25:16. ELLICOTT, " (25) Sin against the Lord.—This touches on the mystery of sin. There are transgressions which may again and again receive pardon, but there seems to be a transgression beyond the limits of Divine forgiveness. The pitiful Redeemer, in no obscure language, told His listeners the same awful truth when He warned them of the sin against the Holy Ghost. They hearkened not . . . because the Lord would slay them.—Here the mysteries connected with God’s foreknowledge and man’s free-will are touched upon. The Lord’s resolution to slay them was founded on the eternal foreknowledge of their persistence in wrong-doing. There seems to be a period in the sinner’s life when the Spirit of the Eternal ceases to plead; then the man is left to himself, and he feels no longer any remorse for evil done; this is spoken of in Exodus 4:21 as “hardening the heart.” This period in the 171
- 172. life of Hophniand Phinehas apparently had been reached when the Lord resolved to slay them. HAWKER, "(25) If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall intreat for him? Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because the LORD would slay them. What a sweet verse is this, abstracted from the family of Eli, and applied to the case of Christians in general. Who shall intreat for the sinner? I answer, Jesus; for so saith John, "If any man sin we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous, and he is the propitiation for our sins." Precious Redeemer! thou art both our Advocate and Propitiation; our Judge and Saviour. Thou art all we stand in need of, for the transgressions of our nature. 1 John 2:1-2. Observe, how sin hardens the heart, in the case of Eli's sons. The Lord had given them up to a judicial blindness. Oh! for grace to all poor sinners, to offer up continually that prayer of the Church, "From all blindness of heart, good Lord deliver us!" PETT, "1 Samuel 2:25 “Notwithstanding, they did not listen to the voice of their father, because YHWH was minded to slay them.’ Whether they would have listened to their father of their own volition even if YHWH had not hardened them we do not know. The probability is that they would not, for they were hardened sinners. After all their father must surely have spoken to them about the rumours before. But now there was another reason why they did not listen, and that was because, as a result of the fact that they had hardened their hearts for so long, God had now hardened their hearts. As with Pharaoh previously, the time for forgiveness had passed. YHWH had determined that they must die. They had committed the ‘sin unto death’ (James 5:16-17). COKE, "1 Samuel 2:25. If one man sin against another, the judge, &c.— That is, if one neighbour do an injury to another, the business may be adjusted by the judge, who, interposing his authority, sets the matter right; but if one injure the judge himself, as was the present case, who can intercede in his behalf? Houbigant 172
- 173. observes, that theword rendered shall judge him, would more properly and more consistently be rendered, shall be entreated; interceded with for the man. The words, because the Lord would slay them, are rendered by Dr. Waterland, wherefore the Lord would slay them; a better translation than the common one; which yet may very well be justified; as the Lord, when people become incorrigible, gives them up to their own hardness of heart, and its consequent destruction. REFLECTIONS.—The characters of these families, thus contrasted, appear more conspicuous. The negligence of Eli, the high-priest, makes Elkanah's diligence more remarkable; and the piety of Samuel casts a double gloom upon the ungodliness of Eli's sons. I. Concerning Elkanah and his family, we have, 1. Their return unto Ramah, leaving Samuel behind, with Eli's blessing upon them for the loan they had lent unto the Lord, and the effect of that blessing taking place, in five children given to Hannah in return for Samuel. Note; Nothing returns so surely with interest, as that which is lent unto the Lord, and devoted to his service. 2. Their regular and stated worship of God at Shiloh, and their care of their darling son, providing him with clothes during his noviciate at the tabernacle. Note; (1.) Though we must be in spirit always worshipping, yet regular and stated returns for prayer are carefully to be kept up. (2.) A due provision for children is a parent's duty, and should be their delight, never grudging the expence of it. 3. The progress Samuel made under Eli's care and inspection. Though surrounded with the bad examples of Eli's sons, he carefully attended to Eli's instructions, and ministered before him in any little service in which he was capable of being employed; and Eli, observing, no doubt, his extraordinary delight in the work, and reflecting on the extraordinary circumstances of his birth, took care betimes to train him up to the service of the tabernacle, and put on him a linen ephod, though not a priest, and before he was of the usual age to minister before the Lord. As he increased in stature, his understanding and gracious dispositions, like the expanding 173
- 174. rose-bud, disclosed theirsweet perfume, and attracted the regard of God and man. Note; (1.) Under careful and pious teachers, we may hope for the blossoms of early piety. (2.) God is pleased with the graces he bestows. II. Concerning Eli and his house, we are told, 1. Their exceeding bad character. They were sons of Belial. Though born of so godly a man, and, during their youth, brought up under his prayers and instructions, yet they turned out profane and profligate. They knew not the Lord, paid him no regard, made their office a mere benefice, and, though priests, were atheistical perhaps in opinions, certainly in their practice. Note; (1.) The best of parents have often lived to see themselves in Eli's unhappy case. Grace cannot be communicated but from God alone. (2.) It were greatly to be wished, that Eli's sons had been the last of such priests; but there are still too many of their successors, whose profession makes their immoralities and infidelity more infamous and more criminal. 2. The particular acts of their wickedness are recorded to their everlasting shame. They were rapacious, profane, and adulterous. In view of such abominations, it cannot be wondered that the people abhorred the offerings of the Lord where such impiety was practised, and that God with a deep brand stamped their wickedness before him, to be remembered afterwards to their eternal confusion. Note; (1.) A rapacious priest is accursed of God, and abhorred of men. (2.) They who make a god of their belly, only add to their impiety by the mockery of wearing Christ's livery. (3.) To abuse the credit of the sacred office, in order to succeed in the gratification of bestial appetite, is the highest step of human villainy and abandoned wickedness. 3. Their hardened resistance of their father's reproof. He heard of their ill-doings: the injured, no doubt, complained to him; but he was old, and unable therefore himself to inspect the concerns of his office; and his sons were too headstrong to be restrained by him. Yet he remonstrates with them on their evil doings, expostulates on the ill-tendency of their wickedness, in leading God's people to transgress, and warns them of the dreadful danger of it to their own souls, when, without an advocate, they should appear before God, and receive that eternal condemnation which their crimes provoked. But words signified little to them; they needed severer 174
- 175. correction; and forEli's sinful indulgence of them, God will visit him when he takes vengeance on them: for, having resolved to slay them, God had given them up to the blindness and hardness of their own hearts; and therefore they hearkened not to their father, but went on in their iniquities. Note; (1.) There is not a more hopeless character, than a disobedient child. (2.) Parents have often much reason to blame their sinful lenity and indulgence, and not only are chargeable with guilt before God for withholding the rod of correction, but are made here to smart for it by their children's undutifulness and sufferings. (3.) There is a sin unto death, for which there is no entreating: let us tremble at every approach to this unpardonable state. III. Samuel's character closes the narrative. His piety served to remove that disgust which Eli's sons had given, and his behaviour the more conciliated the regard of God's people, as it appeared more eminent and exemplary in the midst of such bad company. Note; It is some comfort, when great impiety and wickedness have crept into the church of God, that some burning and shining lights continue to be raised up in it, that we may not be as Sodom, nor become like unto Gomorrah. LANGE, " 1 Samuel 2:25. Pillel (ֵללּ ִ)פּ is used, in connection with wicked actions, in the sense “to give a decisive judgment,” and so between two contending parties, “to compose a strife by judgment;” comp. Ezekiel 16:52; Psalm 106:30. The elohim, however, cannot here mean the Judges, or the authority that Judges, but God is described as He who composes by judging. The sense of Eli’s discourse is: “When men sin against men, it is God (of course through the appointed human organs), who restores the disturbed relations by composing the strife; but when we have to do with the relation, not between man and Prayer of Manasseh, but between man and God, when a man sins against God, offends against God’s honor, who will interpose to arrange the matter?” Eli sets two things therefore before his sons: 1) that their sin is a sin immediately against God, from which point of view it has been regarded in the whole preceding narration ( 1 Samuel 2:12; 1 Samuel 2:17); 2) that the consequent guilt is so great, that divine punishment therefor is certain. [Wordsworth: A man may intercede with God for remission of a penalty due for injury to himself; but who shall venture to entreat for one who has outraged the majesty of God?—Tr.]—Eli’s weakly mild words were too indefinite and general to check the bold wickedness of his sons. It was too late. They sinned against the Lord “with a high hand” (ה ָמ ָר ָדי ְ,)בּ as it were, with hardened hearts.—And they hearkened not to the voice of their father.—As reason of this (י ִ,כּ “because”) is stated, “that it pleased God, was God’s will, to slay them;” that Isaiah, they were in a state of inner hardening, which excluded the subjective condition of salvation from destruction, and so they had already incurred God’s unchangeable condemnation. 175
- 176. As hardened offenders,they were already appointed by God to death; therefore the word of instruction had no moral effect on them. 1 Samuel 2:26. In contrast with them, Samuel is now again presented, as he developed in his childhood as well physically as morally; while the sons of Eli were a horror to God and men, he was well-pleasing to God and men. On ַלָה comp. Ges, § 131, 3, Rem3. It is used frequently to express continuance in the sense “advance,” “continue,” and then also expresses advancing increase, the participial construction being not seldom employed in such cases, as here: “The child Samuel grew constantly in stature and goodness.” [See Luke 2:52.—Tr.] SIMEON, "THE DANGER OF NEGLECTING THE GREAT SACRIFICE 1 Samuel 2:25. If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him? THE consideration of an earthly tribunal is of great use to restrain the wickedness of ungodly men. But as there are innumerable offences which can neither be proved by human testimony, nor defined by human laws, it is necessary that men should be reminded of another tribunal, to which they shall be shortly summoned, and before which they shall be called to a strict account. Long before the deluge this was a topic much enforced by the preachers of religion [Note: Jude, ver. 14, 15.]; and Eli adverted to it, as well calculated to enforce his exhortations, and to dissuade his sons from their impieties. His sons were transgressors of no common stamp: they are justly reprobated as sons of Belial. Their father being advanced in years, the administration of the priestly office had devolved to them. This office they abused to the purposes of oppression and debauchery. The interposition of their father became highly necessary: as God’s vicegerent, he should have vindicated the honour of God, and the rights of his subjects. He should have interposed, not only with parental but judicial authority. He should not only have manifested his detestation of their lewdness and rapacity, but should have punished them with degradation. He however, either from a timidity and supineness incident to age, or from a shameful partiality for his own children, forbore to inflict the punishment they deserved; and contented himself with expostulations and reproofs. He said to them, “Why do ye 176
- 177. such things? forI hear of your evil doings by all this people. Nay, my sons: for it is no good report that I hear; ye make the Lord’s people to transgress. If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him; but if a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him?” With less hardened criminals these words might have produced a good effect: for if it be awful to be summoned before an earthly judge, how much more so to be called into the presence of God, laden with iniquities, and destitute of any advocate or intercessor! May our minds be impressed with reverence and godly fear, while we consider the import of this admonition, and deduce from it some suitable and important observations! The words of the text do not at first sight appear to need much explanation: but we cannot well understand the antithesis, or see the force of the interrogation, without adverting particularly to the circumstances, which occasioned the reproof. The sense is not, That, if a man violate an human law, he shall be condemned by an earthly judge; and, that if he violate the divine law, he shall be condemned by God himself: this is far short of its real import. The sin which the sons of Eli had committed was of a peculiar nature. They, as priests, had a right to certain parts of all the sacrifices that were offered: but, instead of being contented with the parts which God had allotted them, and of burning the fat according to the divine appointment, they sent their servants to strike their flesh-hooks of three teeth into the pot or caldron where the meat was seething, and to take whatsoever the flesh-hook might bring up. If they came before the flesh was put into the caldron, they demanded it raw, together with all the fat that was upon it. If the people objected to such lawless proceedings, or reminded them that they must not forget to burn the fat, the servants were ordered to take away the meat immediately, and by force [Note: ver. 16.]. To these enormities, the young men added others of a most malignant nature: they, who, from their office, should have been ministers of justice, and patterns of all sanctity, availed themselves of their situation to seduce the women, when they came to worship at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation [Note: ver. 22.]. Thus they discouraged the people from even coming to the house of God, and caused them to “abhor the offering of the Lord.” 177
- 178. Now it shouldbe recollected that sacrifices were the instituted means of reconciliation with God: there was no other way in which any offence, whether ceremonial or moral, could be purged, but by the offering of the appointed sacrifice before the door of the tabernacle: without shedding of blood there was to be no remission [Note: Hebrews 9:22.]. It should be remembered further, that these sacrifices were typical of the great sacrifice which Christ was in due time to offer upon the cross. The whole Epistle to the Hebrews was written to establish and illustrate this point. “The blood of bulls and of goats could never take away sin:” they had no efficacy at all, but as they typified him who was to “appear in this last dispensation to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself [Note: Hebrews 9:25-26; Hebrews 10:1; Hebrews 10:4; Hebrews 10:14.].” In causing therefore the offerings of the Lord to be thus abhorred, the young men sinned in a peculiar manner against God himself: they poured contempt upon the very means which God had provided for their obtaining of pardon and reconciliation with him. Thus they rendered their situation desperate: had they only committed some heinous offence against man, a judge, intrusted with the execution of the laws, might have arbitrated between the parties: he might have punished the delinquents, and obtained satisfaction for the injured person: and, the offenders, if truly penitent, might have brought their offering to God, and thus, through the blood of their sacrifice and the intercession of the priest, have obtained the remission of their sin. But they had sinned immediately against God himself; so that there was no third person to redress the grievance or settle the dispute. Moreover they had despised the only atonement that could be offered for them: yea, in despising the typical, they had, in fact, disclaimed all trust in the real atonement. What hope then remained for them? Having provoked God, they had no person of authority sufficient to arbitrate between them: and having rejected the only Sacrifice, the only Advocate, the great High-priest, they had none to make atonement for them, they had none to intercede: they must therefore be left to their fate, and reap the bitter fruits of their iniquities. In confirmation of this, God declared that “their sin should not be purged by sacrifice or offering for ever [Note: 1 Samuel 3:14.].” 178
- 179. With this explanationwe see at once the force and emphasis of the words before us. They were intended to express the exceeding heinousness of the sins that had been committed, and to deter the offenders from persisting in such fatal conduct. While they intimate the danger to which a violation of human laws will expose us, they insinuate the infinitely greater danger we incur by contemning the only means of forgiveness with God. With the additional light which the New Testament reflects on this passage, we may see that we are as much interested in this admonition, as the very persons were, to whom it was first given: for, though we have not run to their excess of riot, or caused the offering of the Lord to be so abhorred, yet we have too much disregarded the sacrifice of the Son of God. If we have not openly opposed the atonement of Christ, we have been, perhaps still are, too indifferent about it. The censure therefore in the text, how severe soever it may appear, lies in full force against us. To neglect the Saviour is in a most fatal manner to sin against God: it is, at the same time, to provoke the Majesty of heaven, and to reject the only Advocate, the only Propitiation for sin. Hence the Apostle asks with such tremendous energy, “How shall ye escape if ye neglect so great salvation [Note: Hebrews 2:3.]?” Which question, both in import and expression, accords with that in our text, “If a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him?” In this application of the passage we are countenanced by a parallel passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews [Note: Hebrews 10:26-29.], “If we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.” Here the writer states the reason why an apostate from the truth has nothing to expect but wrath and fiery indignation; the reason is the same as in our text; he has turned his back on the sacrifice of Christ, and there will be no other sacrifice for sin to all eternity: there is therefore no hope of salvation for him. The Apostle then adds, “He that despised Moses’ law, died without mercy, under two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite to the Spirit of grace?” Thus may we ask, in reference to the text, If the infraction of human laws, when substantiated by sufficient evidence, be ever 179
- 180. punished with theloss of life, how much more shall a neglect and contempt of Christ meet with due recompence from an holy and omniscient God? The text being thus explained, we may proceed to deduce from it some important observations. The solemnity of the present occasion [Note: An Assize Sermon at Cambridge.] requires us to take some notice of human judicatures: we shall not however restrict our observations to them: there is a future judgment to which we must look forward; nor should we satisfy your expectations any more than our own conscience, if we did not principally advert to that. The text affords us a proper opportunity for discharging our duty in both respects. We observe then, I. That the dispensing of justice by persons duly qualified and authorized, is an unspeakable blessing to a nation. The institution of judges is a necessary part of every well-ordered government. When God called his people Israel, and formed them into a distinct nation by his servant Moses, he gave this command; “Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee throughout all thy tribes; and they shall judge the people with just judgment [Note: Deuteronomy 16:18.].” When Jehoshaphat set himself to restore the political and religious welfare of his kingdom, he paid immediate attention to this point: “he set judges in the land throughout all the fenced cities of Judah, city by city; and said to the judges, Take heed what ye do; for ye judge not for man, but for the Lord, who is with you in judgment [Note: 2 Chronicles 19:5-6.].” After the Babylonish captivity also, when the Persian monarch gave commandment respecting the re-establishment of the Jews in their own land, he particularly enjoined Ezra to be mindful of this matter: “Thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy God that is in thine hand, set magistrates and judges, which may judge all the people that are beyond the river: and whosoever will not do the law of thy God, and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily upon him, 180
- 181. whether it beunto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment [Note: Ezra 7:25-26.].” Indeed, without such an institution, the laws themselves would be altogether vain and useless: the weak would sink under oppression; and the strong tyrannize with impunity. The bonds of society would be broken asunder; and universal anarchy would prevail. We have witnessed the destruction of all constituted authorities, and the utter annihilation of all established laws. We have beheld licentiousness stalking with the cap of liberty, and ferocious despotism, under the name of equality, spreading desolation with an undiscriminating hand [Note: At the time of the French Revolution.]. But, blessed be God, it is not thus with Britain: I pray God it never may be. The laws, with us, are respected; and they, who superintend the execution of them, are reverenced. If one man sin against another, we have judges, who are competent, and not afraid, to judge him. If existing laws are not sufficient to check the progress of conspiracy and treason, we have a legislature, that will deliberate with coolness, and enact with wisdom. If the necessary restraints be violated by presumptuous demagogues, we have magistrates, that will call the offenders to trial; juries, that will bring in their verdict with conscientious truth; and judges, that, while they declare the sentence of the law with firmness, know how to temper judgment with mercy. Yes, to their united efforts, under the care of Providence, we owe it, that faction and sedition have been disarmed of the power, would to God I might also add, the inclination, to disturb the realm. However the opinions of many were shaken for a time by specious arguments and groundless cavils, there are but few, it is hoped, at this time, whose eyes have not been opened to discern the excellence of our constitution. Who, that has seen insulted majesty proclaiming pardon to mutiny and sedition; who that, when the contemners of that pardon were brought to trial, has seen the very judges becoming counsel for the accused; who, that has seen to what an amazing extent lenity has been carried (not from partiality or supineness, as under Eli’s administration, but from a love of mercy, and a desire to win the offenders to a sense of duty) who, that reflects how forbearance has been exercised, insomuch that not a single execution even of the most daring traitors took place, till lenient measures absolutely defeated their own ends; who, I say, that has seen these things, must not acknowledge the equity and mildness of our government? And who, that knows the value of such a government, would not uphold it to the utmost of his power? While we are speaking upon this subject, it is impossible to omit the mention of one, 181
- 182. who with unexampledfortitude has stemmed the torrent of iniquity in this country, and has made the most opulent to know, that if they will tempt the chastity of individuals, and destroy the peace of families, they shall do it at their peril. I do not hesitate to say, that every father of a family, and every lover of virtue in this kingdom, stands indebted to him, and has reason to bless God, that such integrity and power are combined in one person [Note: The name of Lord Kenyon will necessarily occur to the mind of every reader. He awarded 10,000l. damages in a case of adultery.]. There is one other point worthy to be noticed in the judicatories of this country; I mean, a freedom from political or religious prejudice. If a man be known to disapprove the measures of government, he is not the less likely on that account to obtain justice in any cause in which he may be engaged: if he dissent from the established mode of worship, he is not the less protected in the right of serving God according to his conscience: nor, if on account of superior zeal and piety, he be branded with an ignominious name, will prejudice be suffered to bias the decisions of our courts against him. Every member of the community, of whatever denomination or description, is sure to have his cause attentively heard, and impartially determined. These things cannot but create a love to our constitution in the mind of every man, who rightly appreciates the blessings of civil and religious liberty. And I pray God that the laws of our country may ever continue to be thus respected, and to be thus dispensed. The observation now made, has been suggested by the first part of Eli’s admonition. Another observation we may offer, arising from the obvious connexion which subsists between that and the latter member of the text; namely, II. That there are many things, not cognizable by human laws, which will be brought to trial before the Judge of quick and dead. Man’s tribunal is erected principally for judging things which particularly affect 182
- 183. the welfare ofsociety; and, in criminal causes, respect is had to actions rather than to thoughts, or at least to actions as the evidences of our thoughts. But at the tribunal of God, every thing which affected the divine government will be brought forward, the sins against God, as well as sins against our fellow-creatures; the sins of omission, as well as of commission; the sins of thought and desire, as well as those of purpose and of act. There is not any one action of our lives that will not then be weighed in the balance of the sanctuary; there is not a word of our lips, which will not then bear its proper stamp of piety, or transgression: there is not so much as a thought of our hearts, that will not receive its just mark of approbation or displeasure. We are expressly told, that “God in that day will judge the secrets of men; that he will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and make manifest the counsels of the heart;” and that “he will then reward every man according to what he hath done, whether it be good or evil;” “to them, who by patient continuance in well-doing have sought for glory and honour and immortality, he will give eternal life: but to them that were contentious, and obeyed not the truth, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, even upon every soul of man that doeth evil.” At that day, we are informed, “the Judge will come in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory;” and he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, even “with the voice of the archangel, and the trump of God.” “Then shall the sea give up the dead which were in it, and death and hell deliver up the dead that were in them, and all, small and great, shall stand before God.” “The Ancient of days, whose garment is white as snow, and the hair of whose head is like pure wool, will sit upon his fiery throne; and while a fiery stream issues from before him, and ten thousand times ten thousand minister unto him, he will open the books [Note: Daniel 7:9-10.]; the book of life [Note: Revelation 20:12.], wherein the names of his people are written; the book of his remembrance [Note: Malachi 3:16.], wherein the most secret imaginations of men’s hearts were registered; the book of conscience too [Note: Matthew 22:12.], which, however illegible now through our ignorance and partiality, will be found to correspond with his records in every particular; and lastly, the book of his law [Note: Romans 2:12.], according to which he will pass his judgment. Ah! who can reflect on the solemnities of that day, and not be filled with awe? Who amongst us can endure so strict a scrutiny? “Who can abide the day of his coming?” We may easily conceive the feelings of a prisoner, who, being to be tried for a capital offence, hears the trumpet announce the coming of his judge. Let us endeavour to realize the thought, and to apply it to our own case. We are sure that such a criminal would lose no time in preparing for his defence. He would engage his counsel, summon his witnesses, and employ every art in order to obtain a favourable sentence. Let us go and do likewise: our “time is short; the Judge is at the door,” and if we be unprepared to meet him, woe be unto us; our sentence will be awful indeed: the very terms, in which it will be expressed, 183
- 184. are already toldus; “Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels [Note: Matthew 25:41.].” In one respect indeed we differ widely from such a criminal: if he escape, it must be through want of evidence to convict him: whereas the only way for us to escape is, to confess our guilt, and plead the atonement offered for us by the Son of God. This leads me to my last observation, namely, III. That a neglect of Christ will be found in that day to have been the most fatal of all offences. Sins of any other kind, how heinous soever they may have been, yea, though they may have brought us to an ignominious end, may yet be pardoned of our God, provided we turn to him with unfeigned sorrow and contrition, and rely on the atonement which Christ has offered. The Scriptures are extremely full and strong upon this subject. They declare that “all who believe, shall be justified from all things;” that “the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin;” that “though our sins be as scarlet they shall be as wool, though they be red like crimson they shall be white as snow.” So undoubted is this truth, and so suited to the condition of fallen man, that it has been often and well proclaimed in our very courts of justice; proclaimed, I say, to criminals condemned, at the very time of condemnation, and that too, by those very persons who pronounced the sentence of death against them. Yes, thanks be to God, there are judges, even in this degenerate age, who are not ashamed to unite the balm of Christian counsel with the severity of a penal sentence. But let us suppose that we have neither violated the laws of man, nor, in any flagrant instances, the laws of God; shall we therefore be acquitted at God’s tribunal? Shall we need none to entreat for us, none to plead our cause in that day? May we safely neglect the sacrifice of Christ, because we have abstained from gross iniquities? Let us not deceive ourselves with any such dangerous imagination: “We all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;” “every mouth therefore must be stopped, and all the world must become guilty before God.” None can stand upon the footing of his own righteousness. Having transgressed the law, we are cursed by the law; as it is written, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that 184
- 185. are written inthe book of the law to do them.” We must therefore all, without exception, seek deliverance in Him, “who hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.” God has declared that “there is salvation in no other; that there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved, but the name of Jesus Christ:” if we will not “enter by that door,” we exclude ourselves from even a possibility of obtaining mercy to all eternity. I know it will be urged in opposition to this, that we have been free from all gross offences, and have been punctual in the observance of many civil and religious duties. Be it so: but how would such a plea sound in a court of justice? Let a criminal, accused of rebellion against an earthly monarch, plead his allegiance to the King of kings; let him say, “I regarded his sacrifice, I trusted in the atonement, I sought an interest in Christ.” Would his plea be valid? Would he not be told immediately, that these things he ought indeed to have done, and not have left the other undone? Thus then we answer those, who go about to establish their own righteousness instead of submitting to the righteousness of God; “It was well that you abstained from gross sin, and fulfilled many duties; but you ought also to have sought redemption through the blood of Christ; you ought to have ‘fled for refuge to the hope set before you:’ and because you have neglected him, you have no part or lot in his salvation.” What can be plainer than our Lord’s own assertions, “No man cometh to the Father but by me;” and, “If I wash thee not, thou hast no part in me?” or what can be more awful than that interrogation of St. Peter, “What shall the end be of them that obey not the Gospel of God?” We may venture to put the question to the conscience of every considerate man; If you sin against God in neglecting and despising his dear Son, what atonement will you offer to him? If you make light of the sacrifice offered upon Calvary, where will you find another sacrifice for sin? If you disregard the mediation and intercession of Christ, where will you find another advocate? If you sin thus against God, who shall entreat for you? Here then the subject wears a very serious and solemn aspect. We all are hastening to “the judgment-seat of Christ, where we must give account of ourselves to God.” There, high and low, rich and poor, judges and criminals, must all appear to receive their sentence of condemnation or acquittal; there will be no respect of persons with God: even the criminal who died by the hand of the executioner, provided that his disgraceful circumstances led him to reflection, and made him implore mercy through the blood of Jesus, shall stand a monument of redeeming grace: while his 185
- 186. superiors in morality,yea, even the judge who condemned him, if they died in impenitence and unbelief, shall hear the sentence of condemnation pronounced against them, and be doomed to that “second death in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone.” Let us then inquire diligently into the state of our souls: let us “judge ourselves that we be not judged of the Lord.” Let us examine what regard we have paid, and are yet daily paying, to the sacrifice of Christ; let us inquire whether “He be all our salvation and all our desire?” And let us remember, that if we would have him to entreat for us in that day, we must now entreat him for ourselves, “desiring earnestly to be found in him, not having our own righteousness, but the righteousness of God which is by faith in him.” K&D, "“If man sins against man, God judges him; but if a man sins against Jehovah, who can interpose with entreaty for him?” In the use of ל ְל ִפּ and ל־לֶלַּפּ ְתִי there is a paranomasia which cannot be reproduced in our language. לֵלּ ִפּ signifies to decide or pass sentence (Gen_48:11), then to arbitrate, to settle a dispute as arbitrator (Eze_16:52; Psa_106:30), and in the Hithpael to act as mediator, hence to entreat. And these meanings are applicable here. In the case of one man's sin against another, God settles the dispute as arbitrator through the proper authorities; whereas, when a man sins against God, no one can interpose as arbitrator. Such a sin cannot be disposed of by intercession. But Eli's sons did not listen to this admonition, which was designed to reform daring sinners with mild words and representation; “for,” adds the historian, “Jehovah was resolved to slay them.” The father's reproof made no impression upon them, because they were already given up to the judgment of hardening. (On hardening as a divine sentence, see the discussions at Exo_4:21.) BI, "If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him. The sinner’s friend Even had we no revelation on the subject, a future judgment would be inferred by us from reason; for we should be led by analogy to conclude, that, as when “one man sinned against another the judge judged him” and awarded his punishment, so God would certainly enter into judgment with those who sinned against Him. We are taught it in God’s dealings both with individuals and nations; we are told it in the plainest terms. We see it, in the expulsion of our guilty first parents from the once happy Eden. We see it, in the fire and brimstone which consumed Sodom and Gomorrah. “If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him.” Thanks be to God for this arrangement: judges are his vicegerents on earth, and bear the sword for Him. Thankful ought we to be for this blessing; for laws and magistrates and judges—“the powers that be”—are ordained of God. Without them, the bonds of society would be broken in sunder; the bonds of iniquity would everywhere prevail. If when one man sins against another, the judge judges and condemns him, what shall be done when God cometh to judgment? If an earthly judge can punish severely a sinner on earth, how shall not God terribly judge and 186
- 187. punish sinners inHis great day! If a judge can pass sentence for the punishment of a man’s person or the taking away of his life here, how much more shall God pass sentence on the soul for an eternal hereafter! If there be none to put in an arrest of judgment for a condemned sinner now, who shall entreat, who shall save, when God shall pass judgment then? If the whole of the machinery employed for putting in force laws passed by man on earth, be of an arresting and startling nature, how much more when God shall enter into judgment with the breakers of His law! If an accused person on trial here would employ an able advocate to plead his cause, how much more shall we need and desire the help of one to entreat for us when standing at the bar of God! If we anxiously watch the chain and tissue of evidence produced before the judge in courts of assize holden here, shall we not with intense solicitude mark the evidence produced from the books which are to be opened and exposed to view in that great day. God has denounced His judgment against sin, and has passed the sentence on the sinner, “the soul that sinneth it shall die.” Now God’s truth and God’s justice are the pillars which support His throne; and these, admitting of no room for the exhibition of unconditional mercy, demand the execution of the sentence, part of which has already taken effect, the other part is hanging over our heads. In Adam we are all dead; on account of his sin in paradise, guilt and ruin were entailed upon us: we are partakers in his fall and in the consequences of his fall, he being our covenant head. And, must this be our inevitable doom—must all mankind perish everlastingly? because we have all sinned against the Lord, is there none to entreat for us? It was so once. God the Father planned the scheme of a vicarious sacrifice: God the Son, by assuming human nature and dying in its form, offered that sacrifice in the very person of the sinner. But are there any here who look to some other than Christ to entreat for them? The hope is vain. The expectation cannot be realised. There is but one mediator between God and man, and that Mediator is Christ. No creature can entreat for another: the desperateness of our case is so great, that the united force of men and angels can never reach it. Are there any, who fondly hope that they have no need of a Saviour to entreat for them? who put their trust in good deeds? This is a delusive hope. Here, then, I come to the practical part of my subject. We must all stand before the judgment seat: we shall all need Jesus Christ to entreat for us with God then. I beseech you, then, to flee for refuge to Him, that Saviour who gave Himself a ransom for all. Make Him your friend now, and you shall not lack one to entreat for you when the heavens are riven, and the Almighty Judge descends to hold that grand assize, which will award to all their everlasting doom. (E. J. Wilcocks, M. A.) If a man sin against the Lord who shall entreat for him?— Reasons why man cannot entreat for us 1. Man cannot entreat for you because he is of your class. We are all in the same boat. One man has sinned one way, another a different way; but they are both sinners. The difficulty is that a man thinks that because another does not sin in his way, the other is the greater sinner. That is the mischief. 2. Again, man cannot entreat for us, because the offence is not against man. 3. No man can entreat for us because he does not know what the offence is, and nobody else can help him to know. Black never looks so black as when it is against white. The sun does not make the dust, the sun reveals it. We cannot see our offence, as its far-reaching, its depth, its corruptness, its awfulness; only God knows what sin 187
- 188. is. Who thenshall entreat? Here comes the great Gospel of Grace. Jesus did not die instead of us, He died for us. He says: “I only came to meet this great problem; reconciliation must come by grace; eternity must help time; the heavens must come to redeem the earth. I have come to seek and to save that which was lost.” If one man sin against another judge and save him, but if a man sin against God, how then? (Christian Weekly.) 26 And the boy Samuel continued to grow in stature and in favor with the Lord and with people. Prophecy Against the House of Eli BARNES, "And the child Samuel ... - The account of our Lord’s growth Luk_2:52 is very similar; “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.” The literal version of the passage before us is, “The child Samuel advanced and grew and was good (or acceptable), both with the Lord, and also with men.” GILL, "And the child Samuel grew up,.... Increased in stature and in grace, grew more and more in all respects, and better and better, while Eli's sons grew worse and worse; the contrast between these make the one to shine and appear illustrious, and the other to look the blacker: or "he went on, and grew, and was good" (z); as he proceeded on in years, and grew in stature, he appeared more and more to be a good man, a virtuous, holy, and gracious person: and was in favour both with the Lord, and also with men; the Lord was pleased to give him some tokens of his favour, that he delighted in him, that he was wellpleasing in his sight, and that his person and services were acceptable to him; and the more Eli's sons disgusted the people by their ill lives and conduct, the greater esteem among them did Samuel obtain by his becoming life and conversation; all admired him, spoke well of him, and thanked God that in such bad times he was raising up one among them, of 188
- 189. whom they hadthe most hopeful prospect of usefulness to them. HENRY, "(2.) It was too mild and gentle. He should have rebuked them sharply. Their crimes deserved sharpness; their temper needed it; the softness of his dealing with them would but harden them the more. The animad-version was too easy when he said, It is no good report. he should have said, “It is a shameful scandalous thing, and not to be suffered!” Whether it was because he loved them or because he feared them that he dealt thus tenderly with them, it was certainly an evidence of his want of zeal for the honour of God and his sanctuary. He bound them over to God's judgment, but he should have taken cognizance of their crimes himself, as high priest and judge, and have restrained and punished them. What he said was right, but it was not enough. Note, It is sometimes necessary that we put an edge upon the reproofs we give. There are those that must be saved with fear, Jud_1:23. 3. Their obstinacy against this reproof. His lenity did not at all work upon them: They hearkened not to their father, though he was also a judge. They had no regard either to his authority or to his affection, which was to them an evident token of perdition; it was because the Lord would slay them. They had long hardened their hearts, and now God, in a way of righteous judgment, hardened their hearts, and seared their consciences, and withheld from them the grace they had resisted and forfeited. Note, Those that are deaf to the reproofs of wisdom are manifestly marked for ruin. The Lord has determined to destroy them, 2Ch_25:16. See Pro_29:1. Immediately upon this, Samuel's tractableness is again mentioned (1Sa_2:26), to shame their obstinacy: The child Samuel grew. God's grace is his own; he denied it to the sons of the high priest and gave it to the child of an obscure country Levite. COFFMAN, "SAMUEL'S DEVELOPMENT "Now the boy Samuel continued to grow both in stature and in favor with the Lord and with men." This verse is very like Luke 2:52, where almost the same declarations are made concerning our Lord Jesus Christ. Including increasing in wisdom, this four-fold development is the ideal for everyone. HAWKER, "(26) And the child Samuel grew on, and was in favour both with the LORD, and also with men. How the mind of the Reader is relieved again and again in this melancholy account of Eli's sons, in the relation that is given by the Holy Ghost, of the progressive state of Samuel in the ways of the Lord. Reader! doth not this bring to your recollection what is said here of Samuel's Lord. See Luke 2:52. 189
- 190. NISBET, "IN FAVOURWITH GOD AND MEN ‘And the child Samuel grew on, and was in favour both with the Lord, and also with men.’ 1 Samuel 2:26 These words arouse our attention, not merely on account of what they tell us about the character of Samuel, but also because they are the same words which are used to describe the character of our Lord. Samuel was, in his young days, apparently, the same sort of child as was our Lord. Each was in favour with the Lord. I. Naturalness in children.—He was a child just of the kind that God would have him be. How often children, through their surroundings, are very much warped from their childhood. The little affectations, curious phrases, methods of raillery or contempt—these certainly do not belong to the child, but have plainly been picked up elsewhere. I am sure that there is one thing God likes to see in a child, that it should be in every sense, on its religious and all other sides, perfectly natural. Do we not, one and all, love to see a child who is natural in its religiousness, just religious in a way that our common sense teaches us that a child should be religious. You remember when our Lord came on earth how He approved of such children, how He took the little unconscious ones upon His knee, and how to His wondering disciples, His querulous disciples, He gave that wonderful declaration ‘Suffer them to come;’ and not merely that, but, ‘of such is the Kingdom of Heaven.’ II. Trustfulness in children.—Children being so quick in a simple way, if they are wisely tended and directed to recognise the Unseen, we notice next, how wonderfully they trust unless their sense of faith has been trifled with. Have we not at times, perhaps, when we have told children some little anecdote, been astonished at the way in which they accepted it as true? Samuel was a child of this kind. He had that quick, ready recognition that there was something beyond the world we see which is implanted in every child. He was ready to trust his God, he was ready to try and obey. The times were very broken and very strange ones. The Book of Samuel 190
- 191. follows hard uponthe Book of Judges, and the times of the Judges might be summed up in that phrase ‘There was no King in Israel, no distinct ruler,’ and in such a time there are continually cast up two types of character, and these are strongly marked. On the one hand at Shiloh there were the two sons of Eli, breaking the law of God in various ways, and in some of them the very worst ways, and then there, too, we have the sight of this family of Elkanah. He was a religious man, and he was accustomed to go up and worship God. We are told specially that he went up, and his household went up every year. And still more remarkable is his wife, Hannah. She is in every sense a saint of the Most High. See how she comes and pleads for the child; see how, when the child is given her, she vows it to the Lord, and how year after year she comes up to look after its well-being, having placed it where she thought it was most fitted for its spiritual good, in the courts of the Tabernacle with Eli. Are your children the children of many prayers? Do you bring their names constantly before God? Do you trouble yourself to think over their difficulties and to speak to them about their difficulties, and then pray for them, perhaps sometimes pray with them, that these difficulties may be got rid of? Samuel is a wonderful character at the beginning and all through, but remember that initial fact about him, that his parents were religious people, that especially his mother— and how much mothers influence their children!—was a woman of many prayers. III. Children’s work for God.—Samuel was connected with useful religious work. We are told that he ministered to the Lord before Eli; we are told that on an eventful occasion, and no doubt it was like other occasions, he opened the doors of the Temple of the Lord. As a boy he would not do anything very extraordinary, but there were little, simple things which a child could do, and these his mother, through Eli, put him in the way of doing. Do we take sufficient care to teach our children that they can in their way bless men and work for God? Do our children understand that they can do some little thing for the service of His sanctuary? Do you tell them that at the collection they can give a little from their own pocket? Do you show them how they can go down and speak words of kindness to the weak and sick? Try and set these things before your children. IV. The opportunities of children.—If we parents were quicker to recognise that we need not wait for children to come to old age, or middle age, or even maturity, but that much before that they really have a true place in God’s kingdom, and a true service to do for God, how much happier parents would be! How exhilarating it would be to say, ‘I have the child, and I can even now make it a servant of God!’ At 191
- 192. the confirmation seasonhow often we hear parents say, ‘Oh, he is not old enough!’ Are we amongst those who somehow or other think that children cannot come very close to the heart of God, that they cannot in any full sense carry out His will? Yet the teaching of Scripture surely is this, that God makes different calls upon different persons, and that even the little child has a special degree of holiness, has a special way of serving God, and if only he serves God in that way He will bless him perpetually, and ever more and more. The Rev. Stephen F. Bridge. Illustrations (1) ‘Every child is a bundle of tremendous possibilities; and whether that child shall come forth to life, its heart attuned to the eternal harmonies, and after a life of usefulness on earth go to a life of joy in heaven, or whether across it shall jar eternal discords, is being in a great measure decided by the nursery song, the Sabbath lesson, the evening prayer, the walk, ride, look, frown, or smile.’ (2) ‘Hannah stands before us as the rewarded mother. For all the coats she made for Samuel, all the prayers she offered for him, the discipline exerted over him, she got abundant compensation in the piety, usefulness, and popularity of her son Samuel. And that is true in all ages. Every mother gets full pay for all the prayers and tears in behalf of her children. That man useful in commercial life; that man prominent in a profession; that master mechanic—why, every step he takes in life has an echo of gladness in the heart that, long ago, taught him to be a Christian, heroic and earnest. Oh! the satisfaction of Hannah in seeing Samuel serving at the altar; of Mother Eunice, in seeing her Timothy learned in the Scriptures! That is the mother’s recompense: to see her children growing up to be useful in the world, reclaiming the lost, healing the sick, pitying the ignorant, earnest and useful in every sphere.’ 192
- 193. BI, "And thechild Samuel grew on, and was in favour both with the Lord, and also with men. Child growth One of the most beautiful things that God has made in the world is growth, and the world is full of it. God did not make a great Samuel at once, but a little child Samuel, who grew before Him. I will speak of four thoughts as included in growing before the Lord. I. Samuel grew at the Lord’s house. At this time there was no temple. There was no tabernacle, with the court round about, where the burnt offerings were consumed on the altar. II. Samuel grew is the Lord’s sight. This means that the Lord was pleased to see Samuel grow as he did. “Grow in grace” is the Apostle’s word. Growth in love is the true progress; for love is holiness, and holiness is light, and light is God. III. Samuel grew by the Lord’s grace. His mother had lent him to the Lord, and the Lord saw to his growing. IV. Samuel grew for the Lord’s service. 1. Little services from little people are acceptable to God. 2. The little grows by and by to the great. (J. Edmond.) The training of a prophet The Bible tells us very little about the childhood of its great men. We know nothing of the early days of Abraham, or of the child life of Moses, David, St. Peter, and St. Paul. Even of Jesus there is only one beautiful picture given of His young bright days. The only exception which the Bible makes is the instance of Samuel. The account of his early life is really the only thing of the kind which the sacred pages contain. It is the story of a child’s growth, of a child’s education, of a child’s first prayers and religious beginnings, of a child’s shaping into a man of God. I. It tells us of his mother. No biography is complete without that. The father is not of so much consequence in the story; the mother is indispensable. Paint her moral portrait for me, and I can guess what the child will be like. Samuel’s life began well, with a praying mother kneeling beside his cradle, and praying lips teaching him the first words he knew. She laid her dearest treasure upon the altar, and prayed, “Take him, O God, and make him Thine and make him worthy.” And the Lord answered, as Jesus might have answered, “O, woman, great is thy faith; be it unto thee even as thou wilt.” Our children will become in the main features what their mothers prayerfully and persistently determine they shall be. The picture of life which the mother always holds up before them will be the end, the ideal towards which they strive, and her daily habitual thoughts, her dominant and ruling thoughts will shape and colour their hopes and dreams. II. We are told about his schoolmaster. He was the one pupil of a sad-hearted old man. 193
- 194. There is atouch of pathos in that part of the story, This child became the one joy of a lonely house, the music in its silent chambers. He came to Eli as the sunbeams come into a prison, or the smell of flowers to a sick man on his bed. He was a joyless old man, wearied and disappointed, who trailed behind him the broken threads of all his life’s hopes. His own sons had become his shame, so that he wished he had buried them when they were little ones. His country was in danger, for the people had forsaken God and all good things, and were on the downgrade towards ruin. He was a gentle and kindly old man, but with no strength for the position which he filled. His hands were weak and his eyes dim. Dark was the outlook, and his life was going down with sorrow to the grave. And now see the goodness of the Lord. There comes into his house this sunbeam, this ripple of laughter on the sullen stream, this song in the night. A child whose feet ran in the way of his commandments, a child whom it was good to love and a joy to teach, a child who would take the place of his lost sons and provide new interests and create new hopes. There was something to live for and work for again. The child’s presence brought summer into the drear winter, and warmth and cheerfulness into the cold desolate heart. On that child the old man poured his affection and gave all his remaining strength, and the child took lovely shape under these worn but tender hands. He must have been a good schoolmaster though he was no great good at anything else. He was no prophet, but he helped to make a prophet. He had no greatness of his own, but he developed the greatness of another. If Israel owed him nothing else, it owed him a Samuel: and that was no small debt. His life bore that magnificent fruit in its old age, and many a successful life has far less to show at the end. Call no man or woman a failure who has sent out one brave true life to enrich the world. When you think of Samuel do not forget the gentle, tired, old man who was his schoolmaster. III. We are told of his growth. But there are different kinds of growth. Some children grow taller and stronger, but they do not improve in other things. They get a little more knowledge, hut they do not get much wiser. They increase in stature, years, and strength; but they seem to lose, bit by bit, all their goodness, and what was beautiful in them becomes ugly, and what was kind and gentle and innocent becomes selfish and peevish and hard and unlovely. Samuel grew in favour with God and also with man. He grew by prayer. God heard him, and for every prayer gave him a little more wisdom and a little more goodness. And so he grew in obedience, in truthfulness, in modesty, in kindness of heart, in helpfulness. And everybody saw that he was shaping well. For just as we can felt from the first signs whether a tree will grow crooked or straight, and whether a plant will grow into poisonous nightshade or into a fragrant rose bush, and whether the glittering particles under the sea will form a common oyster shell or crystallise into a pearl, so can those who watch a child’s life today know what the coming man or woman will be. Samuel was steadily shaping into the life which God had designed for him. IV. That he was the rising star in a dark sky and the hope of a godless land. It was a dreary and desperate time. The few who, like old Eli, still believed in God and righteousness were at their wits’ end. They saw no tiniest rift in the black storm cloud which darkened the sky. And yet, in the midst of all that, God was training this child as a teacher and deliverer, keeping him outside all the impurity and unbelief, giving him a big heart and a wise mind, and fitting him for great leadership. If you read these three chapters, you seem to hear two distinct voices speaking. One is a voice of groaning complaint, sad foreboding; the other, a voice of hope, promise, and good cheer. One tells of greedy priests who were robbing the people and plundering the sanctuary; and then the other voice breaks in, “But the child Samuel grew and ministered before the Lord.” 194
- 195. Once more thedoleful lips take up the strain, and tell again how the ruling men are wallowing in the filthiest sins and the people mocking at religion, and all the wisdom turned to folly; and again the other voice replies, “But the child grew on, grew in favour with God and man.” Clouds thickening above, and danger and ruin threatening on every side. Still the child grows, and God is with him. And so God is training our children today. There are always new hopes given to us when we see child life, for in every group of children, especially if they are God-taught children, there are the bright and great possibilities of the future. Instead of the fathers shall come up the children. When there is a dearth of great men there is often a larger abundance of young souls slowly growing into greatness. The seed has been sown and the harvest will be reaped further on. We shall have them again, never fear. The Samuels, the brave leaders, the men made mighty by faith and prayer, they are growing in many a godly home today. The Lord knows them though we do not. (J. G. Greenough, M. A.) The child Samuel I. Now, first of all, what was Samuel, as described in the Word of God? There are among others three things about him, which I want to tell you of his character, his conduct, and his circumstances. First of all, about his character. God loved him, and men loved him too; everybody that knew him could not help loving him. That was his character. The first thing was, that he had God’s love. That is of the utmost importance, dear children; because if everybody in the world loved us, and we had not the love of God, we could not be truly happy. Now, one proof of being accepted of God is, that our conduct will be that which is right. We read that Samuel had the character before men of being a good boy. He “was in favour with men.” If Samuel had been accustomed to tell lies, do yea think that men would have liked him? But I dare say you would like me to tell you something more particularly respecting Samuel’s conduct. 1. In the first place, then, Samuel was very obedient. He was obedient to Eli’s will. Eli had only to tell him what to do, and Samuel ran as hard as he could to do it. 2. The second is, respect and affection for an old man. Now, there are net many children that are disposed to find their pleasure in showing respect and affection to old people. Little children very often are inclined to treat old people with neglect— not to show them proper attention. 3. But another thing in Samuel’s conduct was his humility. It pleased God to reveal Himself to Samuel. Now, many children would have been puffed up with pride at this. 4. There is one thing more in Samuel’s conduct that you ought to notice; and that is his truthfulness. “Samuel told him every whir, and hid not the whole truth from him.” When he was examined, he kept nothing back. There was no deceit, no guile, nothing of this kind to spoil his character, or to cause him to lose that favour which he had with all that knew him. But we must say a word about Samuel’s circumstances; because perhaps there are some children present who think that he had everything to favour him—that he had no temptations to do wrong. They may think that he had a pious mother, and perhaps a pious father too, and that Eli, with whom he lived, was God’s minister, and that he was employed in God’s house, and that there were therefore around him circumstances that all tended to make him good. But, if God had not given Samuel a new heart, all these circumstances would 195
- 196. not have madehim good. But Samuel’s circumstances were not all favourable. The two sons of Eli that Samuel had to do with every day were very bad young men. II. How are you to become like little Samuel? I think I ought to ask you, in the first place, whether you wish to become like little Samuel. In order to be like Jesus, to be in “favour with God and men,” you must have “the mind which was in Christ Jesus.” I have told you that you must pray to be like Jesus: then, secondly, you must pray to remember the truth of your Bibles. “My son, forget not my law, but let thine heart keep My commandments. Let not mercy and truth forsake thee; bind them about thy neck; write them upon the table of thine heart. So shalt thou find favour and good understanding in the sight of God and men.” Now, in order to remember God’s Word you must know it— you must learn it. Let me advise you, then, never to let a single day pass without learning some one text of Scripture. The third thing is be go and practise what you know immediately. Our blessed Lord says, “If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.” (W. Cadman, M. A.) 27 Now a man of God came to Eli and said to him, “This is what the Lord says: ‘Did I not clearly reveal myself to your ancestor’s family when they were in Egypt under Pharaoh? BARNES, "A man of God - See Jdg_13:6 note. The sudden appearance of the only prophet of whom mention is made since Deborah, without name, or any notice of his country, is remarkable. CLARKE, "There came a man of God - Who this was we know not, but the Chaldee terms him דיי נביא nebiya daya, a prophet of Jehovah. Unto the house of thy father - That is, to Aaron; he was the first high priest; the priesthood descended from him to his eldest son Eleazar, then to Phinehas. It became afterwards established in the younger branch of the family of Aaron; for Eli was a descendant of Ithamar, Aaron’s youngest son. From Eli it was transferred back again to the family of Eleazar, because of the profligacy of Eli’s sons. 196
- 197. GILL, "And therecame a man of God unto Eli,.... A prophet, as the Targum; he had gifts and graces bestowed on him by the Lord, qualifying him for that office; he came from God, and spoke in his name, as prophets used to do: who this was is not said, nor can it be known with certainty; many conjectures are made; some think he might he Phinehas, as Ben Gersom and Abarbinel (a), which is not at all likely; it is not probable that he was living, for if he had been alive, Eli would not have been high priest; the more ancient Jews say (b) he was Elkanah, the father of Samuel; and so Jarchi; and he is said in the Targum on 1Sa_1:1, to be one of the disciples of the prophets, and was reckoned by them among the two hundred prophets that prophesied in Israel (c); but of his prophecy we nowhere read in Scripture, or that he was one: other's (d) think he was Samuel himself, who through modesty conceals his name; but he was now a child, as in the preceding verse; indeed, some are of opinion that what follows is recorded in this chapter by way of anticipation, and properly belongs to, and is a part of the message sent from the Lord by Samuel to Eli, in the following chapter: and said unto him, thus saith the Lord; using the language prophets in later times did, who spake not of themselves, but in the name of the Lord; and from whence it appears that this was not a divine Person, the Son of God in human form, since he never used to speak in this manner when he appeared: did I plainly appear to the house of thy father, when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh's house? he did; this was evident and certain, and a wonderful instance of condescending goodness: the house of his father is the house of Aaron, who, and all his sons, were born in Egypt, from whose youngest son, Ithamar, Eli descended; and to whom the Lord appeared when in Egypt, and sent him to meet Moses, whose spokesman he appointed him to be; and who prophesied in Egypt, and reproved the Israelites, which is recorded in Eze_20:1 as say the Jews (e). HENRY, "Eli reproved his sons too gently, and did not threaten them as he should, and therefore God sent a prophet to him to reprove him sharply, and to threaten him, because, by his indulgence of them, he had strengthened their hands in their wickedness. If good men be wanting in their duty, and by their carelessness and remissness contribute any thing to the sin of sinners, they must expect both to hear of it and to smart for it. Eli's family was now nearer to God than all the families of the earth, and therefore he will punish them, Amo_3:2. The message is sent to Eli himself, because God would bring him to repentance and save him; not to his sons, whom he had determined to destroy. And it might have been a means of awakening him to do his duty at last, and so to have prevented the judgment, but we do not find it had any great effect upon him. The message this prophet delivers from God is very close. I. He reminds him of the great things God had done for the house of his fathers and for his family. He appeared to Aaron in Egypt (Exo_4:27), in the house of bondage, as a token of further favour which he designed for him, 1Sa_2:27. He advanced him to the priesthood, entailed it upon his family, and thereby dignified it above any of the families of Israel. He entrusted him with honourable work, to offer on God's altar, to burn incense, and to wear that ephod in which was the breast-plate of judgment. He settled upon him an honourable maintenance, a share out of all the offerings made by fire, 1Sa_ 197
- 198. 2:28. What couldhe have done more for them, to engage them to be faithful to him? Note, The distinguishing favours we have received from God, especially those of the spiritual priesthood, are great aggravations of sin, and will be remembered against us in the day of account, if we profane our crown and betray our trusts, Deu_32:6; 2Sa_12:7, 2Sa_12:8. JAMISON, "1Sa_2:27-35. A prophecy against Eli’s house. there came a man of God unto Eli, and said ... that there shall not be an old man in thine house — So much importance has always, in the East, been attached to old age, that it would be felt to be a great calamity, and sensibly to lower the respectability of any family which could boast of few or no old men. The prediction of this prophet was fully confirmed by the afflictions, degradation, poverty, and many untimely deaths with which the house of Eli was visited after its announcement (see 1Sa_4:11; 1Sa_14:3; 1Sa_22:18-23; 1Ki_2:27). BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:27-28. There came a man of God unto Eli — That is, a prophet, sent from God to deliver the following message to him: Did I plainly appear — Hebrew, Manifestly reveal myself unto the spouse of thy father — Unto Aaron, who was the head of the family of the priests. It is the way of the prophets, when they call men to repentance for their sins, to show them the aggravations of these sins, by enumerating God’s many and great mercies to them. See Isaiah 1:2, &c.; Micah 6:3-5. All the offerings made by fire — There were none of the sacrifices offered at the altar of which the priest had not some share: see Numbers 18:8-10. For even of the burnt-offerings, which were wholly consumed on the altar, the skin was, by an express law, given to the priest, Leviticus 7:8. COFFMAN, "GOD'S PROPHETIC WARNING OF ELI "And there came a man of God to Eli, and said to him, "Thus the Lord has said, `I revealed myself to the house of your father when they were in Egypt subject to the house of Pharaoh. And I chose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest, to go up to my altar, to burn incense, to wear an ephod before me; and I gave to the house of your father all my offerings by fire from my people of Israel. Why then look with a greedy eye at my sacrifices and my offerings which I commanded, and honor your sons above me by fattening yourselves upon the choicest parts of every offering of my people Israel?' Therefore the Lord the God of Israel declares: `I promised that your house and the house of your father should go in and out before me forever'; but now the Lord declares: `Far be it from me; for those who honor me I will honor, and those who despise me shall be lightly esteemed. Behold the days are coming, when I will cut off your strength and the strength of your father's house, so 198
- 199. that there willnot be an old man in your house. Then in distress you will look with envious eye on all the prosperity which shall be bestowed upon Israel; and there shall not be an old man in your house forever. The man of you which I shall not cut off from my altar shall be spared to weep out his eyes and grieve his heart; and all the increase of your house shall die by the sword of men. And this which shall befall your two sons Hophni and Phinehas, shall be the sign to you: both of them shall die on the same day. And I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who shall do according to what is in my heart; and I will bring him a sure house, and he shall go in and out before my anointed forever. And everyone who is left in your house shall come to implore him for a piece of silver or a loaf of bread, and shall say, "Put me, I pray you, in one of the priest's places, that I may eat a morsel of bread."'" The International Critical Commentary has a remarkably excellent summary of what these verses say. "An unnamed prophet comes to Eli and rehearses the benefits he and his house have received from Yahweh. The ingratitude with which he has treated his benefactor is pointed out, and the removal of his house from the priesthood is foretold, with the consequent impoverishment of his descendants.[20] "I revealed myself to the house of your father when they were in Egypt." In fact, God revealed himself to all Israel while they were still slaves in Egypt under Pharaoh, but this does not say that he chose Aaron and the Levites at that time, because those choices occurred after the revelation at Sinai. "Why then look with greedy eyes at my sacrifices?" This statement and the words that follow clearly make Eli himself blameworthy. "I promised ... but now, Far be it from me" (1 Samuel 2:30). All of God's promises are conditional absolutely upon the fidelity of the one to whom the promise came. Jeremiah spelled this out dramatically in Jeremiah 18:7-10. 1 Samuel 2:32, above, is an exceedingly obscure and doubtful passage, and the RSV rendition of it here is the result of extensive emendation,[21] a necessary procedure at times in order to come up with some likely meaning. "All the increase of your house shall die by the sword of men." This prophecy was dramatically fulfilled by Doeg's massacre of the priests at Nob (1 Samuel 22:17,18). The prophecy that Hophni and Phinehas would die on the same day (1 Samuel 2:34) was fulfilled when the Philistines defeated Israel and captured the ark of the covenant (1 Samuel 4:11). "The ark was not restored to Israel during the times of Samuel; and the tabernacle 199
- 200. itself was movedfrom Shiloh to Nob, probably in the time of war. And when Saul had all the priests put to death, it was removed to Gibeon, where it necessarily fell more and more into contempt."[22] "I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, etc." It is usually agreed among scholars that this is a reference to Zadok. However: "It also refers to all the priests whom the Lord would raise up as faithful servants of his altar, and only receives its complete and final fulfillment in Christ, the true and eternal High Priest."[23] ELLICOTT, " (27) There came a man of God.—Of this messenger of the Highest, whom, from his peculiar title, and also from the character of his communication, we must regard as one of the order of prophets, we know nothing. He appears suddenly on the scene at Shiloh, nameless and—as far as we know—homeless, delivers his message of doom, and disappears. The term “man of God” we find applied to Moses and to different prophets some forty or more times in the Books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings. It occurs, though but rarely, in Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, and in the prophetical books only once. Until the sudden appearance of this “man of God,” no mention of a prophet in the story of Israel had been made since the days of Deborah. Did I plainly appear . . .—The interrogations in this Divine message do not ask a question with a view to a reply, but simply emphatically appeal to Eli’s conscience. To these questions respecting well-known facts the old man would reply with a silent “Yes.” The “house of thy father” refers to the house of Aaron, the first high priest, from whom, through Ithamar, the fourth son of Aaron, Eli was descended. The Talmud has a beautiful note on this passage:—Rabbi Shimon ben Yochi said, “Come and see how beloved Israel is by the Holy One! Blessed be He! Wherever they are banished, there the Shekinah is with them; as it is said (1 Samuel 2:27): ‘Did I (God) plainly appear unto the house of thy fathers when they were in Egypt?’ &c. When they were banished to Babylon, the Shekinah was with them; as it is said 200
- 201. (Isaiah 43:14): ‘Foryour sakes was I sent to Babylon.’ And when they will be redeemed the Shekinah will be with them; as it is said (Deuteronomy 30:3): ‘Then the Lord thy God will return with thy captivity;’ it is not said, He will cause to return (transitively), but He will return (intransitively).”—Treatise Meguillah, fol. 29, Colossians 1. HAWKER, "(27) ¶ And there came a man of God unto Eli, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Did I plainly appear unto the house of thy father, when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh's house? Observe with what a solemn introduction the man of God is here mentioned; and what a most awful message he brought. Probably the revelation here spoken of, of the Lord's appearance to his father's house, referred to the general deliverance of Israel from the bondage of Egypt; or if anything more personal or particular was alluded to, it might have been the Lord's appearance to Aaron, the great Father of the Levites. Exodus 4:27. CONSTABLE, "4. The oracle against Eli's house 2:27-36 The rest of the chapter explains why God would put Eli's sons to death (1 Samuel 2:25). The specific criticism that the man of God (a prophet, cf. 1 Samuel 9:9-10) directed against Eli and his sons was two-fold. They had not appreciated God's grace extended to them in the Exodus deliverance nor the opportunity to serve Him as priests (1 Samuel 2:27-29). "Kick at" (NASB, 1 Samuel 2:29; cf. Deuteronomy 32:15) means to "scorn" (NIV, Heb. ba'at). It is a serious matter to undervalue the grace of God. God had initiated blessing, but they had not responded appropriately, namely, with gratitude, trust, and obedience. Eli's guilt (1 Samuel 2:29) lay in his failure to rebuke his sons severely for their sin (1 Samuel 3:13), though he did warn them of God's judgment (1 Samuel 2:25). He also enjoyed the fruits of their disobedient worship (1 Samuel 2:13-16). Had Eli grown fat from eating the best portions that his sons extorted from the people (cf. 1 Samuel 4:18)? Many students of this book have identified 1 Samuel 2:30 as its key verse because it articulates the principle that the books of Samuel illustrate. Every section of 1 and 2 Samuel demonstrates the truth of this statement. 201
- 202. God's judgment onEli and his sons was that He would dishonor them. God had promised that Levi's descendants would serve Him forever as priests, namely, as long as Israel existed as a sovereign nation (Exodus 29:9; Numbers 25:13). Now God revealed that He would cut off Eli's branch of the Levitical family tree. Eli was a descendant of Levi through Levi's son Ithamar. His descendants ceased to function as priests when Solomon dismissed Abiathar as high priest. Abiathar escaped the slaughter of the priests at Nob (1 Samuel 22:17-20), but Solomon defrocked him because he supported Adonijah (1 Kings 2:27; 1 Kings 2:35). The faithful priest God promised to raise up (1 Samuel 2:35) was initially Samuel (1 Samuel 3:1; 1 Samuel 3:20; 1 Samuel 7:9; 1 Samuel 9:2-13). Zadok, a descendant of Levi's son Eleazar, replaced Abiathar as high priest in Solomon's day (1 Kings 2:35). [Note: Segal, p. 40; et al.] The Lord's anointed (1 Samuel 2:35) was the king of Israel. One of his descendants would be Messiah. Ezekiel 44:15; Ezekiel 48:11 refer to the continuing ministry of Zadok's descendants when Messiah reigns in His future millennial kingdom. [Note: See Ronald L. Rushing, "Phinehas' Covenant of Peace," Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1988.] 1 Samuel 2:36 evidently continues to describe the fate of Eli's descendants after God deposed Abiathar. [Note: For another study of 1 Samuel 2:27-36, see Tsevat, "Studies in the Book of Samuel," Hebrew Union College Annual 32 (1961):191-216.] Notice the chiastic (crossing) structure of chapter 2 that focuses on Eli's blessing of Samuel's parents. "A. The song of Hannah, concluding with reference to the Lord's anointed (1 Samuel 2:1-10) B. Samuel ministers before the Lord (1 Samuel 2:11) C. The sins of Eli's sons (1 Samuel 2:12-17) 202
- 203. D. Samuel ministersbefore the Lord (1 Samuel 2:18-19) E. Eli blesses Samuel's parents (1 Samuel 2:20-21 a) D.' Samuel grows in the Lord's presence (1 Samuel 2:21 b) C.' The sins of Eli's sons (1 Samuel 2:22-25) B.' Samuel grows in the Lords' presence (1 Samuel 2:26) A.' The oracles of the man of God, concluding with reference to the Lord's anointed (1 Samuel 2:27-36)" [Note: Youngblood, p. 588.] This section reveals the importance and power of parental influence, though this is not the primary lesson. Eli had placed more importance on his sons' personal preferences than he had on God's preferences; he had honored them more than Him (1 Samuel 2:29). Consequently they became worthless men (1 Samuel 2:12) whom God finally killed prematurely. Hannah, on the other hand, encouraged her son, Samuel, to value the service of God. Consequently he developed into a godly man whom God and other people honored and respected (1 Samuel 2:26). Eli's sons despised God and abused other people (1 Samuel 2:17; 1 Samuel 2:22). Samuel feared God and became a great blessing to other people. This chapter also shows that godly influence can be more powerful than ungodly influence and can overcome many natural obstacles. God enabled Hannah to influence Samuel for good even though she seldom saw him, lived miles from him, and could not prevent the daily wicked influence of Eli's sons over him. Her previous dedication of him to the Lord was undoubtedly a factor in her success. Other important factors were her continuing encouragement to serve God and her 203
- 204. prayers for Samuel. Godhas not blessed with godly offspring all parents who have had the same desires for their children that Hannah did. Children are responsible for their own decisions as they grow up (Ezekiel 18:4; Ezekiel 18:20). Some choose to turn away from the Lord. Nevertheless this story shows what can happen. Children can grow up in an ungodly environment away from their parents' personal supervision and still become godly. The influence of a wise and godly parent can overcome many other ungodly influences in a child's life. LANGE, "The prophecy of a Man of God of the divine judgment on Eli’s house and of the calling of a faithful priest 1 Samuel 2:27-36 27And there came a man of God[FN41] unto [to] Eli and said unto [to] him, Thus saith the Lord [Jehovah], Did I plainly appear [reveal myself] unto [to] the house of thy father when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh’s house [in servitude[FN42] to the house 28 of Pharaoh]? And did I choose [I chose[FN43]] him [it] out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest [to do priestly service to me], to offer[FN44] upon my altar, to burn incense, to wear an ephod before me? [om.?], and did I give [I gave] unto [to] the house of thy father all the offerings made by fire [the fire-offerings] of the children 29 of Israel? [om.?]. Wherefore kick ye at [trample ye under foot] my sacrifice and at [om. at] mine [my] offering which I have commanded in my habitation,[FN45] and honorest thy sons above me to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the 30 offerings [the best of every offering] of Israel my people?[FN46] Wherefore [Therefore] the Lord [Jehovah] God of Israel saith, I said indeed[FN47] that thy house and the house of thy father should walk before me for ever; but now the Lord saith [saith Jehovah], Be it far from me; for them that honor me I will honor, and they that 31 despise me shall be lightly esteemed. Behold, the days come that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father’s house, [ins. so] that there shall not be an 32 old man in thine house. And[FN48] thou shalt see an enemy in my habitation in all the wealth which God shall give Israel [thou shalt see distress of house in all that does 33 good to Israel]; and there shall not be an old man in thy house for ever. And the man of thine whom I shall not cut off [And I will not cut off every man of thine[FN49]] from my altar shall be [om. shall be], to consume thine 204
- 205. eyes, and togrieve thine [thy] heart; and all the increase of thine [thy] house shall die in the flower 34 of their age.[FN50] And this shall be a [the] sign unto [to] thee, that [ins. which] shall come upon thy two sons, Hophni and Phinehas: in one day they shall die both of 35 them. And I will raise me up a faithful priest, that [who] shall do according to that which is in my heart and in my mind [soul], and I will build him a sure[FN51] 36house, and he shall walk before my anointed for ever. And it shall come to pass that every one that is left in thy house shall come and crouch to him for a piece[FN52] of silver and a morsel of bread, and shall say, Put me, I pray thee, into one of the priests’ offices, that I may eat a piece of bread. EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL 1 Samuel 2:27. The “man of God” (for the expression comp. Deuteronomy 33:1; Judges 13:6) who appears here is undoubtedly to be regarded as a prophet, both from this title, which marks him as standing in a specific relation to God, and from the introduction of his address: “Thus saith the Lord.” This Isaiah, however, not the first mention of a prophet after Moses (Thenius); against this are Judges 4:14; Judges 6:8.—[Bib. Comm.: “The term (man of God) is applied to Moses in Deuteronomy 33:1; Joshua 14:6; and to different prophets upwards of forty times in Judges, Sam. and Kings, most-frequently in the latter. In the Prophets it occurs only once ( Jeremiah 35:4). It occurs six or seven times in Chron, Ezra and Nehemiah, and in the inscription of Psalm 90, and nowhere else in the Old Testament. The sudden appearance of a man of God, the only prophet of whom mention is made since Judges 6:8, without name, or any notice of his country, is remarkable.”— Tr.]—Thus saith the Lord.—Called and commissioned hereto by the Lord, he is nothing but His instrument; what he says is the very word of the Lord.—Did I reveal myself?—The interrog. particle (ֲה) stands here to strengthen the reality of the fact treated of, a question being introduced to which an affirmative reply is a matter of course, where in German [and in English] a not must be inserted. Comp. Jeremiah 31:20; Job 20:4; Ges. § 153, 2. The Inf. Abs. (ה ְגִ)נ shows the feeling of the question, and strengthens the assurance or assertion contained in it. By Eli’s father’s house we cannot understand Ithamar and his family, since a divine revelation to them in Egypt is out of the question; it is rather the family of Aaron (from whom Eli descended through Ithamar), as the high-priestly house. Aaron and his four sons, Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, when they were in Egypt, “belonged to Pharaoh’s house,” were its subjects, property (פּ׳ יתֵבְ;)ל the suffix ָם־ (when they were) refers not to the children of Israel, but to “the house of thy 205
- 206. father.” During the Egyptianbondage Aaron received the divine revelations by which he was called along with Moses to be God’s instrument for the redemption of His people; and with Moses he received the command to institute the feast of the Passover ( Exodus 4:14 sqq, Exodus 4:27; Exodus 12:1; Exodus 12:43). These revelations were the preparation and foundation for the calling of Aaron and his house to the high-priesthood.—[So far as the calling was concerned, the house of Aaron and the house of Eli were identical. Hence Eli is in this discourse identified with Aaron as to his privileges, but distinguished from the whole house as to his sin and its Punishment.—TR.] [Erdmann renders: “I chose it (the house of thy father) to perform priestly service.”—TR.][FN53] How that house (Aaron and his sons) were formally called and appointed to the priestly office is circumstantially related in Exodus 28, 29. Comp. especially Exodus 28:1; Exodus 29:9; Exodus 29:30; Exodus 29:44, with Leviticus 8:1 sq. and Numbers 18—The priestly service is described in three grades, corresponding to the three divisions of the Sanctuary: 1) “to offer[FN54] on my altar,” where the altar of burnt-offering with its service is meant; 2) “to burn incense.” Incense had to be burned daily. The incense-offering alone is named, and represents the other offerings as the indication of the priestly service in the Holy Place, Exodus 30:8; Exodus 3) “to wear the ephod before me.” The high-priest wore the ephod[FN55] when he went officially into the Most Holy place to represent the people before God, Exodus 28:12; Exodus 28:29-30.—And I gave to the house of thy father, etc.—The divine wages for these priestly services is the maintenance which the priests derived from the offerings. The “firings” (fire-offerings, ב׳ י ֵשּׁ ִ)א are the same as “the firing and the firings of the Lord” ( Leviticus 1:9; Leviticus 2:10; Deuteronomy 18:1) in the offerings, and so are the things offered. According to Numbers 18:20; Deuteronomy 10:9; Deuteronomy 18:1, the Levites, and therefore the whole priesthood, received no inheritance in land; their support was provided for by the portions of the offerings appointed them by law, that Isaiah, all sacrificial gifts, so far as they were not burnt in offering the sacrifice, Leviticus 6:7; Numbers 18. 206
- 207. 1 Samuel 2:29.In the preceding verses (27, 28) reference is made to the favor which had been shown the family of Eli in their selection and calling to the service of priests in the Sanctuary, and their maintenance with the offerings is mentioned as proof of the Lord’s care for His servants; there the question ( 1 Samuel 2:27) was introduced by the simple interrog. sign (ֲה); here the more sharply toned question with “why” )ה ָָמּל ) portrays in distinct contrast the wicked conduct of the priests: Why do ye trample under foot? etc.—“Sacrifice and offering” (הָחְנ ִוּמ חֶַבז) is a “general designation for all altar-offerings” (Keil). טַﬠָבּ “is in Aram. first tread (Heb. ,)דרך and might thence (as בום,דרך , Judges 5:23; Proverbs 27:7) like ‘tread’ in many languages figuratively mean to treat with contempt” (Bצttcher). עוֹן ָ,מ the “dwelling,” in pregnant sense is the Tabernacle, as the Lord’s dwelling-place in the midst of His people. Though the word has not elsewhere in itself this meaning, yet it follows here and in 1 Samuel 2:32 from the connection, which without difficulty permits the same addition that we find in Psalm 26:8, “of thy house.” There is no need therefore here to suppose (with Thenius) either a wrong reading or in general anything superfluous, particularly not the latter, because the Lord’s abode with His people was in fact the scene of the priests’ enormities, and their guilt thus appeared so much the greater. עוֹן ָמ is Accus. of place “in the dwelling” =)תִיַבּ “in the house”). Bצttcher proposes as a “faultless text” וֹןָﬠ ים ִית ִוּ ִצ ,א׳ “why do ye trample under foot,… what I commanded them, sinfully,” where the suffix “them” refers to the Israelites ( 1 Samuel 2:28), and וֹןָﬠ “sin,” is taken in the sense of וֹןָﬠ ְ,בּ “in sin,” which is found in Psalm 51:7. But according to the preceding explanation there is no need for such a change, apart from the fact “that the ‘sinfully’ precisely speaking is already contained in the ‘trample under foot’ ” (Thenius). He says: “why do ye trample,” etc, because Eli was partaker in the guilt of his sons; because Hebrews, not only as father towards sons, but also as high-priest towards them as priests, was weakly lacking in the proper chastisement and in the enjoined holy strictness. Eli ought to have opposed his sons as a zealous contender for the Lord’s honor; since he did not do this, he not only made himself partaker of their guilt, but honored his sons before the Lord, more than the Lord, because he spared them, and showed unseasonable paternal gentleness. In the plu. pron. “make yourselves fat,” Eli’s guilt is again referred to; what they did, namely, that they took ( 1 Samuel 2:15) the first (ית ִאשׁ ֵ)ר of the offering before the best of the offering (הָחְנ ִ)מ was presented to the Lord by burning it in the fire of the altar, that he did along with them; they made themselves fat. The wickedness of Eli and his sons in connection with the offering is also put here in two-fold form, namely, against God (“my offering”), and against the people as the people of the Lord (all the offerings of Israel, my people).[FN56] After the reference to the guilt follows now the judgment, the announcement of 207
- 208. punishment, which appliesto Eli as well as to his sons and his whole house. PETT, " YHWH Sends A Man Of God To Pass His Verdict On Eli’s House (1 Samuel 2:27-36). Scripture constantly reveals that God is never left without a witness. Always at special times of need a ‘man of God’ appears. In this case there comes an anonymous ‘man of God’ to Eli. He may well, of course, have been known to Eli, but like a number of ‘men of God’ in Samuel and Kings he is not made known to us. He is one of God’s anonymous witnesses. He is, however, important nonetheless, and his message is even more important, for he has come to signal the demise of Eli’s house. The coming of ‘the man of God’ has another significance in the passage. For it indicates that at this point in time YHWH has no one else that He can use in order to convey the message to Eli. But in chapter 3 the situation will change, for there YHWH uses Samuel for the purpose. It is thus an indication that Samuel is by then also accepted as a ‘man of God’, able to receive and pass on a message from YHWH. His status is continually growing. 1 Samuel 2:27-28 ‘And there came a man of God to Eli, and said to him, “Thus says YHWH. Did I reveal myself to the house of your father, when they were in Egypt in bondage to Pharaoh’s house? And did I choose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest, to go up to my altar, to burn incense, to wear an ephod before me? And did I give to the house of your father all the offerings of the children of Israel made by fire?” ’ The man of God comes to Eli and outlines in YHWH’s Name all that YHWH has done for his house. He had revealed Himself to the house of his ‘father’ (ancestor) Aaron when he was in Egypt in bondage to Pharaoh’s house. He had chosen him out of all the tribes of Israel to be His Priest, so that he might go up to His altar, burn incense, and wear the ephod (of the Priest) before Him. Note the order as it moves forwards from the sacrificial altar in the courtyard, to the altar of incense in the Holy Place, to wearing the Priest’s ephod before YHWH in the Holiest of All. It was 208
- 209. a huge privilegethat the house of Aaron had been given. And YHWH had also given to the house of his father all the offerings of the children of Israel made by fire, a part of which was given to the priests, the very offerings which were now being misused by them. PULPIT, "THE DIVINE JUDGMENT UPON ELI AND HIS HOUSE (1 Samuel 2:27-36). 1 Samuel 2:27 There came a man of God. The title man of God is the usual appellation of a prophet in the books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings, and as such is applied by Manoah to the angel who appeared to him ( 13:6, 13:8). Though the recorded interpositions of the Deity in those times were generally by angels, still the readiness with which Manoah gave his visitant this title makes it probable that prophets did appear from time to time; and the mission of one, though, as here, without a name, is recorded in 6:8. As regards the date of this visitation of the man of God, we find that Eli was ninety- eight years of age when the ark was captured (1 Samuel 4:15). At that time Samuel was not merely a man, hut one whose reputation was established throughout the whole land, and who was probably regarded not merely as a prophet, but as Eli's successor in the office of judge (1 Samuel 3:19, 1 Samuel 3:20). But Eli was "very old" (1 Samuel 2:22) when he rebuked his sons, probably between seventy and eighty, for Samuel is then called a child ( 6:26); whereas he can scarcely have been much less than thirty years of age when the Philistines destroyed Shiloh. In 1 Samuel 8:1-3, when the misconduct of Samuel's own sons led to the revival of the agitation for a king, he is himself described as already "old;" but as he lived on till nearly the end of Saul s reign, he could not at that time have been much more than sixty. Even when God spake by him to Eli he is still described as a boy, na'ar (1 Samuel 3:1), though the higher position to which he had attained, as is proved by his duties, would lead to the conclusion that he was then verging on manhood. As some time would naturally elapse between two such solemn warnings, we may feel sure that the visit of the man of God occurred shortly after Samuel s dedication. Then, as Eli neglected the warning, and the wickedness of his sons grew more inveterate, some eight or ten years afterwards the warning was repeated in sharper tones by the voice of his own youthful attendant. Meanwhile Eli seems himself to have grown in personal piety, but he could do nothing now for his sons. Past eighty years of age, 209
- 210. the time ofactivity had gone by, and resignation was the sole virtue that was left for him to practise. And so the warning given by the mouth of Samuel is stern and final. Ten or fifteen more years must elapse before the ruin came. But the gloom was deepening; the Philistines were increasing in power, and the valour of Israel was decaying as its morality declined; then there was a short violent crash, and the house of Eli met its doom. The prophet begins by enumerating Jehovah's mercies to "the house of thy father," that is, the whole family of Aaron, in selecting them for the priesthood (on the choice of the house of Aaron, see Exodus 28:1-43; Exodus 29:1-46.), and in richly endowing the office with so large a portion of every sacrifice. These portions are termed literally firings, or fire sacrifices, but the term soon became general, and in Le 1 Samuel 24:7, 1 Samuel 24:9 is applied even to the shew bread. Added then to the tithes, and to the cities with their suburbs given them to inhabit, this share of every sacrifice gave the house of Aaron great wealth, and with it they had also high rank. There was no one above them in Israel except the kings. In Sparta we find that one of the endowments of the kings was the skins of animals offered in sacrifice (Herod; 6:56). Why then do Eli and his sons, who benefit so greatly by them, "kick at Jehovah's sacrifices and offerings?" The word is taken from Deuteronomy 32:15, and refers to the efforts of a pampered steer violently to shake off the yoke. Eli's sons treat the ordinances which have raised them to rank, and given them wealth and power, as if they were an injury and wrong. And Eli, instead of removing them from the office which they disgraced, preferred the ties of relationship to his duty to God and the moral welfare of the people. K&D, "Announcement of the judgment upon Eli and his house. - 1Sa_2:27. Before the Lord interposed in judgment, He sent a prophet (a “man of God,” as in Jdg_13:6) to the aged Eli, to announce as a warning for all ages the judgment which was about to fall upon the worthless priests of his house. In order to arouse Eli's own conscience, he had pointed out to him, on the one hand, the grace manifested in the choice of his father's house, i.e., the house of Aaron, to keep His sanctuary (1Sa_2:27 and 1Sa_2:28), and, on the other hand, the desecration of the sanctuary by the wickedness of his sons (1Sa_ 2:29). Then follows the sentence: The choice of the family of Aaron still stood fast, but the deepest disgrace would come upon the despisers of the Lord (1Sa_2:30): the strength of his house would be broken; all the members of his house were to die early deaths. They were not, however, to be removed entirely from service at the altar, but to their sorrow were to survive the fall of the sanctuary (1Sa_2:31-34). But the Lord would raise up a faithful priest, and cause him to walk before His anointed, and from him all that were left of the house of Eli would be obliged to beg their bread (1Sa_2:35, 1Sa_ 2:36). To arrive at the true interpretation of this announcement of punishment, we must picture to ourselves the historical circumstances that come into consideration here. Eli the high priest was a descendant of Ithamar, the younger son of Aaron, as we may see 210
- 211. from the factthat his great-grandson Ahimelech was “of the sons of Ithamar” (1Ch_ 24:3). In perfect agreement with this, Josephus (Ant. v. 11, 5) relates, that after the high priest Ozi of the family of Eleazar, Eli of the family of Ithamar received the high- priesthood. The circumstances which led to the transfer of this honour from the line of Eleazar to that of Ithamar are unknown. We cannot imagine it to have been occasioned by an extinction of the line of Eleazar, for the simple reason that, in the time of David, Zadok the descendant of Eleazar is spoken of as high priest along with Abiathar and Ahimelech, the descendants of Eli (2Sa_8:17; 2Sa_20:25). After the deposition of Abiathar he was reinstated by Solomon as sole high priest (1Ki_2:27), and the dignity was transmitted to his descendants. This fact also overthrows the conjecture of Clericus, that the transfer of the high-priesthood to Eli took place by the command of God on account of the grievous sins of the high priests of the line of Eleazar; for in that case Zadok would not have received this office again in connection with Abiathar. We have, no doubt, to search for the true reason in the circumstances of the times of the later judges, namely in the fact that at the death of the last high priest of the family of Eleazar before the time of Eli, the remaining son was not equal to the occasion, either because he was still an infant, or at any rate because he was too young and inexperienced, so that he could not enter upon the office, and Eli, who was probably related by marriage to the high priest's family, and was no doubt a vigorous man, was compelled to take the oversight of the congregation; and, together with the supreme administration of the affairs of the nation as judge, received the post of high priest as well, and filled it till the time of his death, simply because in those troublous times there was not one of the descendants of Eleazar who was able to fill the supreme office of judge, which was combined with that of high priest. For we cannot possibly think of an unjust usurpation of the office of high priest on the part of Eli, since the very judgment denounced against him and his house presupposes that he had entered upon the office in a just and upright way, and that the wickedness of his sons was all that was brought against him. For a considerable time after the death of Eli the high-priesthood lost almost all its significance. All Israel turned to Samuel, whom the Lord established as His prophet by means of revelations, and whom He also chose as the deliverer of His people. The tabernacle at Shiloh, which ceased to be the scene of the gracious presence of God after the loss of the ark, was probably presided over first of all after Eli's death by his grandson Ahitub, the son of Phinehas, as his successor in the high-priesthood. He was followed in the time of Saul by his son Ahijah or Ahimelech, who gave David the shew- bread to eat at Nob, to which the tabernacle had been removed in the meantime, and was put to death by Saul in consequence, along with all the priests who were found there. His son Abiathar, however, escaped the massacre, and fled to David (1Sa_ 22:9-20; 1Sa_23:6). In the reign of David he is mentioned as high priest along with Zadok; but he was afterwards deposed by Solomon (2Sa_15:24; 2Sa_17:15; 2Sa_19:12; 2Sa_20:25; 1Ki_2:27). Different interpretations have been given of these verses. The majority of commentators understand them as signifying that the loss of the high-priesthood is here foretold to Eli, and also the institution of Zadok in the office. But such a view is too contracted, and does not exhaust the meaning of the words. The very introduction to the prophet's words points to something greater than this: “Thus saith the Lord, Did I reveal myself to thy father's house, when they were in Egypt at the house of Pharaoh?” The ֲה interrogative is not used for ֹאֲלה (nonne), but is emphatic, as in Jer_31:20. The question is an appeal to Eli's conscience, which he cannot deny, but is obliged to confirm. By Eli's father's house we are not to understand Ithamar and his family, but 211
- 212. Aaron, from whomEli was descended through Ithamar. God revealed himself to the tribe-father of Eli by appointing Aaron to be the spokesman of Moses before Pharaoh (Exo_4:14. and Exo_4:27), and still more by calling Aaron to the priesthood, for which the way was prepared by the fact that, from the very beginning, God made use of Aaron, in company with Moses, to carry out His purpose of delivering Israel out of Egypt, and entrusted Moses and Aaron with the arrangements for the celebration of the passover (Exo_12:1, Exo_12:43). This occurred when they, the fathers of Eli, Aaron and his sons, were still in Egypt at the house of Pharaoh, i.e., still under Pharaoh's rule. 28 I chose your ancestor out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest, to go up to my altar, to burn incense, and to wear an ephod in my presence. I also gave your ancestor’s family all the food offerings presented by the Israelites. BARNES, "An ephod - The High Priest’s ephod, in which was Urim and Thummim. Did I give ... - The bountiful provision made by God for His priests is mentioned as the great aggravation of the covetousness of Eli’s sons (compare 2Sa_12:7-9). CLARKE, "And did I choose him - The high priesthood was a place of the greatest honor that could be conferred on man, and a place of considerable emolument; for from their part of the sacrifices they derived a most comfortable livelihood. GILL, "And did I choose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest,.... He did; of all the tribes of Israel the Lord chose the tribe of Levi to place the priesthood 212
- 213. in, and ofall the families of that tribe he chose the house of Aaron, Eli's ancestor, to minister in the priest's office, see Exo_28:1. to offer upon mine altar; burnt offerings, sin offerings, and peace offerings; this is the altar of burnt offering, which stood in the court of the tabernacle: to burn incense; on the altar of incense, which was in the holy place, and on which incense was burnt morning and evening: to wear an ephod before me? in which was the breastplate, with the Urim and Thummim, with which the high priest went into the most holy place, where was the ark, the symbol of the divine Presence, and where he inquired of the Lord by the above things: and did I give unto the house of thy father all the offerings made by fire of the children of Israel? he did; the priests who were of the house of Aaron had not only the sin offerings, and part of the peace offerings, but even of the offerings made by fire, the burnt offerings; the skin of them was the priest's, and the meat offerings that went along with them, see Lev_6:25 and Lev_8:8 which were given them for their maintenance. Now these instances of God's goodness to the family of Aaron are mentioned to aggravate the sins of Eli and his sons. ELLICOTT, " (28) Did I choose him out of all the tribes of Israel? . . .—After such glorious privileges had been conferred on this favoured house, and such ample provision for all its wants had been made for it, it was indeed a crime of the blackest ingratitude that its leading members should pour dishonour on their invisible King and Benefactor. To wear an ephod before me.—This included the privilege, which belonged to the head of the house of Aaron, the reigning high priest, of entering the Holy of Holies—that lightless inner sanctuary where the visible presence of the Eternal was ever and anon pleased to dwell—and also the possession of the mysterious Urim and Thummim, by which enquiry could be made of the will of the invisible King of Israel. HAWKER, "(28) And did I choose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest, to offer upon mine altar, to burn incense, to wear an ephod before me? and did I give unto the house of thy father all the offerings made by fire of the children of Israel? Aaron was very eminently chosen and set apart to the priestly office; and hence 213
- 214. became the objectof envy. See Numbers 16:8-11. PETT, "1 Samuel 2:29 “Why do you trample on my sacrifice and my offering, which I have commanded in my habitation, and honour your sons above me, to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel my people?” The charge is then laid, that Eli and his house have trampled on His sacrifice and offering which He has commanded in His own habitation, and indeed that Eli, by allowing what he has, has honoured his sons above YHWH, and what is more, has by participating in their behaviour made himself fat with the best parts of the offerings of His people Israel. Eli is thus not to be exonerated from blame. K&D, "1Sa_2:28 “And did I choose him out of all the tribes for a priest to myself.” The interrogative particle is not to be repeated before ר ח ָ,וּב but the construction becomes affirmative with the inf. abs. instead of the perfect. “Him” refers back to “thy father” in 1Sa_2:27, and signifies Aaron. The expression “for a priest” is still further defined by the clauses which follow: לַע מ ת ֲלעַ,ל “to ascend upon mine altar,” i.e., to approach my altar of burnt-offering and perform the sacrificial worship; “to kindle incense,” i.e., to perform the service in the holy place, the principal feature in which was the daily kindling of the incense, which is mentioned instar omnium; “to wear the ephod before me,” i.e., to perform the service in the holy of holies, which the high priest could only enter when wearing the ephod to represent Israel before the Lord (Exo_28:12). “And have given to thy father's house all the firings of the children of Israel” (see at Lev_1:9). These words are to be understood, according to Deu_18:1, as signifying that the Lord had given to the house of Aaron, i.e., to the priesthood, the sacrifices of Jehovah to eat in the place of any inheritance in the land, according to the portions appointed in the sacrificial law in Lev 6-7, and Num 18. 214
- 215. 29 Why doyou[e] scorn my sacrifice and offering that I prescribed for my dwelling? Why do you honor your sons more than me by fattening yourselves on the choice parts of every offering made by my people Israel?’ BARNES, "Wherefore kick ye - See the marginal reference. The well-fed beast becomes unmanageable and refractory, and refuses the yoke, and bursts the bonds Jer_ 5:5. So the priests, instead of being grateful for the provision made for them, in their pampered pride became dissatisfied, wantonly broke the laws of God which regulated their share of the offerings, and gave themselves up to an unbridled indulgence of their passions and their covetousness. Honourest thy sons above me - What restrained Eli from taking vigorous action to vindicate God’s honor, was his unwillingness to lose for his sons the lucrative office of the priesthood. He was willing to rebuke them, he was grieved at their misdeeds, but he was not willing to give up the wealth and plenty which flowed into his house from the offerings of Israel. CLARKE, "Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice - They disdained to take the part allowed by law; and would take for themselves what part they pleased, and as much as they pleased, 1Sa_2:13-16 : thus they kicked at the sacrifices. Honourest thy sons above me - Permitting them to deal, as above, with the offerings and sacrifices, and take their part before the fat, etc., was burnt unto the Lord: thus they were first served. At this Eli connived, and thus honored his sons above God. GILL, "Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice, and at mine offering, which I have commanded in my habitation,.... To be offered in the tabernacle, where the Lord had his dwelling; which they might be said to kick and spurn at, despising them, as if there were not enough of them, nor the best of them given to them for their maintenance; a metaphor taken from cattle well fed and fat, which kick and spurn with their feet at even the owners and feeders of them. The Targum is,"why do ye use force with the holy offerings?''that is, take them away by force, when there was such a sufficient quantity allowed them for their support. Some understand this of their driving 215
- 216. away such, thatbefore used to bring their sacrifices to be offered, but being so ill treated, refrained from bringing them: and honourest thy sons above me; by suffering them to take their part of the sacrifices, and even what did not belong to them, before God had his part, or before the fat was burnt; and by continuing them in their office, to the dishonour of God, his name and worship, when they ought to have been turned out by him and punished; but by this he preferred the honour of his sons before the honour of God, and chose rather that he should be dishonoured, than that they should be censured: to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel my people? they took the best pieces of the peace offerings from them by force, having no right unto them; and this they did to indulge their luxury and sensuality, which Eli connived at; and it is highly probable took part of the roasted meat his sons provided for themselves, out of the choicest pieces of the offerings of the people; since he himself is included in this clause, "to make yourselves fat", as his sons might be, and it is certain he himself was, 1Sa_4:18. HENRY, "II. He exhibits a high charge against him and his family. His children did wickedly, and he connived at it, and thereby involved himself in the guilt; the indictment therefore runs against them all, 1Sa_2:29. 1. His sons had impiously profaned the holy things of God: “You kick at my sacrifice which I have commanded; not only trample upon the institution as a mean thing, but spurn at it as a thing you hate to be tied up to.” They did the utmost despite imaginable to the offerings of the Lord when they committed all that outrage and rapine about them that we read of, and violently plundered the pots on which, in effect, Holiness to the Lord was written (Zec_14:20), and took that fat to themselves which God had appointed to be burnt on his altar. 2. Eli had bolstered them up in it, by not punishing their insolence and impiety: “Thou for thy part honourest thy sons above me,” that is, “thou hadst rather see my offerings disgraced by their profanation of them than see thy sons disgraced by a legal censure upon them for so doing, which ought to have been inflicted, even to suspension and deprivation ab officio et beneficio - of their office and its emoluments.” Those that allow and countenance their children in any evil way, and do not use their authority to restrain and punish them, do in effect honour them more than God, being more tender of their reputation than of his glory and more desirous to humour them than to honour him. 3. They had all shared in the gains of the sacrilege. It is to be feared that Eli himself, though he disliked and reproved the abuses they committed, yet did not forbear to eat of the roast meat they sacrilegiously got, 1Sa_2:15. He was a fat heavy man (1Sa_4:18), and therefore it is charged upon the whole family (though Hophni and Phinehas were principally guilty), You make yourselves fat with the chief of all the offerings. God gave them sufficient to feed them, but that would not suffice; they made themselves fat, and served their lusts with that which God was to be served with. See Hos_4:8. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:29. Wherefore kick ye, &c. — Using my sacrifices irreverently and profanely; both by abusing them to your own luxury, and by causing the people to abhor them. He chargeth Eli with his sons’ faults. Honourest 216
- 217. thy sons —Permitting them to dishonour and injure me, by taking my part to themselves; choosing rather to offend me by thy connivance at their sin, than to displease them by severe rebukes and just punishments. To make yourselves fat — To pamper yourselves. This you did, not out of necessity, but out of mere luxury. Chiefest — Not contented with those parts which I had allotted you, you invaded those which I reserved for myself. ELLICOTT, " (29) Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice.—The imagery of the words are taken from Deuteronomy 32:15 : “Jeshurun waxed fat, and kicked . . . then he forsook God which made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation.” The image is one drawn from the pastoral life of the people: the ox or ass over-fed, pampered, and indulged, becomes unmanageable, and refuses obedience to his kind master. And honourest thy sons above me.—Although Eli knew well what was right, yet foolish fondness for his sons seems in part to have blinded his eyes to the enormity of their wickedness. It is also probable that he was influenced not by feelings of weak affection, but also by unwillingness to divert from his own family the rich source of wealth which proceeded from the offerings of the pilgrims from all parts of the land. These considerations induced him to maintain these bad and covetous men as his acknowledged representatives in the national sanctuary of Shiloh. Eli then allowed things, which gradually grew worse and worse, to drift, and merely interfered with a weak rebuke; but the day of reckoning was at hand. HAWKER, "(29) Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice and at mine offering, which I have commanded in my habitation; and honourest thy sons above me, to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel my people? It should seem to be more than probable from hence, that though Eli did not himself commit the sin of profanation here charged upon his sons, yet he winked at it, and partook in the plunder. For otherwise he could not be said to have made himself fat with the chiefest offerings of the people. Be this, however, as it may, certain it is, from the severity of the reproof the man of God had in commission to deliver to Eli, the hoary priest was not so zealous as he ought to have been for the honor of God; but, instead of disgracing his children, and removing them from their office, he contented himself with merely making a mild expostulation. Alas! how doth nature and natural feelings blind the eye to the steady regard of God's glory and honor. 217
- 218. K&D, "1Sa_2:29 With suchdistinction conferred upon the priesthood, and such careful provision made for it, the conduct of the priests under Eli was an inexcusable crime. “Why do ye tread with your feet my slain-offerings and meat-offerings, which I have commanded in the dwelling-place?” Slain-offering and meat-offering are general expressions embracing all the altar-sacrifices. ן ע ָמ is an accusative (“in the dwelling”), like תִי ַ,בּ in the house. “The dwelling” is the tabernacle. This reproof applied to the priests generally, including Eli, who had not vigorously resisted these abuses. The words which follow, “and thou honourest thy sons more than me,” relate to Eli himself, and any other high priest who like Eli should tolerate the abuses of the priests. “To fatten yourselves with the first of every sacrificial gift of Israel, of my people.” י ִמַּע ְל serves as a periphrasis for the genitive, and is chosen for the purpose of giving greater prominence to the idea of י ִמַּע (my people). ית ִשׁ ֵ,ר the first of every sacrificial gift (minchah, as in 1Sa_2:17), which Israel offered as the nation of Jehovah, ought to have been given up to its God in the altar-fire because it was the best; whereas, according to 1Sa_2:15, 1Sa_2:16, the sons of Eli took away the best for themselves. 30 “Therefore the Lord, the God of Israel, declares: ‘I promised that members of your family would minister before me forever.’ But now the Lord declares: ‘Far be it from me! Those who honor me I will honor, but those who despise me will be disdained. BARNES, "Be it far from me - The phrase so rendered is a favorite one in the Books of Samuel, where it occurs ten or eleven times. It is variously rendered in the King 218
- 219. James Version, “Godforbid,” and “Be it far from me, thee, etc.” Literally, “Be it an abomination to me.” CLARKE, "Should walk before me for ever - See Exo_29:9; Exo_40:15; Num_ 25:10-13, where it is positively promised that the priesthood should be continued in the family of Aaron For Ever. But although this promise appears to be absolute, yet we plainly see that, like all other apparently absolute promises of God, it is conditional, i.e., a condition is implied though not expressed. But now - be it far from me - You have walked unworthily; I shall annul my promise, and reverse my ordinance. See Jer_18:9, Jer_18:10. For them that honor me - This is a plan from which God will never depart; this can have no alteration; every promise is made in reference to it; “they who honor God shall be honored; they who despise him shall be lightly esteemed.” GILL, "Wherefore the Lord God of Israel saith,.... This being the case, so much contempt cast upon his sacrifices, and dishonour on himself: I said indeed that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before me for ever; or minister in the priest's office before him: if the house of Aaron in general is meant, it did continue so to do, in one branch or another of it, as long as the Mosaic dispensation lasted, which is meant by the phrase "for ever"; but since it is afterwards denied that it should, rather the house of Ithamar, or of the immediate parent of Eli, is meant, and this said when the priesthood was translated from the family of Eleazar to the family of Ithamar; when, and on what account that was done, we nowhere read. It is a tradition (f), that it was in the time of the Levite's concubine; and because Phinehas, and the other priests, did not go from city to city, and reprove the Israelites for the many sins they were fallen into, that the priesthood was taken away out of the family of Eleazar, and translated to that of Ithamar: but now the Lord saith, be it far from me; to continue the priesthood in the line of Ithamar; which argues no change in the purposes or promises of God, this being not a decree of his, but a declaration of his will; that if the house of Ithamar behaved well in the discharge of the office of the high priest, it should continue with them to the end of the Mosaic dispensation, but if not, it should be taken from them, and restored to the family of Eleazar; as it was in Solomon's time: for them that honour me I will honour; as Phinehas the son of Eleazar did at Shittim, where he showed his zeal for the Lord of hosts, and had the promise of the everlasting priesthood; and which continued in his family until the Babylonish captivity, excepting the interval in which it was in the family of Ithamar, and for what reason is not known: and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed; as the posterity of Eli, whose sons despised the Lord, and his offerings, as appeared by their conduct; and these were 219
- 220. killed in battlein one day, and in the times of Solomon, Abiathar, of the posterity of Eli, was thrust out of the priesthood, and Zadok, of the line of Eleazar, was put in his room, 1Ki_2:27. HENRY, "III. He declares the cutting off of the entail of the high priesthood from his family (1Sa_2:30): “The Lord God of Israel, who is jealous for his own honour and Israel's, says, and lets thee know it, that thy commission is revoked and superseded.” I said, indeed, that thy house, and the house of thy father Ithamar (for from that younger son of Aaron Eli descended), should walk before me for ever. Upon what occasion the dignity of the high priesthood was transferred from the family of Eleazar to that of Ithamar does not appear; but it seems this had been done, and Eli stood fair to have that honour perpetuated to his posterity. But observe, the promise carried its own condition along with it: They shall walk before me forever, that is, “they shall have the honour, provided they faithfully do the service.” Walking before God is the great condition of the covenant, Gen_17:1. Let them set me before their face, and I will set them before my face continually (Psa_41:12), otherwise not. But now the Lord says, Be it far from me. “Now that you cast me off you can expect no other than that I should cast you off; you will not walk before me as you should, and therefore you shall not.” Such wicked and abusive servants God will discard, and turn out of his service. Some think there is a further reach in this recall of the grant, and that it was not only to be fulfilled shortly in the deposing of the posterity of Eli, when Zadok, who descended from Eleazar, was put in Abiathar's room, but it was to have its complete accomplishment at length in the total abolition of the Levitical priesthood by the priesthood of Christ. IV. He gives a good reason for this revocation, taken from a settled and standing rule of God's government, according to which all must expect to be dealt with (like that by which Cain was tried, Gen_4:7): Those that honour me I will honour, and those that despise me shall be lightly esteemed. 1. Observe in general, (1.) That God is the fountain of honour and dishonour; he can exalt the meanest and put contempt upon the greatest. (2.) As we deal with God we must expect to be dealt with by him, and yet more favourably than we deserve. See Psa_18:25, Psa_18:26. 2. Particularly, (1.) Be it spoken, to the everlasting reputation of religion or of serious godliness, that it gives honour to God and puts honour upon men. By it we seek and serve the glory of God, and he will be behind-hand with none that do so, but here and hereafter will secure their glory. The way to be truly great is to be truly good. If we humble and deny ourselves in any thing to honour God, and have a single eye to him in it, we may depend upon this promise, he will put the best honour upon us. See Joh_ 12:26. (2.) Be it spoken, to the everlasting reproach of impiety or profaneness, that this does dishonour to God (despises the greatest and best of beings, whom angels adore) and will bring dishonour upon men, for those that do so shall be lightly esteemed; not only God will lightly esteem them (that perhaps they will not regard, as those that honour him value his honour, of whom therefore it is said, I will honour them), but they shall be lightly esteemed by all the world; the very honour they are proud of shall be laid in the dust; they shall see themselves despised by all mankind, their names a reproach; when they are gone, their memory shall rot, and, when they rise again, it shall be to everlasting shame and contempt. The dishonour which their impotent malice puts upon 220
- 221. God and hisomnipotent justice will return upon their own heads, Psa_79:12. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:30. I said — Where, or when did God say this? To Eli himself, or to his father, when the priesthood was translated from Eleazar’s to Ithamar’s family. Should walk before me — That is, minister unto me as high- priest. Walking is often put for discharging one’s office; before me, may signify that he was the high-priest, whose sole prerogative it was to minister before God, or before the ark, in the most holy place. For ever — As long as the Mosaical law and worship lasts. Be it far from me — To fulfil my promise, which I hereby retract. COKE, "1 Samuel 2:30. Wherefore the Lord God of Israel saith, I said, &c.— The office of the high-priesthood was first settled upon Eleazar the eldest son of Aaron, and upon his posterity; for the very same promise is made to Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, Numbers 25:13 which is here said to be made to Eli, who was descended from Ithamar, the youngest son of Aaron. The high-priesthood was translated to him from the family of Eleazar, for some sin or other, as now it was resolved it should be translated back again, from the family of Ithamar to that of Eleazar, because of the horrid sins of the sons of Eli. We frequently read of God's conditional decrees in Scripture; see particularly Jeremiah 7:9-10 and Selden de Success. in Pontif. lib. 1: cap. 2. We cannot too carefully attend to the solemn declaration at the close of this verse, which, while it highly magnifies the goodness of God to us, warns us at the same time, in the strongest manner, to be active in the performance of our duties. ELLICOTT, "(30) . . . but now the Lord saith, Be it far from me.—But the fulfilment of the glorious and gracious promise which involved the walking of the favoured house for ever in the light of the Lord in the blessed courts of the sanctuary with no worldly cares—were they not amply provided for without sowing and reaping?—were they not invested with high honours and universal consideration?—was necessarily dependent upon those that walked, the favoured house carrying out their share of the covenant. To be honoured of God, they for their part must be His faithful servants. Now the life and conduct of the priestly house had wrought the gravest dishonour and brought the deepest shame on the worship and sanctuary of the “King in Jeshurun.” HAWKER, "(30) Wherefore the LORD God of Israel saith, I said indeed that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before me forever: but now the LORD saith, Be it far from me; for them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed. 221
- 222. Certain it is,that in the first grant of the priesthood to Aaron the grant was conditional. And it is remarkable, that Eli was descended from Aaron's youngest son, Ithamar, and not Eleazar his eldest. But no notice is taken in the sacred history, how it had been transferred from the family of Eleazar to that of Ithamar's family, as in the case of Eli it must have been done. But I conceive that an infinitely higher object the Holy Ghost hath in view, in the expression contained in this verse, and that it is meant to convey the total abolition of the Levitical dispensation, by the introduction of the gospel in the Lord Jesus. He is indeed the great High Priest, who hath duly honored his Father's righteous law, and as such, Jehovah is engaged to honor him. And all his sons are thereby made kings and priests to God and the Father. Sweetest Jesus! thou art a priest forever, and of an everlasting priesthood. And thou makest the offerings of thy people precious, in thy salvation; for thou art both the priest, and the offering, and the altar, which sanctifieth the gift. LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:30. י ִתּ ַר ַמ ָ=אI had said.—The house of thy father in connection with “thy house,” indicates the whole priestly connection in all its branches from Aaron down, to whom with his sons the same expression in 1 Samuel 2:27 refers. For this reason, if for no other, because “the house of thy father” must mean the same here as in 1 Samuel 2:27, we must set aside the view that here only Ithamar’s family is meant, to which the high-priesthood passed from Eleazar’s family, and to which Eli belonged. But also the expression: should walk before me for ever, is in conflict with this view. The “walking before the Lord” would be understood in too narrow a sense, on the one hand, if it were restricted to the entrance of the high- priest into the Holy of Holies, and in too wide a sense, on the other hand, if it were regarded as a general description of a pious walk before God, as in Genesis 17:1. Rather it points to the life in priestly service before the Lord promised to the house of Aaron for ever ( Exodus 29:9). The promise of the “covenant of an everlasting priesthood” was renewed to Phinehas, the son of Eleazar ( Numbers 25:13) for his zeal for the Lord’s honor. This fact and its motive contribute essentially to the explanation of what here follows. The “and now” introduces a declaration opposed to that promise, not in the sense that the latter is annulled, but in reference to its non-fulfilment for those in whom the condition of its fulfilment was lacking.— Far be it from me, that Isaiah, this promise shall not be fulfilled unless the condition be fulfilled which is expressed in the words: Those that honor me I will honor.— According to the priests’ attitude towards God the Lord in their whole walk will be His attitude towards them in respect to the fulfilment of His promise. PETT, "1 Samuel 2:30 222
- 223. “Thus the wordof YHWH (neum YHWH - an indication of a solemn prophetic statement), the God of Israel, “I said indeed that your house, and the house of your father, should walk before me for ever.” But now, the word of YHWH (neum YHWH), “Be it far from me; for those who honour me I will honour, and those who despise me will be lightly esteemed.” In Exodus 29:9; Numbers 25:13 God had said that the family of Aaron in all its branches would serve perpetually as priests in His presence, but now He was altering the promise as far as Eli’s line were concerned. The time would come when they would cease to act as priests. And the reason for it was because they had lightly esteemed Him and despised Him. For, He declares, ‘those who honour Me I will honour, and those who despise Me will be lightly esteemed’. By this they had excluded themselves from God’s covenant. Thus they would be cut off from the priesthood, and the promise would from then on only apply to the house of Eliezer, that is, to the Zadokites. These last would, of course, also later be cut off as a result of their attitude towards Jesus Christ by the destruction of the Temple. In God’s eyes Israel therefore no longer has a sacerdotal priesthood, apart from the High Priesthood of Jesus Christ. But that was yet in the far future. PULPIT, "1 Samuel 2:30 I said indeed. By thus acting Eli became an accomplice in the irreligion of his sons, and God therefore revokes his grant of a perpetual priesthood. The promise had been made to Aaron's family as a whole (Exodus 29:9), and had then been renewed to the house of Eleazar (Numbers 25:13). But the house of Ithamar was now in the ascendant, probably owing to Eli's own ability, who during the anarchical times of the Judges had won for himself, first, the civil power, and then, upon some fitting opportunity, the high priesthood also, though I suppose the heads of the houses of Eleazar and Ithamar were always persons of great importance, and high priests in a certain sense. Eli had now the priority, and had he and his family proved worthy, the possession of this high station might have been confirmed to them. Like Saul in the kingdom, they proved unworthy of it, and so they lost it forever. Their names, as we have seen above, do not even occur in the genealogies. I said .... but now Jehovah saith. Can then a promise of God be withdrawn? Yes, assuredly. Not from mankind as a whole, nor from the Church as a whole, but from each particular nation, or Church, or individual. To each separate person God's promises are conditional, and human action everywhere is a coworker with the 223
- 224. Divine volition, thoughonly within a limited sphere, and so as that the Divine purposes must finally be accomplished. Eli then and his sons may suffer forfeit of the promise by not fulfilling the obligations which, whether expressed or implied, are an essential condition of every promise made by God to man. But the high priesthood will continue, and will perform its allotted task of preparing for the priesthood of Christ. "Them that honour me I will honour," states one of these conditions essential on man's part to secure the fulfilment of God's promises. SIMEON, "ELI’S UNFAITHFULNESS REPROVED 1 Samuel 2:30. Them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed. HOWEVER the promises of God may be expressed, they are never so to be understood, as if they should be fulfilled to us whilst we are in a state of wilful sin: there is always in them an implied condition, that we depart from iniquity, and endeavour faithfully to serve the Lord. To Aaron a promise was made, that the priesthood should be continued in his family, and in that of Eleazar his son: yet for some wickedness of his descendants it was transferred from the family of Eleazar, his eldest son, to that of his younger son, Ithamar, from whom Eli was descended. Again the promise was made, that it should be continued in the line of Eli: but, for a similar reason, it was afterwards taken from Abiathar, his descendant, and given to Zadoc, who was of the elder branch. That the promises were to be understood with such limitations, God himself declares in this address to Eli; wherein he tells Eli, that he had rescinded the promise made to him, and determined to act towards him on the broad basis of equity, precisely as he would towards all mankind: “I said indeed that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before me for ever: but now the Lord saith, Be it far from me; for them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed.” Here we may see, I. What conduct God requires of us— 224
- 225. This will bebest learned from a review of the context. Eli being far advanced in age, his sons performed the priestly office in his stead. But they abused their power to such a degree as to “make the offerings of the Lord to be abhorred.” Eli heard of their proceedings, and reproved them for their wickedness: but he neglected to exert that authority with which God had invested him; and manifested more regard for the feelings of his sons, than he did for the honour of his God. This was Eli’s fault, and the occasion of God’s heavy displeasure against him. From hence then we see what God requires of us: he expects us, 1. To have a supreme regard for his glory— [The honour of God ought to be dear to every one of us: for though we cannot augment or diminish his essential glory, we may greatly affect the regards of men towards him, and be an occasion of his being either honoured or blasphemed by multitudes around us. In truth, there is not any thing we do, but has considerable influence of this kind. How careful then should we be, and how watchful, not to do any thing which may lower him in the esteem of men! The thought that should be ever uppermost in our minds, is this; “What aspect will such or such conduct have upon religion; and what effect will it produce in advancing or retarding its influence in the world? — — —] 2. To promote it to the utmost of our power— [To exemplify religion in our own conduct must be our first labour, and to shew all possible respect to every thing that relates to God. His word, his Sabbath, his name, his Gospel, his cause and interest in the world, must be exceeding high in our estimation. But we must not content ourselves with honouring God in our own persons; we must exert all our influence that he may be honoured by all around us. Some are invested with magisterial power; and they must use it for God, and not bear the sword in vain. To others is committed the ministry of the Gospel; and they must boldly reprove sin of every kind, and commend themselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. To others is parental authority intrusted; and they must not content themselves with gently rebuking the wickedness of their children, 225
- 226. but must exertthemselves to the uttermost to restrain it. Here was Eli’s defect. He did well to begin with mild reproof: but he should have proceeded to severer measures, when he saw that they were not to be reclaimed by gentler means. In a word, we should be so intent on advancing the honour of God in the world, as to esteem nothing too much to do, nor any thing too great to suffer, for the attainment of our object: relations, interests, or life itself, should be of no account with us in comparison of this [Note: Luke 14:26 with that expression in the verse before the text, “Thou honourest thy sons above me.”].] Such being the conduct which God requires, let us consider, II. In what light he will view it— He will account himself “honoured” by our observance of it— [Often does he speak to us to this effect: and in what sense we must understand the expression, has been before explained. Though “our goodness cannot extend to him,” or profit “him,” if he esteem himself glorified by it, it is quite sufficient for us: nor can we have any greater stimulus to exertion than such a consideration as this. To form a just estimate of it, let us only reflect on the zeal which is manifested by all the hosts of heaven to honour God: how do they all vie with each other in their songs of praise! And if an opportunity were afforded them to advance his honour by any offices on earth, how readily would they leave their blest abodes, and fly hither to execute his high commands! They are represented as “doing his commandments, and hearkening to the voice of his word,” to obey the first intimation of his will. Such is the zeal that should animate us; and God will assuredly consider himself as glorified by it: indeed he is glorified, inasmuch as our obedience proclaims to all around us, that he is, in our estimation at least, worthy of all the love that we can manifest, and of all the service that we can render him.] But where such conduct is wanting, God accounts himself treated with contempt— 226
- 227. [Is there nomedium between an honouring of God and a despising of him? I answer, No: if he be not honoured, something else is honoured above him, and the creature is set above the Most High God. It is said of Eli, that he “honoured his sons above God:” and this was considered by God as an instance of direct and absolute contempt. The same is true respecting every act of disobedience, and every neglect of duty; which necessarily implies an attention to our own ease, interest, or pleasure, in preference to the will of God. What a contempt of the Divine Majesty does it argue, when we resist his will! What a contempt of his love and mercy, when we neglect his salvation! What a contempt of his justice, his holiness, and his truth, when we entertain the idea that such conduct can pass with impunity! This is the very construction that God himself puts upon such conduct: “Wherefore doth the wicked contemn God, while he doth say in his heart, Thou, God, wilt not require it?” If then we, poor, ignorant, guilty creatures, feel so keenly when we are treated with contempt, let us consider how indignantly the Most High God will resent such conduct at our hands.] He himself has told us, II. What notice he will take of it— He will honour his faithful and obedient servants— [This he has promised [Note: John 12:26.]: and he will perform it. Men may treat them as if they were “the filth of the earth and the offscouring of all things;” (though they cannot help reverencing them in their hearts [Note: Mark 6:20.]:) but God will honour them with the most distinguished tokens of his love. He “will give them a name better than of sons and of daughters,” and will enrich them with the inestimable blessings of grace and peace. Through their whole lives he will admit them to the nearest fellowship with himself: and what will he not do for them in the hour of death? — — — Yet all this falls infinitely short of the glory he will confer upon them in the future world. Read what testimonies of his approbation he will 227
- 228. give them beforethe assembled universe, and with what honours he will invest them at his own right hand [Note: Matthew 25:34; Malachi 3:17.]: verily they shall never have reason to complain that their fidelity to God has not been adequately rewarded.] But those who have despised him shall be despised by him— [Though they may be exalted among men, God will hold them in the utmost contempt. He will not vouchsafe to them so much as one kind look: but, on the contrary, in the hour of their greatest extremity, “he will laugh at their calamity, and mock when their fear cometh.” No consolations will he administer to them in a dying hour; but will rather hide his face from them, and shut his ear at the voice of their cry. And when they stand at his judgment-seat, he will bid them “depart accursed into everlasting fire,” regarding them no more than the chaff that is cast into the oven — — — They will then indeed “be lightly esteemed;” for they will “awake to shame and everlasting contempt.”] Here then we may see, 1. What estimate we should form of lukewarm religion— [That religion is most pleasing to men, which is regulated by the opinions of the world: but that alone is acceptable with God, which is agreeable to the standard of his revealed will. He requires our whole hearts; and looks with utter abhorrence upon the lukewarmness of a Laodicean state [Note: Revelation 3:15-16.] — — — Let us then not be contented with serving God in our closets; but let us confess him in the world: and let us not only serve him ourselves, but use all our influence to bring others also to a submission to his will. Yea, if all others should determinately reject his yoke, let us say, “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”] 2. What alone we are to regard as the great object of our desire— 228
- 229. [“The honour thatcometh of man” should be no further of any account with us, than it may augment our influence in serving God. It is the honour which cometh of God that alone deserves our concern. To have the witness of his Spirit and the testimony of our own conscience that we are pleasing God, is worthy of our most diligent pursuit. That will comfort us, when all other sources of consolation are cut off. Moreover, the approbation of God will continue, millions of ages after that the breath of man’s applause has vanished away. Let us then act to God, and live for God, and endeavour so to walk with him, that we may enjoy the light of his countenance: for “in his favour is life, and his loving-kindness is better than life itself.”] K&D, "1Sa_2:30 For this reason, the saying of the Lord, “Thy house (i.e., the family of Eli) and thy father's house (Eli's relations in the other lines, i.e., the whole priesthood) shall walk before me for ever” (Num_25:13), should henceforth run thus: “This be far from me; but them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be despised.” The first declaration of the Lord is not to be referred to Eli particularly, as it is by C. a Lapide and others, and understood as signifying that the high-priesthood was thereby transferred from the family of Eleazar to that of Ithamar, and promised to Eli for his descendants for all time. This is decidedly at variance with the fact, that although “walking before the Lord” is not a general expression denoting a pious walk with God, as in Gen_17:1, but refers to the service of the priests at the sanctuary as walking before the face of God, yet it cannot possibly be specially and exclusively restricted to the right of entering the most holy place, which was the prerogative of the high priest alone. These words of the Lord, therefore, applied to the whole priesthood, or the whole house of Aaron, to which the priesthood had been promised, “for a perpetual statute” (Exo_29:9). This promise was afterwards renewed to Phinehas especially, on account of the zeal which he displayed for the honour of Jehovah in connection with the idolatry of the people at Shittim (Num_25:13). But even this renewed promise only secured to him an eternal priesthood as a covenant of peace with the Lord, and not specially the high-priesthood, although that was included as the culminating point of the priesthood. Consequently it was not abrogated by the temporary transfer of the high-priesthood from the descendants of Phinehas to the priestly line of Ithamar, because even then they still retained the priesthood. By the expression “be it far from me,” sc., to permit this to take place, God does not revoke His previous promise, but simply denounces a false trust therein as irreconcilable with His holiness. That promise would only be fulfilled so far as the priests themselves honoured the Lord in their office, whilst despisers of God who dishonoured Him by sin and presumptuous wickedness, would be themselves despised. This contempt would speedily come upon the house of Eli. BI, "For them that honour Me I will honour, and they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed. The reward of honouring God 229
- 230. The words arein the strictest sense the word of God, uttered immediately by God Himself; and may thence command from us an especial attention and regard. I. The reward may be considered either absolutely, as what it is in itself; or relatively, as to its rise and whence it comes. 1. For itself, it is honour; a thing, if valued according to the rate it bears in the common market, of highest price among all the object of human desire; the chief reward which the greatest actions and which the best actions do pretend unto or are capable of; that which usually bears most sway in the hearts, and hath strongest influence on the lives of men; the desire of obtaining and maintaining which doth commonly overbear other most potent inclinations. The love of pleasure stoops thereto: for men, to get or keep reputation, will decline the most pleasant enjoyments, will embrace the hardest pains. If we observe what is done in the world, we may discern it to be the source of most undertakings therein. For honour the soldier undergoes hardship. In such request, of such force, doth honour appear to be. If we examine why, we may find more than mere fashion to ground the experiment on. There is one obvious reason why no mean regard should be had thereto; its great convenience and usefulness: it being an engine very requisite for the managing of any business, for the compassing any design, at least sweetly and smoothly. But searching farther, we shall find the appetite of honour to have a deeper ground, and that it is rooted even in our nature itself. For we may descry it budding forth in men’s first infancy (before the use of reason, or speech); even little children being ambitious to be made much of, maintaining among themselves pertly emulations and competitions, as it were about punctilios of honour. It is a spirit that not only haunts our courts and palaces, but frequents our schools and cloisters, yea, creeps into cottages, into hospitals, into prisons, and even dogs men into deserts and solitudes. The reason why is clear: for it is as if one should dispute against eating and drinking, or should labour to free himself from hunger and thirst: the appetite of honour being indeed, as that of food, innate unto us, so as not to be quenched or smothered, except by some violent distemper or indisposition of mind; even by the wise Author of our nature originally implanted therein, for very good ends. For did not some love of honour glow in men’s breasts, were that noble spark quite extinct, few men probably would study for honourable qualities, or perform laudable deeds; there would be nothing to keep some men within bounds of modesty and decency. A moderato regard to honour is also commendable as an instance of humanity or good will to men, yea, as an argument of humility, or a sober conceit of ourselves. For to desire another man’s esteem, and consequently his love, doth imply somewhat of reciprocal esteem and affection toward him; and to prize the judgment of other men concerning us, doth signify that we are not oversatisfied with our own. But beyond all this, the holy Scripture doth not teach us to slight honour, but rather in its fit order and just measure to love and prize it. It indeed instructs us to ground it well, not on bad qualities or wicked deeds; not on things of a mean and indifferent nature, that is vanity; but on real worth and goodness, that may consist with modesty and sobriety. Such is the reward propounded to us in itself; no vile or contemptible thing, but on various accounts most valuable; that which the common apprehensions of men, plain dictates of reason, a predominant instinct of nature, the judgments of very wise men, and Divine attestation itself conspire to commend unto us as very considerable and precious. Such a reward our text prescribes us the certain, the only way of attaining. 2. Such a benefit is here tendered to us by God Himself: “I,” saith He, “will honour.” It is sanctified by coming from His holy hand; it is dignified by following His most wise and just disposal; it is fortified and assured by depending on His unquestionable word and uncontrollable power: who, as He is the prime Author of all good, so He is in especial 230
- 231. manner the sovereigndispenser of honour. It is but an exchange of honour for honour; of honour from God, which is a free gift, for honour from us, which is a just duty; of honour from Him our sovereign Lord, for honour from us His poor vassals; of honour from the most high Majesty of heaven, for honour from us vile worms creeping on the earth. Such an overture one would think it not only reasonable to accept, but impossible to refuse. For can any man dare not to honour invincible power, infallible wisdom, inflexible justice? II. There are several ways of honouring God, or several parts and degrees of this duty. 1. The soul of that honour which is required of us toward God, is that internal esteem and reverence which we should bear in our hearts towards Him; importing that we have impressed on our minds such conceptions about Him as are worthy of Him, suitable to the perfection of His nature, to the eminency of His state, to the just quality of His works and actions. In acts, I say: not in speculative opinions concerning the Divine excellencies, such as all men have who are not downright atheists. Such an apprehension of God’s power, as shall make us dread His irresistible hand, shall cause us to despair of prospering in bad courses, shall dispose us to confide in Him, as able to perform whatever He wills us to expect from Him. “This people,” saith God, “do honour me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.” Such honour is indeed no honour at all, but impudent abuse and profane mockery. 2. This bodily part consists in outward expressions and performances, whereby we declare our esteem and reverence of God, and produce or promote the like in others. First, in general, God is honoured by a willing and careful practice of all piety and virtue for conscience sake, or in avowed obedience to His holy will. This is the most natural expression of our reverence toward Him, and the most effectual way of promoting the same in others. The light and lustre of good works done in regard to Divine command, will cause men to see clearly the excellencies of our most wise and gracious Lord; will consequently induce and excite them “to glorify our Father which is in heaven.” “In this,” saith our Saviour, “is my Father glorified, if you bear much fruit.” It is an aggravation of impiety, often insisted on in Scripture, that it slurs, as it were, and defames God, brings reproach and obloquy on Him, causes His name to be profaned; and it is answerably a commendation of piety, that by the practice thereof we beget esteem to God Himself, and sanctify His ever-blessed name. Secondly, but there are, deserving a particular inspection, some members thereof, which in a peculiar and eminent manner do constitute this honour: some acts which more signally conduce to the illustration of God’s glory Such are— 1. The frequent and constant performance (in a serious and reverent manner) of all religious duties, or devotions. 2. Using all things peculiarly refuted unto God, His holy name, His holy word, His holy places (the places “where His honour dwelleth,”) His holy times (religious fasts and festivities) with especial respect. 3. Yielding due observance to the deputies and ministers of God. 4. Freely spending what God hath given us (out of respect unto Him) in works of piety, charity, and mercy; that which the wise man calls, “honouring the Lord with our substance.” 5. All penitential acts, by which we submit unto God, and humble ourselves before Him. As Achan, by confessing of his sin, is said to “give glory to the Lord God of Israel.” 6. Cheerful undergoing afflictions, losses, disgraces, for the profession of God’s truth, or for obedience to God’s commands. (As St. Peter is said “by his death,” suffered on such 231
- 232. accounts, “to glorifyGod.”( 7. We shall especially honour God, by discharging faithfully those offices which God has intrusted us with; by improving diligently those talents which God hath committed to us; by using carefully those means and opportunities which God hath vouchsafed us, of doing Him service, and promoting His glory. It is a most notorious thing, both to reason and in experience, what extreme advantage great persons have, especially by the influence of their practice, to bring God Himself, as it were, into credit; how much it is in their power easily to render piety a thing in fashion and at request. For in what they do, they never are alone, or are ill attended; whither they go, they carry the world along with them: they lead crowds of people after them, as well when they go in the right way, as when they run astray. Their good example especially hath this advantages that men can find no excuse, can have no pretence why they should not follow it. III. I should now show why the duty is required of us, or how reasonable it is. God surely doth not exact honour from us because He needs it, because He is the better for it, because He, for itself, delights therein. He is infinitely excellent, beyond what we can imagine or declare. 1. For that to honour God is the most proper work of reason; that for which primarily we were designed and framed; whence the performance thereof doth preserve and perfect our haters; to neglect it being unnatural and monstrous. 2. For that also it is a most pleasant duty. He is not a man who doth not delight to make some returns thither, where he hath found much goodwill, whence He hath felt great kindness. 3. For that likewise our honouring God disposes us to the imitation of Him (for what we do reverence we would resemble), that is, to the doing those things wherein our chief perfection and happiness consists, whence our best content and joy doth spring. 4. In fine, for that the practice at this duty is most profitable and beneficial to us; unto it by an eternal rule of justice our final welfare and prosperity being annexed. IV. This promise He makes good several ways. 1. The honouring God is of itself an honourable thing; the employment which ennobles heaven itself, wherein the highest angels do rejoice and glory. It is the greatest honour of a servant to bring credit to his master. 2. By honouring God we are immediately instated in great honour; we enter into most noble relations, acquire most illustrious titles, enjoy most glorious privileges. 3. God hath so ordered it, that honour is naturally consequent on the honouring Him. God hath made goodness a noble and stately thing; hath impressed on it that beauty and majesty which commands an universal love and veneration, which strikes presently both a kindly and an awful respect into the minds of all men. 4. God, by His extraordinary providence, as there is reason and occasion, doth interpose so as to procure honour to them, to maintain and further their reputation who honour Him. Many are the instances of persons (such as Abraham, Joseph, Moses, David, Job, and Daniel), who, for their signal honouring of God, from a base and obscure, or from an afflicted and forlorn condition, have, in ways strange and wonderful, been advanced to eminent dignity. 5. Whereas men are naturally inclined to bear much regard to the judgment of posterity concerning them, are desirous to leave a good name behind them, and to have their memory retained in esteem: God so disposes things, that “the memory of the just shall be blessed”; 232
- 233. that “his righteousnessshall be had in everlasting remembrance.” 6. Lastly, to those who honour God here, God hath reserved an honour infinitely great and excellent, in comparison whereto all honours here are but dreams, the loudest acclamations of mortal men are but empty sounds. (I. Barrow, D. D.) Divinely approved The principle underlying these words is, that God is jealous of His honour and glory. The great object of God still, in revealing Himself, is be get men to honour Him. When that is accomplished He is satisfied, and men are fulfilling the great end of their existence. I. Consider some reasons why God should be honoured. 1. He should be honoured because of His power. It seems almost an instinct in the human mind to honour power. Some of the heathen worshipped the ox and the lion as the symbols of strength. In our own day, in connection with athletic sports, etc., we see what amounts almost to a worship of brute force. But perversions of the idea apart, every well-regulated mind recognises the necessity of honouring those to whom honour is due, and notably those possessed of power. Now consider the power of God. 2. He is to be honoured because of His character. Some would say that men possessed of power, if destitute of character, are not to be honoured. Without discussing this point, it will be admitted on all hands that power and character combined deserve, and will receive, all due honour. Besides this, it is to be observed that God’s character is perfect in the combination of the strong with the tender. His power is to be taken along with His goodness, His justice with His love, His holiness with His compassion. So that we have in God perfection in each attribute, and perfection in all taken together. 3. He is to be honoured because of all He is doing both in Providence grace. II. Consider some ways in which God can and ought to be honoured. 1. We are to honour Him by trusting Him. There is nothing more dishonouring to a man of honour and truthfulness, than to doubt or mistrust him. The life of faith, from first to last, is a God-honouring life. 2. We honour God by the services of the Sanctuary, if they are performed in a right spirit. Altogether, if we are in a right frame of mind we are offering spiritual sacrifices to God. 3. We are to honour God with our substance. III. Consider the consequence of honouring God. It is said in the 75th Psalm, “Promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south. But God is the Judge: He putteth down one and setteth up another.” He is the Ruler of the Universe, and, therefore, all honour comes from Him. This truth is also brought out in: the history of Joseph, Moses, David, Daniel and many others. IV. Consider: the principle on which God acts in the bestowing of honour. God honours men, not for their fathers’ sake but for their own. In other words, He deals with men not representatively but individually. This principle is brought out also in, the 18th chapter of Ezekiel, the gist of which is comprehended in the statement, “the soul that sinneth it shall die.” (D. Macaulay, M. A.) 233
- 234. Honour and Shame Therecould not be a move forcible illustration of the truth of these words than the sad story of which they form a part. Outwardly, we see nothing to blame in the personal conduct of Eli. He had never lived above his office. That God had delight in burnt offerings and sacrifice, he had impressed on himself, and these things were the summit of his estimate. He had never learned that there are things better than sacrifice, and more acceptable than the fat of rams. An amiable heart, a fine conservative feeling for all that was enjoined by God, these had kept him steady and made him respected: but alas it now appears, Mass there was no more than these. He knew not that in order to do good, a man must live above, not up to his outward duties: that influence on others is found, not where life is raised up to the routine of duty, but where that routine of duty is quickened and inspired by a life led in higher places and guided by nobler motives. He who dwells in the circumference of his life gains no sympathy from those who dwell in its centre. And none are so keen as the young to discover where central principle is wanting; none so ductile, to be drawn after, where another leads. The father reposed in the public esteem. He lived and acted as was expected of him They knew that their father’s piety was just conformity to what he saw around him: was just amiableness, propriety, acquiescence in that which he found among the servants of God in his tabernacle. And when with the passions and feelings of youth, they began to do likewise, they too find what all under the same circumstances have found. The result in this case was natural, and speedily followed. Eli, falling among the decent and the religious, knowing his duties, and having inherited perhaps a feeling of their sacred nature, did what was expected of him: his sons, falling among the unprincipled and profligate, being taught to look on their sacred duties as decent forms merely, did what was expected of them: ran riot with their ungodly companions; being destitute of leading principle, drifted onward from bad to worse; openly disgraced the solemn service of the sanctuary by their greediness and by their sensuality. The sad history ends as God had forewarned them it would—and even more terribly in its details than it had pleased Him to disclose. Most characteristic and instructive is every step of the narration: instructive, to the effect produced on a people by the long endurance of such a system as that which we have now been tracing. To what must a people have been degraded, who could look on that ark thus accompanied, and greet its arrival with shouts of triumph? And now rapidly gathers in the dark and disgraceful catastrophe. Yes, and it is thus that all glory departs—from men, from families, from nations—by leaving out God from life, and lightly esteeming Him. Turn for an instant to another example, of a very different kind, and notice the central. There never was a religious man, who gave more lamentable instances of forgetting his God and falling into sin, than did David. But when David fell, he rose again. He never indeed lost the changing consequences of his sin; it rained his peace, it broke up his family, it embittered his death bed; but it did not overwhelm him utterly. And why? Because he set the Lord ever before him, in the realities of his inward life. And therefore the one was honoured, and the other was disgraced. And now from these ancient examples, written down for our learning, let us turn to ourselves and fit them to our instruction. These are days of all but universal external accord in the great verities of our Christian faith. It is rather creditable than otherwise to maintain them: it is what society expects of men and of families, to conform to a certain amount of religious charity. And the consequence is, that such a history as this needs applying, and, its lessons enforcing on men’s minds, more perhaps than at any previous period. There is among us, it is to be feared, a vast amount of this same untoward and blameless decency, this uniform respect for the usages and ordinance of religion, subsisting without a living personal apprehension of and honour of God in the character in which He has revealed himself, and in which we profess to have received and to be serving Him. Let us set before ourselves the consequences of such a state in the individual, in the family, in the community. Do we not at once see, that it contains necessity the elements of 234
- 235. decay and ofdownward progress? And corresponding to this progress will be, as we might expect, yet another, and in another direction. As Israel became acted an by the system which prevailed under Eli, superstition succeeded to the fear of God. Now superstition is the refuge of the conscience when it has lost the sense of God’s personal presence. You may measure by its prevalence, the absence of God from men’s hearts. And another result will not fail to follow, from the mere decent conservation of religion among a people: a depreciation of Truth, as truth: a refusal to entertain solemn questions reaching to our very truthfulness and genuineness as men and Christians, and falling back on expediency as a principle. I might point out many more mischiefs resulting from such a view of religion as that which I have been today impugning. I might follow the young, as its result not only into superstition, which I have done—but into even darker and more awful consequences: I might show how much of the lax belief and growing unbelief of our day is owing to this want of living reality in our religious men and religious families: but I rather hasten to what I conceive ought to be our great practical lesson from this awful history and subject. And that practical lesson is beyond all question this: that the inward reality of religion is the one thing needful, far, far above those outward expressions of it which however necessary as its accompaniments, may and often do exist willful it. “Them that honour me I will honour.” (H. Alford, B. D.) Man honouring God and God honouring man. “Them that honour Me I will honour” (1Sa_2:30). I. Man honouring God as a duty. How can man honour God? Not by making Him greater than He is. He is infinitely glorious. Not by ascribing to Him, in song or prayer and in sublimest forms of speech, the highest attribute of being. How then? 1. By a practical reverence for His greatness. His greatness should be realised in every step of life. The world is the house of God and the gate of heaven. Life should be reverent, not frivolous. 2. By a practical gratitude for His goodness. 3. By a practical adoration for His excellence. The heavens declare His glory, yea, the whole earth is full of His glory. II. God honouring man as a reward. “Them that honour Me I will honour.” How does God honour such a man? 1. With a commission in His service. He gives him work to do and qualification for its discharge. 2. With an adoption into His family. 3. With a participation in His glory. “Enter into the joy of thy Lord.” (Homilist.) The duty and reward of honouring God It is abundantly evident that God is eminently worthy of the highest honour. I. There are special forms in which in special circumstances we may be called upon to honour God. These are various as the changing nature of our lot in Providence, and the characteristics of the age and place in which we live. But there are common forms of honouring Him which are 235
- 236. incumbent upon allwho are blessed with gospel privileges. 1. As rebellious lost and ruined creatures, it is a primary and fundamental duty that we honour God by obeying His commend, to believe on His Son whom He hath sent as the Saviour of mankind sinners. 2. Another important way of honouring God is by having a strict regard to the ordinances of His worship. And we honour Him in a special manner by strictly observing, and carefully conserving, and earnestly defending any of these ordinances., which for the time may be corrupted or neglected or denied. Those thus honour Him, for example, who “keep the Sabbath from polluting it” in a time such as this when Sabbath desecration in a variety of open and flagrant forms so generally and lamentably prevails. 3. God is also honouring in our holding fast and holding forth His revealed truths, especially those which are being ignored, made light of, corrupted, or denied. II. It is an encouraging and animating assurance that in proportion as we in these and the like ways honour God, he will honour us. 1. God sometimes honours those who honour Him in the honour they receive during their lives from their fellowmen. He so deals with them in His providence as to mark them out as those whom He delights to honour. Many instances of this are found not only in Scripture, but in everyday life, as in the following case. There was a large mercantile firm whose annual stock taking was done on Sabbath. Mr. C—, a superior clerk in their establishment, had, without scruple always taken a principal part in this work. Having become savingly impressed with Divine things, he felt, when the first annual stock-taking thereafter came round, that he could not again dishonour God by engaging in his secular calling on the Sabbath, whatever might be the consequences of his refusal. He therefore respectfully but firmly informed his employers that he Could not again take part in the usual Sabbath stock- taking. The Saturday came, and he was finally asked whether or not he would be at his accustomed post on the morrow. He firmly declined being present, and received the ominous answer that a letter from the firm would be sent to his home in the evening. Late at night the letter came. Too excited and nervous to do so himself, he asked his sister to open it and read. It began, as he expected, viz., that in consequence of his refusal to perform accustomed duties his employers discharged him from their service; but the letter continued, “we so exceedingly admire your firm, straightforward conscientiousness, and feel so strongly that we can place implicit confidence in you, that we offer you a partnership in our firm, and feel sure that your presence with us will be a blessing.” The following stock taking, we may add, was left in Mr. C—’s hands, under whose arrangements it was satisfactorily done without encroaching on the Sabbath. And never again was the sacred day desecrated in the firm in which he bad become so valued a partner. 2. Again, God sometimes honours those who honour Him in the esteem in which they are held by after generation. “The memory of the just is blessed.” This is abundantly illustrated in Sacred and Church history. It is seen in the honourable repute in which the Patriarchs and Prophets and Apostles are held wherever the inspired writings are read and received. It is seen in the admiration felt throughout Protestant Christendom for the great leaders of the Reformation, as Luther, Zwingle, Calvin, Wickliffe, Cranmer, and Knox. It is seen in the esteem in which Knox, and Melville, and Henderson are held throughout the Presbyterian world. It is seen on a smaller scale in the honour which, in Scotland at least, attaches to the memory of the Erskines and other Fathers of the Secession, to the memory of Dr. M’Crie, the historian of the Scottish Reformation and Reformers, and to the memory of Chalmers, and other founders of the Free Church, and to the memory of many others who readily suggest 236
- 237. themselves. 3. Again, Godsometimes honours in their posterity those who honour Him. More than two hundred years ago, the Marquis of Argyle was beheaded in Edinburgh, nominally for the crime of high treason, but in reality for his eminent honouring of God as a pious Christian, a staunch Presbyterian, and a devoted Covenanter. And is it not noteworthy, as illustrative of our theme, that the Argyle family, whilst still Presbyterian, has long occupied a foremost place amongst the Scottish nobility, for talent and character and influence, and that one of his lineal descendants—the present Marquis of Lorne—has been honoured to become son-in-law to our Queen? We may give another and similar recent illustration. The celebrated John Welsh, minister of Ayr, and son-in-law to the illustrious Reformer Knox, was condemned to death as a traitor, for his firm and uncompromising opposition to the Erastian and Prelatic encroachment of King James the Sixth upon the Scottish Church. This sentence was commuted to one of perpetual exile from his native land. The unfeeling and brutal treatment given to his wife the daughter of Knox—by that vain monarch, when she sought some remission of this punishment to save her husband’s life, is well known to every reader of Scottish Church History. And what do we now find with regard to their posterity? The Royal House of Stuart has long since been banished from the throne of Great Britain. And, according to the Boston Advertiser, the Honourable John Welsh, who last month arrived in this country as Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States to the British Court, is a lineal descendant of that very Welsh, minister of Ayr, who, for fidelity to the King of Zion, was unjustly condemned for treason against his earthly king. But whether those who honour God be honoured in such respects as we have referred to or not, they are and ever will be honoured by God Himself. They have His present approbation and esteem, both in and for honouring Him And the converse of all this is equally true. Those who despise God—who despise Him by slighting or rejecting His offers of Himself in the gospel to be their God in Christ—who despise Him by neglecting or corrupting the ordinances of His worship—who despise Him by making light of, or parting with, or rejecting any of His revealed truths— “shall be lightly esteemed.” They shall be so necessarily, for there can be no true and lasting honour apart from moral excellence. Those who despise God are held in light esteem by those whose esteem is most worth having. They are at heart often despised even by wicked men, who for selfish purposes may fawn upon and flatter them in their outward prosperity. Their posterity often lose any outward honour inherited from them, and become otherwise dishonoured. “The seed of evildoers shall never be renowned.” But whether those who despise God be much or little esteemed by their fellowmen, God Himself holds them in light esteem. All the plaudits, and honours, and rewards which the world can heap upon them cannot counterbalance this. “He that sits in heaven shall laugh; the Lord shall hold them in derision.” (Original Secession Magazine.) The road to honour Our chickens generally come home to roost. Our thoughts of other men become other men’s thoughts of us. According as we measure out to our fellows, so do they measure back into our bosoms, for good or for evil. So especially, in reference to the Lord himself, the God of justice sooner or later causes a man to reap his own sowing, and gather his own scattering. So does life repeat itself; so does the seed develop the flower, and the flower again produce the seed. It is an endless chain; for the thing that has been is the thing which shall be. A man may live to see a grim procession of all his old sins marching past him, robed in the sackcloth and ashes wherein justice dooms them to be arrayed. So is it also with our joys. God gives us joy after the similitude 237
- 238. of our service.If you wish to see this exemplified in Scripture, how many instances rise before your Enoch walks with God because God pleases him, and then we find that he pleases God. Noah obediently rests the issues of his life upon the truth of God, and God gives him rest. Abraham was famous for trusting God, and it is wonderful how God trusted him. Very striking as an instance of the retaliation of providence is the case of Adonibezek’s. Samuel, when he smote Agag, told him that, as his sword had made women childless, so should the sword of the Lord that day make his mother childless by slaying him. Most memorable of all is the instance of Haman and his gallows, fifty cubits high. See how he swings thereon. He built the gibbet for Mordecai. Malice uses a sort of providential boomerang. The man flings it with all his force at the foe, and it comes back to him; not into his hand that he may use it again, but across his brow to smite him even to the dust. Take heed what ye put into the measure that ye mete out to others, and especially to God; for “with what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again.” “Them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed.” I. The duty incumbent upon us all, but especially upon God’s people, of honouring the Lord. As we are God’s creatures we are bound to honour God. Just notice how we ought to honour Him, and consider wherein this duty lies. 1. We should honour Him by confessing his deity: I mean the deity of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. “The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet there are not three Gods but one God.” 2. Let us further honour God by acknowledging His rule. 3. Let us honour the holiness of God and the justice of God and the mercy of God by repentance whenever we feel that we have done wrong. 4. I would press upon you to honour God by acknowledging the wisdom of His teaching, and by a teachableness which accepts His doctrine. 5. We honour God when we believe Holy Scripture to be inspired—infallibly inspired; and, taking it as such, say, “It is not mine to question it, or to argue against it, but simply to accept it.” 6. Further, we honour God’s love by a daily trust in him. 7. We also honour God, when we confess His goodness by patiently enduring His will, and especially by rejoicing in it. II. The influence upon our daily life of this habit of honouring God. A man who honours God does this practically; it is no form or farce with him, but a deep practical reality. 1. He does it often by consulting with God. 2. We honour God in our daily life when we confess him. 3. Sometimes you can honour Christ by Some distinct service that you can do for him, or by some special obedience to his will. I have always admired the example of the pious Jew who was told that a certain city on the Continent would excellently suit his business. “But,” he asked, “is there a synagogue there?” and when they said that there was no synagogue he preferred to stay in another place, that he might worship God, though he would do less business. I do not know that this is often the case among Jews any more than it is among Gentiles; and, I am sorry to say that I know many Gentiles to whom God’s worship is no consideration whatever—they would go to the bottomless pit if they could make large profits. 4. Then you can honour God with your substance when He gives it to you. 238
- 239. 5. In aword, the man that really honours God seeks to praise Him. III. The reward of all this. “Them that honour me I will honour.” Is not this a grand reward? It is not, “They that honour me shall be honoured,” but, “Them that honour me I will honour.” Does God honour men? He promises to do so. Compared with the honour which the Lord is able to give, there is no honour which is worth naming in the same day. When God honours a man the glory is glory indeed. One of the French kings gave to a conquering general some £500 a year, or thereabouts, for a wonderful deed of prowess, but the soldier told the king that he would have preferred the gold cross. I do not think I should have had such preference for a bauble; but honour is a precious commodity. To get honour from God is very different from getting it from a king. It was said of Alexander that, of two nobles who had served him well, be gave to one ten thousand talents, and to the other a kiss; and he that had the money envied him who received the kiss. One kiss from the mouth of God would outweigh kingdoms. Honour from God—favour from God—this is a high reward, which cannot be weighed against ten thousand worlds, and all the glory thereof. “Them that honour me I will honour.” The man who honours God shall be honoured in his own heart by peace of conscience—honoured in his own spirit by the conviction that it must be wisdom to be right and true and honest, and that it can never be under any circumstances right to do wrong, or wise to break a divine command. Such a man honouring his God among his brethren shall be honoured of God in the church. And in the world it shall be the same. I do not believe that a man truly serves God without in the long run winning the esteem of his fellow citizens. (C. H. Spurgeon.) The right way of honouring God These words were spoken by a prophet of the Lord to Eli, upon occasion of the wickedness of his sons, and the dishonour brought upon religion thereby. 1. That their sins were of a scandalous nature, being an open affront both to the ceremonial and moral law. The offering of the Lord was that which Himself had appointed in the Law of Moses ((Lev_7:31; Lev_7:33-34). But these sons of Eli thought themselves too great to be tied up to such a strict observance of the niceties of the law. God will and ought to be served in his own way, and they, who thought to be wiser than his laws, smarted for their folly. 2. That the house of Eli was advanced to that dignity which it then enjoyed by an extraordinary method of providence. 3. That although God was justly provoked by the sins of the house of Eli; yet there was a concurrence of the people’s sins in bringing down such severe judgments. I. The name of that honour which is due to them. II. The rules and measures whereby God bestows honour on mankind. “Them that honour me I will honour; and they that despise me,” etc. There are three sorts of men to be considered with respect to the honour due to God. 1. There are such as despise him instead of honouring him. Such as the sons of Eli here mentioned, who are said to be the sons of Belial, who knew not the Lord. 2. There are such who pretend to honour God, but do not. He that would give true honour to another must have a just apprehension of his worth and excellency, and give it in such a manner as is most becoming and agreeable to him. Now, there are two ways whereby men may be guilty of dishonouring God under a pretence of 239
- 240. honouring him. 1. Byfalse notions of God in their minds, when persons form in their minds false imaginations or conceptions of him; and so give their worship not to the true God, but to an idol of their own fancy. And when our minds are fixed herein, the next thing is to exclude all mean and unworthy thoughts of him, as inconsistent with his Divine perfections. 2. Men dishonour God, when they pretend to honour him, not according to His will, but their own intentions and imaginations. 3. But certainly there is a way left to give to God that honour which is due to Him. What are the most likely means to be effectual— 1. An universal discountenancing of all sorts of vice and profaneness, be the persons of what rank or quality soever. 2. An even, steady, vigorous and impartial execution of the laws against looseness and debauchery. 3. A wise choice of fit instruments to pursue so good an end. 4. Lastly, a diligent inspection into the behaviour of those who are the proper and immediate instruments for carrying on so good a design. II. The rules and measures which God observes in distributing honour among men. “Them that honour Me, I will honour; but they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed.” Which may be understood two ways. 1. As to such societies of men, which have one common interest. And so it implies, that the welfare and flourishing condition of such depends upon their zeal and concernment for God and religion.. God takes care of His own honour by methods we are not able to comprehend. And if we cannot know the number and aggravation of a people’s sins we can never fix the measures and degrees of their punishment. But, however, some things are certain; 1. That the sins of a nation do naturally tend to the weakness and dishonour of it. 2. Sometimes God steps out of his ordinary method and course of Providence, either in a way of judgment or mercy. And then he more particularly shows that those that honour him, he will honour; and those who despise him shall be lightly esteemed. 2. As to particular persons, how far this holds will appear by these things. 1. That esteem and honour naturally follows the opinion of another’s desert or excellency. 2. The sincere practice of piety and virtue doth command esteem and reverence. (Bishop Stillingfleet.) God honouring the righteous I. The righteous man should honour God. 1. By putting his trust implicitly in God’s words of promise. 2. The righteous man honours God by cleaving fast unto the Lord when the world is all 240
- 241. against him. 3. Anotherway in which the righteous man honours God is by his ceaseless activity and enlarged benevolence. 4. By his singleness of eye, and his faithfulness unto death. II. How God honours the righteous. God honours his saints who commit their souls to his keeping for pardon and reconciliation, by bestowing that peace which passes all understanding. (T. Myers, M. A.) Honour from God The desire of honour, credit, reputation, soon arises in us, because the usefulness of it soon appears to us, for, as we live in society and continually converse with others, and stand in need of them, we see how necessary it is that others should think and speak well of us. The desire of honour which is common to us all is very profitable to society, of singular use to keep men in order, to deter them from wickedness, and to excite them to many virtues. The sacred writers have also represented honour as desirable, and in some measure worthy to be sought and loved. I. Let us explain what it is to honour God. To honour God is to frame to ourselves just and worthy notions of Him, of His perfections, of His power, wisdom, justice, goodness and mercy, to reflect upon them with pleasure and respect, to love Him, to trust in Him, to desire to resemble Him as nearly as our nature permits, and in all things to consult His will as the rule of our life. To honour God is to declare openly before men by our behaviour that we reverence Him, and would choose above all things to approve ourselves to Him. To honour God is to be constant in the performance of all public acts of religion. To honour God is to improve our abilities, and to discharge the duties of our station in a manner which shall procure respect to the religion which we profess. II. We have see what it is to honour God, and hence we may know what, on the contrary, is meant by dishonouring Him. God is dishonoured, in general, by all kinds of moral evil, which is a contempt of His authority, an abuse of His gifts, and a disobedience to His will. But more particularly: God is dishonoured by atheism and unbelief. God is dishonoured by that kind of idolatry, in which, instead of him, many false gods are worshipped. God is dishonoured by those who reject the Gospel of Christ. Amongst those who profess the Christian religion, God is dishonoured by such as live not suitably to it. III. Let us now proceed to consider the reward promised to those who honour God. By the honour thus promised to the righteous, the same thing is not altogether meant in the Old Testament, and in the New; for, because under the Law future rewards were not so clearly propounded, the honour there mentioned relates principally to this world, though honour in the world to come is not excluded: on the contrary, in the New Testament, where eternal life is more fully taught, the honour promised relates principally to that honour which the good shall hereafter receive, though honour even for the present is not to be excluded. The promise, therefore, contained in the text may be fairly restrained and reduced to this, that the good shall be rewarded with honour, usually in this world, and certainly in the world to come Honour is not to be obtained by those who do nothing to deserve it. All the gifts which this world can bestow upon us will not secure it. A good person will always be useful to society, as far as his station and abilities permit: he will not despise and wrong others, and he will do them all the services that He in his power so far, therefore, as he is known, he will probably be esteemed. Thus respect and honour is the natural consequence of goodness, and in the common course of things must 241
- 242. attend it. Butthere is, over and above all this, a promise of God that it shall be so, and we must not suppose that He leaves the issues of things altogether to second causes, and never interposeth Himself. In the Scriptures of the Old Testament we find in how extraordinary a manner God honoured those who honoured Him. If we descend to the times when piety most flourished, and yet was attended with the fewest temporal recompenses, to the first age of Christianity, we find that the disciples of Christ, and other eminent persons in the church, though persecuted, scorned, and slandered by the Gentiles, and the unbelieving Jews, received great authority and miraculous powers from God, and the utmost duty, love, and respect from their numerous brethren in the faith. (J. Jortin, M. A.) The service of God the only true dignity I. What it is to honour God. I need not, I trust, use may words to show you the sole supremacy of the God of heaven and earth. In order to honour this great Being aright, He requires that we love Him with all the heart, and soul, and strength, and mind—that we entertain towards Him, supreme reverence and affection, that, whatsoever we do, we do it to His glory. To honour God then as a sinner, you must first do homage to His Son as a Saviour. II. To illustrate the promise and the threatening in the text. Many and great are the blessings promised in the Scriptures of truth, to the righteous, to them that fear God. Of all the subordinate principles of action in the human breast, there is perhaps none of more universal influence or of more powerful efficacy than the desire of honour. There is no class of men so high as to despise it, and none so low as to be incapable of feeling it. Princes and nobles, statesmen and warriors, lawyers and merchants, philosophers and poets, peasants and mechanics, are all sensible of its influence. To obtain it they will submit to the heaviest toils, the greatest risks, the severest hardships, the most wasting anxieties, and the most alarming dangers. Under its influence have the most formidable obstacles been surmounted, and the greatest results effected. A principle, then, so universal and so powerful, may justly be considered a principle of oar original constitution, and intended to serve the most important and beneficial purposes; and yet it is not to be concealed, that being directed to foolish, vain, unsatisfactory, and forbidden objects, it has been productive of dissatisfaction, disappointment, and bitter remorse to him who was actuated by it, as well as gross injustice, cruelty, and oppression to others. To gratify it, strange as it may seem, many have been guilty of the most contemptible meanness. Though a principle of our nature, then, and capable of producing the most extensive results, it is plain that before these results can be beneficial or allowable, as means of acquiring honour, they must be such as the laws of God, the principles of justice, truth, and goodness will allow; hence God says, “Let not the rich man glory in his riches,” etc. If you seek, then, the honour that cometh from God in those pursuits which are agreeable to righteousness, truth, and mercy, which alone reason and conscience can commend, which promote the glory of Him who is all in all, the good of mankind, and the salvation and happiness of your own immortal souls, then assuredly it is a lawful, and proper, and dignified, principle of action. But if the honour that cometh from God be the object of your desire, and pursued in the way we have pointed out, you cannot be disappointed. The word of the living God is thus passed that if you honour Him, in other words devote yourselves to a life of faith and holiness, He will honour you. And He who is God over all, almighty in His power, and infinite in His resources, cannot want the means of fulfilling His promise—“Riches and honour come of Him, for he ruleth over all: in his hand is power and might: in his hand it is to make great, and to give strength unto all.” It is considered an honour to be made associates of the illustrious great, and men covet, even to a weakness, to be thought persons of illustrious extraction and rank; now God promotes those who honour Him to the rank of His children, 242
- 243. makes them “heirsof God, and joint-heirs with Christ.” The Almighty so arranges His providence that at the last, and often in this world, the character of the righteous is duly appreciated. “They that despise me shall be lightly esteemed.” While there is nothing that men, especially the young, desire so much as honour, there is nothing they so much dread as disgrace and contempt—but this shall infallibly be the portion of all who neglect or despise God. But is it possible, we would ask, to despise God? (J. Gibson, M. A.) Honouring God That though it is in the power of every man, more or less, as well as it is his duty, to honour God by his words and actions; yet that this morn especially belongs to those that are in a more eminent station, and have greater advantages and opportunities for doing good than others, by their authority, power, and example I. I shall treat of the words by themselves. “Them that honour me, I will honour.” The honour due to Almighty God is founded upon the same reason as His Being. For who can consider the wonderful power and wisdom shining through the works of the visible creation. Who can contemplate His goodness and His mercy, His mercy to the world. Who can consider God’s government of the world, and His constant preservation of mankind? Who that considers the equity and perfection of the divine law? Who can reflect upon the preservation of a church? Lastly, who is there that has made any observation of himself, and looked into the circumstances of his life in the various scenes of it, but must own a cause superior to himself, and his obligations to this Almighty Power? Surely there is no need of any other argument than the nature of the thing to induce us to honour our Creator, Preserver, and Benefactor. 1. Religion and the civil interest are closely connected. It was strictly so among the Jews, whose government was a theocracy And the law of the land being then of God’s own institution, there was a peculiar providence and blessing that was connected to their obedience by a Divine promise: And by this they were eminently distinguished from other nations. But though it was thus with them after an especial manner, yet the whole world always was, and ever will be, under the government of God’s providence. And howsoever the providence of God may vary in its motions, now turning itself this way, and then another; yet there are immovable reasons upon which it always proceeds, and that is religion, and the blessing of God; our honouring of him, and His honouring of us, in conjunction and cooperation. For religion will stand to the world’s end, whatever become of particular persons and governments. While mortals engage with mortals only, there is the like force to defend, as to assault, and the success depends upon the greater numbers, the inbred courage of the soldiery, the conduct of the commander, or some fortunate accident; but now when the Divine providence comes to be concerned, it is not what the number, or the courage, or the conduct, nay or accidents, are on the adverse side: because that’s all in itself, and becomes all wherever it is. And there it will be, where the honour of God and religion is concerned. There is a vast difference between what is done by Divine providence for our own sakes, and what for the sake of others. If for our own sakes, as it is when grounded upon religion, and the honour we pay to Almighty God, it will then continue, and last as long as the reason lasts upon which it stands. But if it be for other reasons that we succeed in a design, and not for our own sakes, then when the reasons cease our assistance that we had from the Divine providence ceases with it. Thus it was with the haughty Assyrian, who prospered in his invasion of Judea, not as he himself thought, by the wisdom of his own counsel, but as he was the rod of God’s anger, and sent by his special commission against the hypocritical nation But that service ended, there was a stop put to his victory, and he soon fell under the 243
- 244. like calamity (Isa_10:5,etc.) The world is then as the Jewish state was, a kind of theocracy, God is the governor, and religion, as it were, the soul of it: And then it is that God becomes their patron, and His providence their security. 2. As these two are thus to be connected, for religion is to have the preference: “Them that honour me, I will honour.” Second causes have this advantage of the first, that they are visible, and so sooner affect us than the Supreme, who is invisible; and therefore mankind have been inclined to direct their endeavours another way. But this is an unpardonable oversight, to begin thus at the wrong end; as if because an artificer uses a pencil and colours in the various figures which he draws, and sets off by his skill to the greatest advantage; that a person should impute all to the instruments the artist uses and applaud their skill, and apply himself to them as the operator, and pass by the painter. Much so do they that apply themselves to the next causes, and to the means to the neglect of Him who is the Supreme Cause. Prayer is somewhere due, for we receive what we cannot of ourselves procure; we live as well as we begin to be, by the like Power; and if we enter upon our affairs under the influence only of our own wisdom and power, we may as well pray to ourselves, as depend upon ourselves; since where our dependence is there are our devotions due. But how ridiculous would he appear that should thus adore himself, and pray to himself? 3. According to the honour we give to God, and the regard shown to religion, we may expect to be honoured by him; such we may expect the event will be. It is an easy thing to conceive that such the event will be, forasmuch as God governs the world, and when we lay things in their proper order there is no reason to think but that prosperity, honour, and success should attend those that honour God, as heat and light do the sun. And yet if we draw near, and view the case as it is often in fact, we shall find it far different from what it is in speculation. If, indeed, this was constantly so, that those that honour God were always honoured by Him with such peculiar marks of favour as distinguished them from others, it would serve as a character by which the good might be known from the bad. But since nothing is more evident from common experience than that all things, generally speaking, come alike to all, then those that do not honour God may fare alike with such as do, end those that do honour Him fare no better than those that do not; and so the force of the argument in the text will be lost. But setting aside, for the present, what may he said in defence of the method of Divine providence in such a seeming promiscuous dispensation of things and the reconcileableness of the proposition in the text to it, as to particular persons, we are to remember what has been already said, that it is more especially to be applied to such persons that are of eminent character in respect of quality, or office, or for the advantages they have and improve to the honour of God, and promoting of religion. And surely such as these will God more especially regard. But if we raise the argument higher, and apply it to nations and communities, it improves in our hands, and we have a noble instance of this truth. It must be granted that God that has a regard to the flowers of the field, the fowls of the air, and the beasts of the earth, is as much more concerned in the good, preservation, and happiness of mankind, as these in their nature exceed the other; but yet because we see not into all the events and circumstances relating to men in this world, and that there is a reserve for them in another, we cannot so settle what relates to them, but that we are forced to suspend, and must acknowledge there are great difficulties, and that must remain so to be, till the whole comes to be disclosed. But now as to men combined together in societies, the case is not so perplexed, for there we may, generally speaking, observe, and perhaps, if a careful history of acts and events were preserved, it would appear that God doth honour those nations which honour Him, and that there is no people among whom, as well by their practice as laws, virtue, and religion have been, and are encouraged, but has a suitable blessing attending it, and the Divine providence eminently appearing in their behalf. There are some vices that in 244
- 245. their own natureand apparent consequences root up families, make nations effeminate, and poor-spirited, and render them an easy prey to the bold invader: As was evident in the declining times of the Roman empire, declining in virtue as well as power, and declining in power, because they declined in virtue. But there are other sins that have as bearing an influence in the judgments that befall a nation, and especially a nation in covenant with God, as a church, that deprives them of their best defence, the protection of God, and exposes them to the worst of dangers; and these sins are a profane contempt or neglect of things sacred. II. To consider the proposition in the text, with relation to the context, and to the matter of fact it is subjoined to. Eli being invested with the supreme power and authority, had an opportunity for doing the greatest good, for reforming matters in Church and State, and settling them upon a sure and lasting foundation. In which, how happily soever he succeeded for a time, and so as to have the former part of the text verified in him, “Them that honour me, I will honour”; yet afterwards there followed so great disorders, through the evil practices of his sons, and his indulgence to them, that drew upon him a severe train of judgments. And can such persons whom God hath blessed with gifts and talents above others, or raised by His providence to a state of eminence, think that there is no more required of them in their public station than if they drowsed away their time in some obscure corner, alike unknown and unprofitable to the world? (Luk_12:48.) (John Williams, D. D.) Honouring God First, here is honour residing in God. Secondly, I will honour; that is, honour communicated and diffused from God. Thirdly, honour for honour, a covenant established to the advancement of our glory, if we glorify God. Let the honour due unto God have the first place. If we were enjoined to magnify and worship that which was base and despicable, like gods of silver and gold, then cause might be shown why flesh and blood should disdain it. It is the King of Kings, and the excellency of Jacob; He sits upon a throne that is circled about with a rainbow (Rev_4:1-11). I know it will be more profitable to instance particulars of honour and worship, wherein God especially is delighted. 1. We must magnify His name. 2. Obey His word and commandments. 3. We must give reverence to His sacraments, as to the seals of His love and mercy. 4. Obey His magistrates. Let me declare this blessing of God in particulars. The life of man is divided into three ages. First, here is our conversation upon earth, whose honours we call political promotions, but the days of this life are few and evil, and the honours are as short. The second life is the voice of fame when we are dead, according as we live in the good report of men, or be quite forgotten. And the last life is the life of glory. Thus you see God hath dispersed his blessing of honours: 1. In title and preeminence; 2. In a blessed memory; 3. In a crown of glory. This I have spoken for the first share of honour which God giveth in this life, and that for these two ends: First, to promote the public good; secondly, to be depressed in humility. But you will 245
- 246. say, wherewith shallwe honour God? With the heart, by desiring Him; with the mouth, by confessing Him; with the hand, with the plenty of your substance by enriching God’s portion. “They that despise him shall be lightly esteemed.” Which words will best bear this division of two parts. 1. Here is a disdain much undeserved that God should be despised in the opinion of men. 2. Here is a scorn and disdain justly deserved, such a man set at nought in the eyes of God. The first sign of despising is we condemn that which we neglect to understand, as when a prudent man will not beat his brains to study curious and unlawful arts, it is manifest he doth despise them; so, whomsoever thou art, that art not painful to understand the sum of thy faith, and the mystery of thy salvation, it must be granted, that thou settest it at no price and estimation. Secondly, those things which we despise we put out of mind and easily forget, forgetfulness is a sign of contempt. Thirdly, contempt is seen in not to take it to heart, not to be wounded with compassion when Sion is wasted, and God’s honour is trampled under feet. Hearken now to the fourth sign of scorn and contempt, which consists in this, to speak ill of those things who are precious to God and of high esteem. Fifthly, to step into the observation of a judicious commentator, it is an apparent disgust of contempt; not to tremble at his anger that threatens. Sixthly, to take another arrow out of the same quiver, it is a sign we undervalue the power of another, not to fly to His help when we had need of relief. Seventhly, let me borrow but the speech of the angry goddess, when she thought she should be condemned; that is, when sacrifice comes not in plentifully to the altar, it is an indignity second to none, and God doth greatly disdain at it. 1. The order of these parts will insinuate it unto us; for promise doth go before minacie, the affection of love before the destruction of anger. Them that honour Me I will honour. God begins at the end where there is a reward in the right hand. 2. God will honour the good, He takes it upon Him, that benediction is His proper act. Where is the advancement of the proud? Where is there honour that would be noble, and yet tush at the true nobility of virtue and religion. (Bishop Hackett.) 31 The time is coming when I will cut short your strength and the strength of your priestly house, so that no one in it will reach old age, 246
- 247. BARNES, "I willcut off thine arm ... - A strong phrase for breaking down the strength and power, of which the arm is the instrument in man (compare Zec_11:17). See 1Sa_2:33. CLARKE, "I will cut off thine arm - I will destroy the strength, power, and influence of thy family. GILL, "Behold, the days come,.... Or, are coming (g); and will quickly come, in a very little time the things, after threatened, began to take place, even in the days of Eli's sons, and the whole was accomplished in about eighty years after: that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father's house: that is, the strength of him and them, as the Targum, the strength of a man for doing business lying in his arm; meaning by it not long life, as Kimchi, who concludes this sense from what follows; but rather power and authority, or the exercise of the office of high priest, which gave him and his family great esteem and power; or it may be best of all, his children, which are the strength of a man, and the support of his family, see Gen_49:3 that there shall not be an old man in thine house; as there were none when he died, and his two sons, the same day; and the children they left were very young, and Ahitub, who was one of them, could not die an old man, since Ahimelech his son was priest in the time of Saul, who with eighty five priests were slain by his order; and Abiathar his son was deprived of his priesthood in the time of Solomon; though some understand this not of an elder in years, but in office; and that the sense is, that there should be none of his family a senator, or a member of the great sanhedrim, or court of judicature; and so it is interpreted in the Talmud (h); with which agree Ben Gersom and Abarbinel. HENRY, " That their power should be broken (1Sa_2:31): I will cut off thy arm, and the arm of thy father's house. They should be stripped of all their authority, should be deposed, and have no influence upon the people as they had had. God would make them contemptible and base. See Mal_2:8, Mal_2:9. The sons had abused their power to oppress the people and encroach upon their rights, and the father had not used his power, as he ought to have done, to restrain and punish them, and therefore it was justly threatened that the arm should be cut off which was not stretched out as it should have been. JAMISON, "I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father’s house — By the withdrawal of the high priesthood from Eleazar, the elder of Aaron’s two sons (after Nadab and Abihu were destroyed, [Num_3:4]), that dignity had been conferred on the family of Ithamar, to which Eli belonged, and now that his descendants had forfeited the honor, it was to be taken from them and restored to the elder branch. 247
- 248. BENSON, "1 Samuel2:31. I will cut off thine arm — I will take away thy strength, or all that in which thou placest thy confidence. This threatening was fulfilled, when the ark, which is called God’s strength, (Psalms 78:61,) and was Eli’s strength, was delivered into the hands of the Philistines; and more especially when God took away all power and authority from him and his family, both as he was a priest and as he was a judge. Or, thine arm, may mean thy children, to whom the words following seem to confine the expression. Of thy father’s house — That is, thy children’s children, and all thy family; which was in a great measure accomplished, 1 Samuel 22:16. ELLICOTT, " (31) I will cut off thine arm.—“The arm” signifies power and strength: “Thy power and strength, and that of thy house is doomed.” (See for the figure Job 22:9; Psalms 37:17.) And there shall not be an old man in thine house.—No one more in thy house, O High Priest, who hast so signally failed in thy solemn duty, shall attain to old age; sickness or the sword shall ever early consume its members. This strange denunciation of the “man of God” is emphasised by being repeated in the next (32) verse, and in different words again in 1 Samuel 2:33. HAWKER, "(31) Behold, the days come, that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father's house, that there shall not be an old man in thine house. (32) And thou shalt see an enemy in my habitation, in all the wealth which God shall give Israel: and there shall not be an old man in thine house forever. (33) And the man of thine, whom I shall not cut off from mine altar, shall be to consume thine eyes, and to grieve thine heart: and all the increase of thine house shall die in the flower of their age. These are awful denunciations, and are accompanied both with an awful signs and commencement of the threatened visitation. To lose both sons in one day; and that Eli himself should be the witness of this visitation, is a proof that all the other threatened evils would in their season surely come. See 1 Samuel 4:17. And what a sad catalogue was to follow? None of the race of Eli should be long lived; there shall not be an old man in thine house forever: that the family of Eli should see an enemy in God's habitation: perhaps unhallowed men exercising the priestly office: those of Eli's family, which were permitted to live, should be but for a reproach; perhaps by living in a scandalous manner: and that so far from being in the exercise of the priesthood, which had it been well conducted, would have been perpetuated in Eli's 248
- 249. family, the lowestoffices of the servants to the priests, should be eagerly sought after by his posterity to keep them from starving. Behold, Reader! the awful consequences of sin. See in the sad examples of Hophni and Phinehas, that when the kindliest gifts of the people would not satisfy them; their posterity shall want a morsel of bread. See that awful scripture thus strikingly fulfilled, in visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children. Exodus 20:5. Perhaps this visitation on Eli's family was, beside lesser instances, more strikingly shown in the days of Solomon, when Abiathar, who was among the descendants of Eli, was turned out of the Priest's office. 1 Kings 1:42; 1Ki_1:49. LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:31-32. The general truth of the last words in 1 Samuel 2:30, which emphasize in the distinctest manner the ethical condition of the exercise of the holy sacerdotal office in the priest’s bearing towards God, is applied to Eli and his house in 1 Samuel 2:31, and contains the standard by which he with his sons is judged. I will cut off thy arm.—The “arm” signifies might, power, Psalm 10:15; Job 12:9. “There shall not be an old man in thy house.” Thus will be shown that the strength of the family and the house is broken; for strength is shown in reaching a great age. No one in Eli’s house shall attain a great age. This supposes that sickliness will early consume its members. “On the aged rested the consideration and power of families” (Bצttcher). As the house of Eli will perish, so will also the house of God suffer affliction ( 1 Samuel 2:32). יט ִבּ ִה always means to look with astonishment or attention (Bצttcher, Numbers 12:8; Isaiah 38:11; Psalm 10:14); רָצ is only “oppressor” or “enemy,” and is not to be rendered “rival” or “adversary,” as Aquila (ἀםפ)זחכןע and Jerome (œmulus), and also Luther and De Wette give it; עוֹן ַמ “dwelling” is here to be understood of the dwelling-place of God, not of Eli. From these meanings it follows that Samuel cannot be here referred to, since he was not an enemy of Eli, nor the installation of Zadok in Abiathar’s place ( 1 Kings 2:27), for Zadok was not Abiathar’s enemy. Something must be meant which Eli lived to see with astonishment or consternation in the house of the Lord, and it can therefore only be the oppression of the house by the oppressor or enemy who met Israel in the person of the Philistines, carried away the ark, and thus robbed the Lord’s house of its heart. We do not need therefore to alter the text to “rock of refuge” )עוֹז ָס ֻרצ ), as Bצttcher proposes. “In all which” (ר ֶשֲׁא לֹ)בּכ is not to be rendered with De Wette “during the whole time which.” In יב ִלטִיִי “shall do good” we must not supply a י as name of Jehovah (Kennicott), nor, as is commonly done, make Jehovah the subject (De Wette, Keil, etc.). “There is no reason why we should not take “all which” itself as unpersonal subject; precisely where י׳ has an unpersonal subject, it has, as here, a simple Acc. after it, Proverbs 15:13; Proverbs 15:20; Proverbs 17:22; Ecclesiastes 20:9, while, with a personal subject, a preposition follows, Exodus 1:20; Numbers 10:32; Judges 17:13” (Bצttcher). The 249
- 250. affliction of God’shouse from the loss of the Ark remained, while under the lead of Samuel there came blessing to the people. This is the fulfilment of this prophecy in reference to the affliction of God’s dwelling. “Not an old man” is repetition of the threat in 1 Samuel 2:31, and return of the discourse to the judgment on Eli’s house. “All the days” [Eng. A. V. for ever], for ever, that Isaiah, as long as his family existed. [Both text and translation of 1 Samuel 2:32 offer great difficulties. Vat. Sept. omits it. Al. Sept. and Theod.: “Thou shalt see strength” (ךסבפב,)שלב etc. The Syr. and Arab.: “and (not) one who holds a sceptre in thy dwelling,” which involves a totally different text. Targ. has “thou shalt see the affliction which will come on a man of thy house in the sins which ye have committed in the house of my sanctuary.” The omission in Vat. Sept. was probably occasioned by the similar endings of 1 Samuel 2:31-32; the other versions and all the MSS. contain the verse, one MS. only of De Rossi giving עוֹז ָ,מ “strength,” instead of עוֹן ָ,מ “dwelling.” We must therefore retain the Heb. text, and explain the repetition of the last clause as intended to give emphasis to the statement in question. But, as רָצ frequently means “distress,” and as the course of thought here suggests affliction for Eli’s house rather than for God’s, it is better to render: “thou shalt see distress of dwelling in all that brings prosperity to Israel,” the contrast being between the national prosperity and his personal affliction, which would thus exclude him from the national rejoicing, and so from the evidence of the divine favor. And we may regard the latter clause of the verse: “there shall not be an old Prayer of Manasseh,” etc, as defining the “affliction” which is here brought out as a punishment additional to the “weakness” of 1 Samuel 2:31.—TR.] PETT, "1 Samuel 2:31 “Behold, the days come, that I will cut off your arm, and the arm of your father’s house, so that there will not be an old man in your house.” To cut off the arm meant to remove the strength. Thus the point was being made that no male of his house would in future grow to be an old man, because YHWH would not permit it. 1 Samuel 2:32 250
- 251. “And you willbehold the distress of my habitation, in all that which God has shown of good to Israel, and there will not be an old man in your house for ever.” This cutting off of the arm would have consequences also for the Tabernacle. As a result of the behaviour of Eli’s family distress would come upon God’s habitation, thus affecting all that God had given to Israel in their unique form of worship. And distress would come on Eli’s family to such an extent that they would no longer be long-lived (something seen as an indication of God’s displeasure) So Eli would live to see YHWH’s habitation distressed. This would happen when he received news of the capture of the Ark by the Philistines. The loss of the Ark was a cause of great distress to the Tabernacle, God’s dwellingplace. It meant that Israel were bereft of the very symbol of God’s presence with them. ‘In all which God has shown of good to Israel’ would then refer to the loss of all the benefits that the Tabernacle brought to Israel. This would be the consequence of their defeat at the hands of the Philistines. The Ark would be taken, and later the Sanctuary of Shiloh would itself either be destroyed, or fall into disuse. Alternately we can translate, ‘you will see a rival in my habitation’, the ‘you’ in this case referring to his descendants who would see themselves being displaced by the house of Zadok when Abiathar was forcibly ‘retired’ by Solomon. This would fit better with the translation of the next phrase as ‘in all that God will give to Israel’ found in many versions. For Zadok’s day (the time of David and Solomon) would be a time of great prosperity, when the sacrifices and offerings would be numerous. But all would be lost to Eli’s descendants. And again it is emphasised that no male in his house would live to old age, but now this judgment will be ‘for ever’. PULPIT, "I will cut off thine arm. The arm is the usual metaphor for strength. As Eli had preferred the exaltation of his sons to God's honour, he is condemned to see the strength of his house broken. Nay, more; there is not to be an "old man in his house." The young men full of energy and vigour perish by the sword; the Survivors fade away by disease. The Jews say that the house of Ithamar was peculiarly short- lived, but the prophecy was amply fulfilled in the slaughter of Eli's house, first at Shiloh, and then at Nob by Doeg the Edomite at the command of Saul. There is nothing to warrant an abiding curse upon his family. The third or fourth generation 251
- 252. is the limitof the visitation of the sins of the fathers upon the children. K&d, "1Sa_2:31 “Behold, days come,” - a formula with which prophets were accustomed to announce future events (see 2Ki_20:17; Isa_39:6; Amo_4:2; Amo_8:11; Amo_9:13; Jer_7:32, etc.), - “then will I cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father's house, that there shall be no old man in thine house.” To cut off the arm means to destroy the strength either of a man or of a family (see Job. 1Sa_22:9; Psa_37:17). The strength of a family, however, consists in the vital energy of its members, and shows itself in the fact that they reach a good old age, and do not pine away early and die. This strength was to vanish in Eli's house; no one would ever again preserve his life to old age. 32 and you will see distress in my dwelling. Although good will be done to Israel, no one in your family line will ever reach old age. BARNES, "The original text is rather obscure and difficult of construction, but the King James Version probably gives the sense of it. The margin gives another meaning. In all the wealth ... - The allusion is particularly to Solomon’s reign, when Zadok was made priest instead of Abiathar, 1Ki_2:26-27. (See 1Ki_4:20 ff) The enormous number of sacrifices then offered must have been a great source of wealth to the priests 1Ki_8:63-66. CLARKE, "Thou shalt see an enemy in my habitation - Every version and almost every commentator understands this clause differently. The word צר tsar, which we translate an enemy, and the Vulgate aemulum, a rival, signifies calamity; and this is the best sense to understand it in here. The calamity which he saw was the defeat of the Israelites, the capture of the ark, the death of his wicked sons, and the triumph of the Philistines. All this he saw, that is, knew to have taken place, before he met with his own tragical death. In all the wealth which God shall give Israel - This also is dark. The meaning may be this: God has spoken good concerning Israel; he will, in the end, make the 252
- 253. triumph of thePhilistines their own confusion; and the capture of the ark shall be the desolation of their gods; but the Israelites shall first be sorely pressed with calamity. Or, the affliction of the tabernacle, for all the wealth which God would have given Israel. There shall not be an old man - This is repeated from the preceding verse, all the family shall die in the flower of their years, as is said in the following verse. GILL, "And thou shalt see an enemy in my habitation,.... Either the Philistines in the land of Israel, where God chose to dwell, who quickly after made war against Israel, and pitched in Aphek, 1Sa_4:1 or, as in the margin of our Bibles, and other versions (i), "thou shalt see the affliction of the tabernacle"; as he did when the ark of God was taken, at the news of which he died, 1Sa_4:17 and so the Targum understands it of affliction and calamity, yet not of the house of God, but of his own house; paraphrasing the words thus,"and thou shall see the calamity that shall come upon the men of thine house, for the sins which they have committed before me in the house of my sanctuary:''but it seems best to interpret it of a rival, which not he in his own person should see, but whom his posterity should see high priest in the temple; as they did in Solomon's time, when Abiathar, of the family of Eli, was thrust out, and Zadok, of the family of Eleazar, was put in; for, as Kimchi observes, when a man has two wives, they are rivals or adversaries to one another, jealous and emulous of each other, as Elkanah's two wives were, and of one of them the same word is used as here, 1Sa_1:6 so when one high priest was put out, and another taken in, the one was the rival or adversary of the other, as in the case referred to: in all the wealth which God shall give Israel; which points exactly at the time when this should be, even men God did well to Israel, gave them great prosperity, wealth and riches, quietness and safety, a famous temple built for the worship of God, and everything in a flourishing condition, both with respect to temporals and spirituals, as was in the days of Solomon, see 1Ki_4:20 and then it was amidst all that plenty and prosperity, and when the high priesthood was most honourable and profitable, that Eli's family was turned out of it, and another put into it: and there shall not be an old man in thine house for ever; See Gill on 1Sa_2:31 this is repeated for confirmation, and with this addition, that this would be the case for ever. JAMISON, "thou shalt see an enemy in my habitation — A successful rival for the office of high priest shall rise out of another family (2Sa_15:35; 1Ch_24:3; 1Ch_ 29:22). But the marginal reading, “thou shalt see the affliction of the tabernacle,” seems to be a preferable translation. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:32. Thou shalt see an enemy, &c. — The words may be rendered, as in the margin, and seem evidently to mean, Thou shalt see, in thy own person, the affliction or calamity of my habitation; that is, either of the land of 253
- 254. Israel, wherein Idwell; or of the sanctuary, called God’s habitation by way of eminence, whose greatest glory the ark was, (1 Samuel 4:21-22,) and consequently whose greatest calamity the loss of the ark was; for, or instead of, all that good wherewith God could have blessed Israel, having raised up a young prophet, Samuel, and thereby given good grounds of hope that he intended to bless Israel, if thou and thy sons had not hindered it by your sins. So this clause of threatening concerns Eli’s person, as the following concerns his posterity. And this best agrees with the most proper signification of that phrase, Thou shalt see. COKE, "1 Samuel 2:32. And thou shalt see an enemy in my habitation— The rendering in the margin of our Bibles seems most agreeable to the history; thou shalt see the affliction of thy tabernacle. See chap. 1 Samuel 4:4; 1 Samuel 4:11. Calmet, Saurin, and others, suppose the meaning to be, that Eli should see a rival in the sanctuary; but in that case, the sacred writer must be understood to speak not of Eli, when he says thou, but of his posterity, as Eli died so soon after; and therefore the former seems the preferable interpretation. ELLICOTT, " (32) And thou shalt see an enemy.—Some—e.g., the Vulgate— understand by enemy a “rival”: thou shalt see thy rival in the Temple. The words, however, point to something which Eli would live to see with grief and horror. The reference is no doubt to the capture of the Ark by the Philistines in the battle where his sons were slain. The earthly habitation of the Eternal was there robbed of its glory and pride, for the ark of the covenant was the heart of the sanctuary. In all the wealth which God shall give Israel.—“The affliction of God’s house from the loss of the ark remained while under the lead of Samuel there came blessing to the people.”—Erdmann. There is another explanation which refers the fulfilment of this part of the prophecy to the period of Solomon’s reign, when Abiathar, of the house of Eli, was deposed from the High Priestly dignity to make room for Zadok, but the reference to the capture of the ark is by far more probable. PULPIT, "Thou shalt see an enemy. The translation of 1 Samuel 2:32 is very difficult, but is probably as follows: "And thou shalt behold, i.e. see with wonder and astonishment, narrowness of habitation in all the wealth which shall be given unto Israel." The word translated narrowness often means an "enemy," but as that for habitation is the most general term in the Hebrews language for a dwelling, 254
- 255. being used evenof the dens of wild beasts (Jeremiah 9:10; Nahum 2:12), the rendering an "enemy of dwelling" gives no sense. Hence the violent insertion of the pronoun my, for which no valid excuse can be given. But narrowness of dwelling, means distress, especially in a man's domestic relations, and this is the sense required. In the growing public and national prosperity which was to be Israel's lot under Samuel, Saul, David, and Solomon, Eli was to see, not in person, but prophetically, calamity attaching itself to his own family. His house was to decay in the midst of the progress of all the rest. Upon this denunciation of private distress naturally follows the repetition of the threat that the house of Ithamar should be left without an old man to guide its course onward to renewed prosperity. K&D, "1Sa_2:32 “And thou wilt see oppression of the dwelling in all that He has shown of good to Israel.” The meaning of these words, which have been explained in very different ways, appears to be the following: In all the benefits which the lord would confer upon His people, Eli would see only distress for the dwelling of God, inasmuch as the tabernacle would fall more and more into decay. In the person of Eli, the high priest at that time, the high priest generally is addressed as the custodian of the sanctuary; so that what is said is not to be limited to him personally, but applies to all the high priests of his house. ן ע ָמ is not Eli's dwelling-place, but the dwelling-place of God, i.e., the tabernacle, as in 1Sa_2:29, and is a genitive dependent upon רַ.צ יב ִיט ֵ,ה in the sense of benefiting a person, doing him good, is construed with the accusative of the person, as in Deu_ 28:63; Deu_8:16; Deu_30:5. The subject to the verb יב ִֵיטי is Jehovah, and is not expressly mentioned, simply because it is so clearly implied in the words themselves. This threat began to be fulfilled even in Eli's own days. The distress or tribulation for the tabernacle began with the capture of the ark by the Philistines (1Sa_4:11), and continued during the time that the Lord was sending help and deliverance to His people through the medium of Samuel, in their spiritual and physical oppression. The ark of the covenant - the heart of the sanctuary - was not restored to the tabernacle in the time of Samuel; and the tabernacle itself was removed from Shiloh to Nob, probably in the time of war; and when Saul had had all the priests put to death (1Sa_21:2; 1Sa_22:11.), it was removed to Gibeon, which necessarily caused it to fall more and more into neglect. Among the different explanations, the rendering given by Aquila (καὶ ἐπιβλέψει [? ἐπιβλέψης] ἀντίζηλον κατοικητηρίου) has met with the greatest approval, and has been followed by Jerome (et videbis aemulum tuum), Luther, and many others, including De Wette. According to this rendering, the words are either supposed to refer to the attitude of Samuel towards Eli, or to the deposition of Abiathar, and the institution of Zadok by Solomon in his place (1Ki_2:27). But רַצ does not mean the antagonist or rival, but simply the oppressor or enemy; and Samuel was not an enemy of Eli any more than Zadok was of Abiathar. Moreover, if this be adopted as the rendering of רַ,צ it is impossible to find any suitable meaning for the following clause. In the second half of the verse the threat of 1Sa_2:31 is repeated with still greater emphasis. ים ִָמיּ ַל־הָ,כּ all the time, i.e., so long as thine house shall exist. 255
- 256. 33 Every oneof you that I do not cut off from serving at my altar I will spare only to destroy your sight and sap your strength, and all your descendants will die in the prime of life. BARNES, "The meaning is explained by 1Sa_2:36. Those who are not cut off in the flower of their youth shall be worse off than those who are, for they shall have to beg their bread. (Compare Jer_22:10.) Thine eyes ... thine heart - For a similar personification of the tribe or family see Jdg_1:2-4. CLARKE, "And the man of thine - Of this passage Calmet observes: “The posterity of Eli possessed the high priesthood to the time of Solomon; and even when that dynasty was transferred to another family, God preserved that of Eli, not to render it more happy, but to punish it by seeing the prosperity of its enemies, to the end that it might see itself destitute and despised. This shows the depth of the judgments of God and the grandeur of his justice, which extends even to distant generations, and manifests itself to sinners both in life and death; both in their own disgrace, and in the prosperity of their enemies.” GILL, "And the man of thine,..... Of his family, which should spring from him: whom I shall not cut off from mine altar: from serving there: who though he shall not be an high priest, but a common priest, as all the descendants of Aaron were: shall be to consume thine eyes, and to grieve thine heart; that is, the eyes and heart of his posterity; who though they should see of their family ministering in the priest's office, yet should make so poor a figure on account of their outward meanness and poverty, or because of their want of wisdom, and intellectual endowments, or because of their scandalous lives, that it would fill their hearts with grief and sorrow, and their eyes with tears, so that their eyes would fail, and be consumed, and their hearts be broken: 256
- 257. and all theincrease of thine house shall die in the flower of their age; or "die men" (k); grown men, not children, when it would not be so great an affliction to part with them; but when at man's estate, in the prime of their days, perhaps about thirty years of age, the time when the priests entered upon their office to do all the work of it; the Targum is,"shall be killed young men:''it is more than once said in the Talmud (l), that there was a family in Jerusalem, the men of which died at eighteen years of age; they came and informed Juchanan ben Zaccai of it; he said to them, perhaps of the family of Eli are ye, as it is said, 1Sa_2:33. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:33. The man of thine — That is, of thy posterity. Shall be to grieve thy heart — Shall be so forlorn and miserable, that if thou wast alive to see it, it would grieve thee at the heart, and thou wouldst consume thine eyes with weeping for their calamities. The increase of thy house — That is, thy children. Flower of their age — About the thirtieth year of their age, when they were to be admitted to the full administration of their office. ELLICOTT, " (33) To consume thine eyes and to grieve thine heart.—The Speaker’s Commentary well refers to 1 Samuel 2:36 for an explanation of these difficult words. “Those who are not cut off in the flower of their youth shall be worse off than those who are, for they shall have to beg their bread.” And all the increase of thine house shall die.—In the Babylonian Talmud the Rabbis have related that there was once a family in Jerusalem the members of which died off regularly at eighteen years of age. Rabbi Jochanan ben Zacchai shrewdly guessed that they were descendants of Eli, regarding whom it is said (1 Samuel 2:33), “And all the increase of thine house shall die in the flower of their age; “and he accordingly advised them to devote themselves to the study of the Law, as the certain and only means of neutralising the curse. They acted upon the advice of the Rabbi; their lives were in consequence prolonged; and they thenceforth went by the name of their spiritual father.—Rosh Hashanah, fol. 18, Colossians 1. LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:33. Bצttcher declares De Wette’s explanation: “and I will not let thee lack a ingle Prayer of Manasseh,” to be incorrect, and Thenius’ reference to the definite one “Ahitub” ( 1 Samuel 14:3; 1 Samuel 22:20) to be without ground, and then remarks (on ֹאל ישׁ ִא ְ:)ו “There remains no other course but to regard it as an infrequent, but not unexampled exceptional case. In Hebrews, as is well known, a negative in a sentence with ישׁ ִא (“man”) and בל (“all”), whether it stand before or after, negatives these words not alone, but in connection with the whole sentence, and thus ישׁ ִא ל ַא,ישׁ ִא ֹאל mean not “not every one,” but “no one,” and so too ישׁ ִא 257
- 258. ל ַא,ֹאל ישִׁא , Exodus 16:19; Exodus 34:3; Leviticus 18:6. But when the accent falls on the word expressive of universality by an adversative particle, as here (ישׁ ִא ְ,)ו the following negation may affect this word alone, as in Numbers 23:13. Accordingly we render here: “Yet I will not cut off every one from thee.” The following words: to consume thine eyes and to grieve thy heart, or “that I may consume,” etc, mark the highest degree of punishment which would befal Eli but for the limitation contained in the words “not every man.” Thenius refers this limitation specially to Ahitub, son of Phinehas, and brother of Ichabod, against which Keil justly remarks that it cannot be proved from 1 Samuel 14:3 and 1 Samuel 22:20 that he was the only one who survived of Eli’s house.[FN57]—The following words: the great majority or mass shall die as men, not only answer to the repeated threat in 1 Samuel 2:31-32, that there should be no old man in the house, but at the same time explain the declaration of 1 Samuel 2:31 : “I will break thine arm;” for “men” (ים ִָשׁנֲ)א indicates the power and strength of the house, and is contrasted with “old man” (Luther: “when they have become men;” Van Ess: “in mature age”.(—On ב׳ ,מ׳ “multitude,” “majority,” not “offspring,” comp. 1 Chronicles 12:29; 2 Chronicles 30:18.—[Sept.: “And every survivor of thy house shall fall by the sword of men.” Vulg.: “and the great part of thy house shall die when they attain the age of men.” Targ.: “and all the multitude of thy house shall be slain young.” Syr.: “and all the pupils (so Castle renders marbith) of thy house shall die men.” Philippson: “and all the increase of thy house shall die as men.” The Eng. A. V. probably gives the sense. The adj. “all” does not suit the rendering “multitude,” which Targ. and Erdmann adopt. In regard to the first clause of the verse, the rendering of Eng. A. V. seems to be possible, that Isaiah, the taking א׳ ֹאל as indef. rel. clause. Erdmann regards the reservation of the “man” as a limitation of the punishment (“consume, grieve”); Eng. A. V. better, with most expositors, as an element of the punishment. Mendoza (in Poole’s Synopsis): “I will take from thee the high-priesthood, which thou hast by privilege; I will give thee or thy descendants the priesthood of the second order, which thou hadst by hereditary right.” Grotius: “They shall live that they may be the greatest grief to thee.”—Long afterwards this curse was held to cling to the family of Eli. Gill cites a saying of the Talmud that there was a family in Jerusalem the men of which did not live to be more than eighteen years old, and Johanan ben Zacchai being asked the reason of this, replied that they were perhaps of the family of Eli.—Sept. has “his eyes” and “his soul,” instead of thy; but there is no good ground for altering the Heb. text.—TR.] PETT, "1 Samuel 2:33 “And the man of yours, whom I will not cut off from my altar, will be to consume 258
- 259. your eyes, andto grieve your heart; and all the increase of your house will die in manhood ( ‘in men’.(” And any man of the house of Eli whom God does not cut off from His altar (prevent from being a practising priest), will be a cause of great sadness and grief of heart to his family, and all the males born in his house will die while still young men. In other words the future for his house is grim. They will never again produce satisfactory priests. It will be noted that they are not being excluded from the priesthood, only from its greatest blessings and benefits, and above all from the High Priesthood. PULPIT, "The man of thine, etc. The meaning of the Hebrews is here again changed by the insertion of words not in the original. Translated literally the sense is good, but merciful, and this the A.V. has so rendered as to make it the most bitter of all denunciations. The Hebrews is, "Yet I will not cut off every one of thine from my altar, to consume thine eyes and to grieve thy soul;" that is, thy punishment shall not be so utter as to leave thee with no consolation; for thy descendants, though diminished in numbers, and deprived of the highest rank, shall still minister as priests at mine altar. "But the majority of try house—lit, the multitude of thy house—shall die as men." This is very well rendered in the A.V. "in the flower of theft age," only we must not explain this of dying of disease. They were to die in their vigour, not, like children and old men, in theft beds, but by violent deaths, such as actually befell them at Shiloh and at Nob. K&D, "1Sa_2:33 “And I will not cut off every one to thee from mine altar, that thine eyes may languish, and thy soul consume away; and all the increase of thine house shall die as men.” The two leading clauses of this verse correspond to the two principal thoughts of the previous verse, which are hereby more precisely defined and explained. Eli was to see the distress of the sanctuary; for to him, i.e., of his family, there would always be some one serving at the altar of God, that he might look upon the decay with his eyes, and pine away with grief in consequence. ישׁ ִא signifies every one, or any one, and is not to be restricted, as Thenius supposes, to Ahitub, the son of Phinehas, the brother of Ichabod; for it cannot be shown from 1Sa_14:3 and 1Sa_22:20, that he was the only one that was left of the house of Eli. And secondly, there was to be no old man, no one advanced in life, in his house; but all the increase of the house was to die in the full bloom of manhood. ים ִָשׁנֲא, in contrast with ן ֵָקז, is used to denote men in the prime of life. 259
- 260. 34 “‘And whathappens to your two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, will be a sign to you—they will both die on the same day. CLARKE, "They shall die both of them - Hophni and Phinehas were both killed very shortly after in the great battle with the Philistines in which the Israelites were completely routed, and the ark taken. See 1Sa_4:1-11. GILL, "This shall be a sign unto thee,.... A confirming one, that all which had been now said would be fulfilled: that shall come upon thy two sons, Hophni and Phinehas; which Eli would live to see fulfilled on them; and when it was, he might be assured the rest would be most certainly accomplished, and it was this: in one day they shall die both of them; as they did in battle with the Philistines, 1Sa_4:11. HENRY, "That God would shortly begin to execute these judgments in the death of Hophni and Phinehas, the sad tidings of which Eli himself should live to hear: This shall be a sign to thee, 1Sa_2:34. When thou hearest it, say, “Now the word of God begins to operate; here is one threatening fulfilled, from which I infer that all the rest will be fulfilled in their order.” Hophni and Phinehas had many a time sinned together, and it is here foretold that they should die together both in one day. Bind these tares in a bundle for the fire. This was fulfilled, 1Sa_4:11. HAWKER, "(34) And this shall be a sign unto thee, that shall come upon thy two sons, on Hophni and Phinehas; in one day they shall die both of them. (35) And I will raise me up a faithful priest, that shall do according to that which is in mine heart and in my mind: and I will build him a sure house; and he shall walk before mine anointed forever. 260
- 261. Amidst all thedreadful denunciations, on the family, and posterity of Eli, what a precious scripture, what a precious promise, comes in here, to give comfort to the mind? I cannot think as some have thought, that this scripture had its accomplishment in the person of Zadok, and that the anointed, before whom this faithful Priest is said to walk, meant David king of Israel. Surely, Reader, none but the ever blessed Jesus could merit the title of faithful Priest. Neither could any be considered as the truly anointed of God, but He to whom the Spirit was given without measure, and who was indeed anointed to be, at one and the same time, the Prophet, the Priest, and the King, of his peopled. If any difficulty should seem to arise in the Reader's mind, how Jesus could be this faithful Priest, and yet walk before himself, as it were, in his other character, as the anointed of Jehovah; this objection is at once done away, by only considering how impossible it would be to prefigure him who fills all offices, unless by such means. Hence Joseph, who in all the grand events of his going down into Egypt; being cast into prison, exalted at the right hand of Pharaoh, and made Governor over the whole land; in all these, and numberless other features of character, he most strongly typified the Lord Jesus: yet Judah, who as strikingly pointed to the Lord Jesus, in his sweet office of Intercessor, is, in that same history, represented as interceding with Joseph. We must never, therefore, stretch any part of the sacred word so far, as not to remember the impossibility of representing divine things, by human, otherwise than in part. No doubt, in all the holy volume, Jesus is the sum, and substance. To him every type refers; every sacrifice points: in him all the promises are completed: and every prophecy is explained, Jesus is the Alpha, and Omega, of all; or, as Paul speaks, Christ is all, and in all. Colossians 3:11. LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:34. The fact announced, the death of his two sons in one day ( 1 Samuel 4:11), was to be a sign to Eli, who lived to see it, that this threat affecting his whole house should be fulfilled. The realization of this threat began with that event. Not all of Eli’s descendants indeed perished in this judgment, and among his immediate posterity were some who filled the office of priest, namely, Phinehas’ Song of Solomon, Ahitub; Ahitub’s sons, Ahiah ( 1 Samuel 14:3; 1 Samuel 14:18) and Ahimelech ( 1 Samuel 22:9; 1 Samuel 22:11; 1 Samuel 22:20); Ahimelech’s Song of Solomon, Abiathar ( 1 Samuel 22:20). Ahiah and Abiathar filled the high-priestly office. But Ahimelech and “all his father’s house, the priests, who were at Nob,” were hewn off from Eli’s family-tree. And Abiathar, Ahimelech’s Song of Solomon, who escaped that butchery ( 1 Samuel 22:19), and as a faithful adherent of David enjoyed the dignity of high-priest, was deposed from his office by Solomon. The office of high-priest passed now forever from Ithamar’s family, and went over to 261
- 262. Eleazar’s, to whichZadok belonged; the latter from now on was sole high-priest, while hitherto Abiathar had exercised this office along with him.—Thus was to be fulfilled the negative part of the prophetic announcement ( 1 Samuel 2:31-34): gradually Eli’s house went down in respect to the majority of its members [better, in all its increase.—TR.]; the office of high-priest, which the surviving members for some time filled, was at last taken away from it altogether. PULPIT, "With this the sign here given exactly agrees. Hophni and Phinehas died fighting valiantly in battle, and then came the sacking of Shiloh, and the slaughter of the ministering priests (Psalms 78:64). Upon this followed a long delay. For first Eli's grandson, Ahitub, the son of Phinehas, was high priest, and then his two sons, Ahiah and Ahimelech, and then Abiathar, the son of Ahimelech. It was in Ahimelech's days that the slaughter took place at Nob, from which the house of Ithamar seems never to have fully recovered. K&D, 1Sa_2:34 “And let this be the sign to thee, what shall happen to (come upon) thy two sons, Hophni and Phinehas; in one day they shall both die.” For the fulfilment of this, see 1Sa_4:11. This occurrence, which Eli lived to see, but did not long survive (1Sa_4:17.), was to be the sign to him that the predicted punishment would be carried out in its fullest extent. 35 I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who will do according to what is in my heart and mind. I will firmly establish his priestly house, and they will minister before my anointed one always. BARNES, "Zadok is meant rather than Samuel. The High Priesthood continued in 262
- 263. the direct descendantsof Zadok as long as the monarchy lasted (see 1Ch_6:8-15). Mine anointed - in its first sense obviously means the kings of Israel and Judah Psa_89:20; Zec_4:14. But doubtless the use of the term MESSIAH (Χριστὸς Christos) here and in 1Sa_2:10, is significant, and points to the Lord’s Christ, in whom the royal and priestly offices are united (Zec_6:11-15 : see the marginal references). In this connection the substitution of the priesthood after the order of Melchisedec for the Levitical may be foreshadowed under 1Sa_2:35 (see Heb. 7). CLARKE, "A faithful priest - This seems to have been spoken of Zadok, who was anointed high priest in the room of Abiathar, the last descendant of the house of Eli; see 1Ki_2:26, 1Ki_2:27. Abiathar was removed because he had joined with Adonijah, who had got himself proclaimed king; see 1Ki_1:7. I will build him a sure house - I will continue the priesthood in his family. He shall walk before mine Anointed - He shall minister before Solomon, and the kings which shall reign in the land. The Targum says, “He shall walk משיחי קדם kodam Meshichi, before my Messiah,” and the Septuagint expresses it, ενωπιον Χριστου μον, “before my Christ;” for, in their proper and more extended sense, these things are supposed to belong to our great High Priest and the Christian system: but the word may refer to the Israelitish people. See the note on Heb_9:26. GILL, "And I will raise up a faithful priest,.... Not Samuel, as some, for he was not of the seed of Aaron, and of the priestly race; nor had he a sure house, for his sons declined from the ways of truth and justice; but Zadok, as it is commonly interpreted, who was put into the office of the high priest by Solomon when he came to the throne, in the room of Abiathar, of the line of Eli; who was an upright man, and faithfully discharged his office, and answered to his name, which signifies righteous, see Eze_ 44:15 that shall do according to that which is in my heart, and in my mind: according to the secret will and pleasure of God, as revealed in his word; do everything relating to the office of an high priest, according to the laws of God respecting it; so the Targum,"that shall do according to my word, and according to my will:" and I will build him a sure house; which some understand of a numerous family and posterity he should have to succeed him, so that there should never be wanting one of his seed to fill up that high office; or rather it may design the establishment of the high priesthood in his family, which was an everlasting one, as promised to Phinehas his ancestor, and which continued unto the times of the Messiah, who put an end to it, by fulfilling it; unless it can be thought that this may refer to the temple built by Solomon, which was a firm house, in comparison of the tabernacle, which was a movable one; it was built for Zadok and his posterity, who was the first that officiated in it as a legal priest. There is one writer, who says (m),"this agrees with no man, only with our Lord Jesus, who is called our high priest, that offered up a sacrifice to the Father for us therefore to Christ properly this prophecy belongs; but, according to the history; to Zadok:''and Christ is said indeed to be a faithful, as well as a merciful high priest, faithful 263
- 264. to him thatappointed him, and faithful to those for whom he officiated; he always did the things which pleased his Father, was obedient to his will and commands in all respects; and a sure house is built by him, his church, against which the gates of hell can never prevail: however, the next clause is by others interpreted of him: and he shall walk before mine anointed for ever; or "before my Messiah", as the high priests did; they were types of Christ, and represented him, and acted under him, and in his stead, and prefigured and pointed at what he was to do, when he came in the flesh, and now does in the most holy place in heaven. Though it is more commonly understood of Zadok and his posterity, walking or ministering, as the Targum, before Solomon the Lord's anointed, and before the kings of the house of David, as they did until the Babylonish captivity. HENRY 35-36, " In the midst of all these threatenings against the house of Eli, here is mercy promised to Israel (v. 35): I will raise me up a faithful priest. 1. This was fulfilled in Zadoc, of the family of Eleazar, who came into Abiathar's place in the beginning of Solomon's reign, and was faithful to his trust; and the high priests were of his posterity as long as the Levitical priesthood continued. Note, The wickedness of ministers, though it destroy themselves, yet it shall not destroy the ministry. How bad soever the officers are, the office shall continue always to the end of the world. If some betray their trust, yet others shall be raised up that will be true to it. God's work shall never fall to the ground for want of hands to carry it on. The high priest is here said to walk before God's anointed (that is, David and his seed) because he wore the breast- plate of judgment, which he was to consult, not in common cases, but for the king, in the affairs of state. Note, Notwithstanding the degeneracy we see and lament in many families, God will secure to himself a succession. If some grow worse than their ancestors, others, to balance that, shall grow better. 2. It has its full accomplishment in the priesthood of Christ, that merciful and faithful high priest whom God raised up when the Levitical priesthood was thrown off, who in all things did his father's mind, and for whom God will build a sure house, build it on a rock, so that the gates of hell cannot prevail against it. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:35. I will raise me up a faithful priest — Of another line, as is necessarily implied by the total removal of that office from Eli’s line. The person designed is Zadok, one eminent for his faithfulness to God, and to the king, who, when Abiathar, the last of Eli’s line, was deposed by Solomon, was made high-priest in his stead. Build a sure house — That is, give him a numerous posterity, and confirm unto him and his children that sure covenant of an everlasting priesthood made to Phinehas, of Eleazar’s line, Numbers 25:13, and interrupted for a little while by Eli, of the line of Ithamar. The high-priesthood continued in his line till the captivity of Babylon, as appears from Ezekiel 40:16; and a long time after it, as Josephus shows, lib. 4. cap. 4. He shall walk before mine Anointed — That is, Zadok and his descendants shall perform the office of high-priest before that king whom God shall anoint, and before his successors. The high- priest is said to walk before 264
- 265. God’s anointed, chieflybecause he wore the breast-plate of judgment, which he was to consult, not in common cases, but for the king, in the affairs of state. For ever — A learned writer justly observes, that though this, according to the history, was intended of, and may properly be applied to Zadok, yet in the highest sense it belongs to none but our Lord Jesus Christ, who offered himself to the Father for us, and is our great High-Priest for ever; who in all things did his Father’s will, and for whom God will build a sure house, build it on a rock, so that the gates of hell cannot prevail against it. For he is the main scope and design not only of the New but of the Old Testament, which, in all types and ceremonies, represented him; and the high- priest especially was an eminent type of him, represented by his person, acted in his name and stead, and did mediately what John the Baptist did immediately, namely, go before the face of the Lord Christ; and when Christ came, that officer and the office he sustained were to cease. ELLICOTT, " (35) A faithful priest.—Who here is alluded to by this “faithful priest,” of whom such a noble life was predicted, and to whom such a glorious promise as that “he should walk before mine anointed for ever,” was made? Many of the conditions are fairly fulfilled by Samuel, to whom naturally our thoughts at once turn. He occupies a foremost place in the long Jewish story, and immediately succeeded Eli in most of his important functions as the acknowledged chief of the religious and political life in Israel. He was also eminently and consistently faithful to his master and God during his whole life. Samuel, though a Levite, was not of the sons of Aaron; yet he seems, even in Eli’s days, to have ministered as a priest before the Lord, the circumstances of his early connection with the sanctuary being exceptional. After Eli’s death, when the regular exercise of the Levitical ritual and priesthood was suspended by the separation of the ark from the tabernacle, Samuel evidently occupied a priestly position, and we find him for a long period standing as mediator between Jehovah and His people, in sacrifice, prayer, and intercession, in the performance of which high offices his duty, after the solemn anointing of Saul as king, was to walk before the anointed of the Lord (Saul), while (to use the words of Von Gerlach, quoted by Erdmann), the Aaronic priesthood fell for a long time into such disrepute that it had to beg for honour and support from him (1 Samuel 2:36), and became dependent on the new order of things instituted by Samuel. (See Excursus C at the end of this Book.) The prediction “I will build him a sure house” is satisfied in the strong house and numerous posterity given to Samuel by God. His grandson Heman was “the king’s seer in the words of God,” and was placed by King David over the choir in the house of God. This eminent personage, Heman, had fourteen sons and three daughters (1 265
- 266. Chronicles 6:33; 1Chronicles 25:4-5). Samuel also fulfilled the prophecy “He shall walk before mine anointed for ever” in his close and intimate relation with King Saul, who we find, even after the faithful prophet’s death—although the later acts of Saul had alienated the prophet from his sovereign—summoning the spirit of Samuel as the only one who was able to counsel and strengthen him (1 Samuel 28:15). Of the other interpretations, that of Rashi and Abarbanel, and many of the moderns, which supposes the reference to be Zadok, of the house of Eleazar, who, in the reign of Solomon, superseded Abiathar, of the house of Ithamar (the ancestor of Eli), alone fairly satisfies most of the different predictions, but we are met with this insurmountable difficulty at the outset—Can we assume that the comparatively unknown Zadok, after the lapse of so many years, was pointed out by the magnificent promises contained in the words of the “man of God” to Eli? The words of the “man of God” surely indicate a far greater one than any high priest of the time of Solomon. In the golden days of this magnificent king, the high priest, overshadowed by the splendour and power of the sovereign, was a very subordinate figure indeed in Israel; but the subject of this prophecy was one evidently destined to hold no secondary and inferior position. Some commentators, with a singular confusion of ideas, see a reference to Christ in the “faithful priest,” forgetting that this “faithful priest” who was to arise in Eli’s place was to walk before the Lord’s Christ, or Anointed One. On the whole, the reference to Samuel is the most satisfactory, and seems in all points—without in any way unfairly pressing the historical references—to fulfil that portion of the prediction of the “man of God” to Eli respecting the one chosen to replace him in his position of judge and guide of Israel. COKE, "1 Samuel 2:35. And I will raise me up a faithful priest— i.e. Zadok, as it is generally supposed, who was anointed in the room of Abiathar, the last descendant of Eli in the pontificate. See 1 Kings 2:27; 1 Kings 2:35. I will build him a sure 266
- 267. house: i.e. "Iwill give him a numerous posterity, and I will renew with him the promise which I made to Phinehas the son of Eleazar:" a prediction which was fully justified by the event. See Ezekiel 40:16 and Josephus Antiquit. lib. 10: cap. 4. He shall walk before mine anointed: i.e. "Zadok and his descendants shall continually perform the office of high-priest: before that king whom God shall anoint, and before his successors." Procopius Gazaeus well remarks, that though, according to the history, this is meant of, and may properly be applied to Zadok, who was put into the priesthood by Solomon; yet it belongs to none in its sublimest sense, but to our Lord Jesus Christ, the anointed of the Father, and the faithful high-priest, who offered up the great sacrifice of himself for the sins of mankind. LANGE, "1 Samuel 2:35 sqq. Now follows the positive part of the prophecy.—But I will raise me up a faithful priest.—The priestly office, as a divine institution, remains, though those that fill it perish because they are unworthy, and because their life contradicts its theocratic meaning, and therefore falls under the divine punishment. The “faithful priest” Isaiah, in the first place, to be understood in contrast with Eli and his sons, to whom the above declaration of punishment was directed. We may distinguish the following facts in the announcement of this priest of the future, who is to assume the theocratic-priestly position between God and His people in place of Eli and his house: 1) he is to be raised up by God directly, that Isaiah, not merely called and chosen, but (according to the exact meaning of the word) set up; his priestly position is to be historically fixed and assigned by God directly and in an extraordinary manner; 2) he will be a faithful priest, that Isaiah, will not merely be in keeping with the end and meaning of his calling, but, in order to this, will be and remain personally the Lord’s own in true piety and in firm, living faith, constantly and persistently devoted to the Lord his God, and seeking only His honor; 3) he will do, Acts, according to the norm of the divine will; as faithful priest of God, he knows what is in God’s heart and soul, he knows His thoughts and counsels; these will be the rule by which (ר ֶשֲאַ)כּ he will act as a man of God, as a servant after his heart; 4) and I will build him a sure house, his family will continue as one well-pleasing to me and blessed, and will not perish like thine—this shall be the reward as well as the result of his faithfulness; 5) he shall walk before my anointed for ever. The “anointed” is the theocratic king, whom the Lord will call. Walking before Him denotes the most cordial life-fellowship with Him. In this reference of the prophetic announcement to the “anointed of the Lord” is expressed the same expectation of a theocratic kingdom as in the close of Hannah’s song. PETT, "1 Samuel 2:35 267
- 268. “And I willraise me up a faithful priest, who will do according to what is in my heart and in my mind, and I will build him a sure house, and he will walk before my anointed for ever (literally, ‘all the days’.(” The promise is then that in contrast to Eli and his family, which is now rejected, God will raise up a faithful Priest who will be totally faithful to Him, and He will establish his house and make it sure, and when he comes, this Priest will serve God’s anointed one ‘all the days’. For ‘God’s anointed one’ compare 1 Samuel 2:10, which is the only mention of an anointed one up to this point, and is pointing forward to a future ideal king. Essentially therefore the promise here is of a faithful and true High Priest who will serve the coming expected ideal prince, the prince who in the future will be the anointed of YHWH. This is Israel’s glorious future. While our thoughts may naturally turn to what lies ahead in Samuel that was not in anyone’s mind when this prophecy was given. The thought was rather of the coming of ‘God’s expected anointed one’, which to them would have indicated, as it did to Hannah, the coming hoped for ideal king mentioned in 1 Samuel 2:10, whom God would raise up in accordance with Genesis 17:6; Genesis 17:16; Genesis 35:11; Genesis 49:10; Numbers 23:21; Numbers 24:17; Deuteronomy 17:14-20. The thought is therefore essentially ‘Messianic’, and find its ultimate fulfilment in our Lord Jesus Christ Who would become our great and perfect High Priest, acting on our behalf (Hebrews 2:17 and often; compare also John 17). But the reader is also clearly intended by the writer to see it as referring to later events in the Book of Samuel, which can be seen as a partial fulfilment of this promise. In this light there are two main views as to whom this refers. The majority view is that it is referring to the High Priest Zadok (2 Samuel 20:25), to whom David gave the responsibility for the Ark (2 Samuel 15:24), and who, being from the line of Eleazar, continued on as High Priest, followed by his heirs, when Abiathar (of the line of Ithamar and Eli) ceased from being the joint High Priest (1 Kings 2:26). From that day the High Priest never again came from the line of Ithamar (and Eli). Zadok was faithful to his trust, and his house was made sure, the line of Zadok (and Eleazar) lasting until the exile, and finally, after a few ups and downs, until the cessation of sacrifices. And Zadok did walk before David and Solomon (the prototypes of the coming king) all his days after his appointment, fulfilling the responsibilities of the High Priest’s office. His line was also that which Ezekiel saw as operating at the new altar to be built after the Exile through which the heavenly 268
- 269. Temple was tobe accessed (Ezekiel 43:19; compare Ezekiel 40:46). A minority view is that it refers to Samuel. He may well be seen as having been ‘adopted’ by Eli, thus becoming recognised as of the priestly line, and he would certainly later offer sacrifices as a priest (although he never claimed the office of High Priest which was seemingly in abeyance after the destruction of Shiloh until it emerged again in Ahijah, the son of Ahitub (1 Samuel 14:3) to be followed by Ahimelech (1 Samuel 21:1). Ahitub was Ichabod’s brother). Furthermore no one was more faithful than Samuel was and would be, and he would certainly do according to what was in God’s heart and mind. But where the prophecy fails with regard to Samuel is in the question of his being built a sure house, which in context means the house that would replace the house of Eli, for his sons in fact failed in their responsibilities (1 Samuel 8:1-3; 1 Samuel 8:5) and as far as we know never became priests. It is true that his house was later ‘established’ in that his grandson became David’s chief musician, and father of fourteen sons and daughters (1 Chronicles 6:33; 1 Chronicles 25:1; 1 Chronicles 25:4-5), but it was not as priests, and the thought in the prophecy here appears to be that the making sure was to be of a house connected with the priesthood. Samuel’s house was not connected with the priesthood after his death. They too had forfeited the right to be so. Thus Samuel might have been a prospective candidate, but he did not fulfil all the qualifications. He only partially fulfilled the conditions. PULPIT, "I will raise me up a faithful priest. This prophecy is explained in three several ways, of Samuel, of Zadok, and of Christ. St. Augustine, who considers the whole passage at length in his 'De Civ. Dei,' 1 Samuel 17:5, argues that it cannot be reasonably said that a change in the priesthood foretold with so great circumstance was fulfilled in Samuel. But while we grant that it was an essential characteristic of Jewish prophecy to be ever larger than the immediate fulfilment, yet its primary meaning must never be slurred over, as if it were a question of slight importance. By the largeness of its terms, the grandeur of the hopes it inspired, and the incompleteness of their immediate accomplishment, the Jews were taught to look ever onward, and so became a Messianic people. Granting then that Christ and his Church are the object and end of this and of all prophecy, the question narrows itself to this—In whom was this prediction of a faithful priest primarily fulfilled? We answer, Not in Zadok, but in Samuel. Zadok was a commonplace personage, of 269
- 270. whom little ornothing is said after the time that he joined David with a powerful contingent (1 Chronicles 12:28). Samuel is the one person in Jewish history who approaches the high rank of Moses, Israel's founder (Jeremiah 15:1). The argument that he was a Levite, and not a priest, takes too narrow and technical a view of the matter; for the essence of the priesthood lies not in the offering of sacrifice, but in mediation. Sacrifice is but an accident, being the appointed method by which the priest was to mediate between God and man. As a matter of fact, Samuel often did discharge priestly functions (1 Samuel 7:9, 1 Samuel 7:17; 1 Samuel 13:8, where we find Saul reproved for invading Samuel's office; 1 Samuel 16:2), and it is a point to be kept in mind that the regular priests disappear from Jewish history for about fifty years after the slaughter of themselves, their wives, and families at Shiloh; for it is not until Saul's time that Ahiah, the great-grandson of Eli, appears, as once again ministering at the altar (1 Samuel 14:3). The calamity that overtook the nation at the end of Eli's reign was so terrible that all ordinary ministrations seem to have been in abeyance. We are even expressly told that after the recovery of the ark it was placed in the house of Abinadab at Kirjath-jearim in Judaea, and that for twenty years his son Eleazar, though a Levite only, ministered there before it by no regular consecration, but by the appointment of the men of that town. During this time, though Ahitub, Ahiah's father, was probably high priest nominally, yet nothing is said of him, and all the higher functions of the office were exercised by Samuel. Instead of the Urim and Thummim, he as prophet was the direct representative of the theocratic king. Subsequently this great duty was once again discharged by Abiathar as priest, and then a mighty change was made, and the prophets with the living voice of inspiration took the place of the priest with the ephod. For this is a far more important matter than even the fact that Samuel performed the higher functions of the priesthood. With him a new order of things began. Prophecy, from being spasmodic and irregular, became an established institution, and took its place side by side with the priesthood in preparing for Christ's advent, and in forming the Jewish nation to be the evangelisers of the world. The prediction of this organic change followed the rule of all prophecy in taking its verbal form and expression from what was then existent. Just as the gospel dispensation is always described under figures taken from the Jewish Church and commonwealth, so Samuel, as the founder of the prophetic schools, and of the new order of things which resulted from them, is described to Eli under terms taken from his priestly office. He was a "faithful priest," and much more, just as our Lord was a "prophet like unto Moses" (Deuteronomy 18:15), and a "King set upon the holy hill of Zion" (Psalms 2:6), but in a far higher sense than any would have supposed at the time when these prophecies were spoken. 270
- 271. As regards thespecific terms of the prophecy, "the building of a sure house" (1 Samuel 25:28; 2 Samuel 7:11; 1 Kings 2:1-46 :94, 1 Kings 11:38; Isaiah 32:18) is a metaphor expressive of assured prosperity. The mass of the Israelites dwelt in tents (2 Samuel 11:11; 2 Samuel 20:1, etc.; 1 Kings 12:16), and to have a fixed and permanent dwelling was a mark of greatness. From such passages as 1 Kings 2:24; 1 Kings 11:38, it is plain that the idea of founding a family is not contained in the expression. As a matter of fact, Samuel's family was prosperous, and his grandson Heman had high rank in David's court and numerous issue (1 Chronicles 25:5). Probably too the men of Ramah, who with the men of the Levite town of Gaba made up a total of 621 persons (Nehemiah 7:30), represented the descendants of Samuel at the return from Babylon. Nevertheless, the contrast is between the migratory, life in tents and the ease and security of a solid and firm abode, and the terms of the promise are abundantly fulfilled in Samuel's personal greatness. In the promise, "he shall walk before mine anointed forever," there is the same outlook upon the office of king, as if already in existence, which we observed in Hannah's hymn (1 Samuel 2:10). Apparently the expectation that Jehovah was about to anoint, i.e. consecrate, for them some one to represent him in civil matters and war, as the high priest represented him in things spiritual, had taken possession of the minds of the people. It had been clearly promised them, and regulations for the office made (Deuteronomy 17:14-20); and it was to be Samuel's office to fulfil this wish, and all his life through he held a post of high dignity in the kingdom. But the promise has also a definite meaning as regards the prophets, in whom Samuel lived on. For St. Augnstine's error was in taking Samuel simply in his personal relations, whereas he is the representative of the whole prophetic order (Acts 3:24). They were his successors in his work, and continued to be the recognised mediators to declare to king and people the will of Jehovah, who was the supreme authority in both Church and state; and in political matters they were the appointed check upon the otherwise absolute power of the kings, with whose appointment their own formal organisation exactly coincided. From Samuel's time prophet and king walked together till the waiting period began which immediately preceded the nativity of Christ. K&D, "1Sa_2:35 But the priesthood itself was not to fall with the fall of Eli's house and priesthood; on the 271
- 272. contrary the Lordwould raise up for himself a tried priest, who would act according to His heart. “And I will build for him a lasting house, and he will walk before mine anointed for ever.” 36 Then everyone left in your family line will come and bow down before him for a piece of silver and a loaf of bread and plead, “Appoint me to some priestly office so I can have food to eat.” BARNES, "A piece - The word is only found here; but is thought to be connected in etymology and in meaning with the “Gerah,” the smallest Hebrew coin, being the twentieth part of the shekel. The smallness of the sum asked for shows the poverty of the asker. CLARKE, " Shall come and crouch to him - Shall prostrate himself before him in the most abject manner, begging to be employed even in the meanest offices about the tabernacle, in order to get even the most scanty means of support. A piece of silver - כסף אגורת agorath keseph, translated by the Septuagint, οβολου αργυριου, an obolus of silver. The Targum translates it מעא mea, which is the same as the Hebrew gerah, and weighed about sixteen grains of barley. A morsel of bread - A mouthful; what might be sufficient to keep body and soul together. See the sin and its punishment. They formerly pampered themselves, and fed to the full on the Lord’s sacrifices; and now they are reduced to a morsel of bread. They fed themselves without fear; and now they have cleanness of teeth in all their dwellings. They wasted the Lord’s heritage, and now they beg their bread! In religious establishments, vile persons, who have no higher motive, may and do get into the priest’s office, that they may clothe themselves with the wool, and feed themselves with the fat, while they starve the flock. But where there is no law to back the claims of the worthless and the wicked, men of piety and solid merit only can find support; for they must live on the free-will offerings of the people. Where religion is established by law, the strictest ecclesiastical discipline should be kept up, and all hireling priests and ecclesiastical drones should be expelled from the Lord’s vineyard. An established religion, where the foundation is good, as is ours, I consider a great blessing; 272
- 273. but it isliable to this continual abuse, which nothing but careful and rigid ecclesiastical discipline can either cure or prevent. If our high priests, our archbishops and bishops, do not their duty, the whole body of the clergy may become corrupt or inefficient. If they be faithful, the establishment will be an honor to the kingdom, and a praise in the earth. The words pillars of the earth, ארץ מצקי metsukey erets, Mr. Parkhurst translates and defends thus: “The compressors of the earth; i.e., the columns of the celestial fluid which compress or keep its parts together.” This is all imaginary; we do not know this compressing celestial fluid; but there is one that answers the same end, which we do know, i.e., the Air, the columns of which press upon the earth in all directions; above, below, around, with a weight of fifteen pounds to every square inch; so that a column of air of the height of the atmosphere, which on the surface of the globe measures one square inch, is known by the most accurate and indubitable experiments to weigh fifteen pounds. Now as a square foot contains one hundred and forty-four square inches, each foot must be compressed with a weight of incumbent atmospheric air equal to two thousand one hundred and sixty pounds. And as the earth is known to contain a surface of five thousand five hundred and seventy-five billions of square feet; hence, allowing two thousand one hundred and sixty pounds to each square foot, the whole surface of the globe must sustain a pressure of atmospheric air equal to twelve trillions and forty- one thousand billions of pounds; or six thousand and twenty-one billions of tons. This pressure, independently of what is called gravity, is sufficient to keep all the parts of the earth together, and perhaps to counteract all the influence of centrifugal force. But adding to this all the influence of gravity or attraction, by which every particle of matter tends to the center, these compressors of the earth are sufficient to poise, balance, and preserve the whole terraqueous globe. These pillars or compressors are an astonishing provision made by the wisdom of God for the necessities of the globe. Without this, water could not rise in fountains, nor the sap in vegetables. Without this, there could be no respiration for man or beast, and no circulation of the blood in any animal. In short, both vegetable and animal life depend, under God, on these pillars or compressors of the earth; and were it not for this compressing power, the air contained in the vessels of all plants and animals would by its elasticity expand and instantly rupture all those vessels, and cause the destruction of all animal and vegetable life: but God in his wisdom has so balanced these two forces, that, while they appear to counteract and balance each other, they serve, by mutual dilations and compressions, to promote the circulation of the sap in vegetables, and the blood in animals. GILL, "And it shall come to pass, that everyone that is left in thine house,.... That is not cut off by death, the few remains of Eli's posterity in succeeding times, after the high priesthood was removed out of his family into another; so that they were reduced at best to common priests, and these, as it should seem, degraded from that office for their maladministration of it, or scandalous lives: shall come and crouch to him for a piece of silver and a morsel of bread; which Grotius interprets of their coming to God, and bowing themselves before him, and praying to him for the smallest piece of money to cast into the treasury, and for a morsel of bread to be accepted as an offering, instead of a bullock, sheep, lamb, or even a bird, which they were not able to bring; but the meaning is, that such should be the low estate 273
- 274. of Eli's family,when another, even Zadok, was made high priest, that they should come and humble themselves before him, as the Targum expresses it, beseeching him to give them a piece of silver, even the smallest piece, that is, as the word signifies, a "gerah" or "meah", about a penny or three halfpence of our money, the twentieth part of a shekel, Eze_45:12 and a piece of bread, not a whole loaf, but a slice of it, to such extremity would they be brought: and shall say, put me, I pray thee, into one of the priests' offices, that I may eat a piece of bread; or into one of the wards of the priests; their custodies or courses, as the Targum; with which the Jewish commentators generally agree, and of which there were twenty four; see 1Ch_24:4, and there are some traces of them in the New Testament, see Luk_1:5, but these were regular priests, who were in those courses, and had a sufficient maintenance for them, and had not barely a piece of bread to live on, or just enough to keep them from starving, as the phrase denotes; wherefore this must be understood, as before hinted, of priests degraded from their office, on some account or another, and reduced to poverty and want; and therefore, that they might be kept from starving, would solicit the high priest in those days, and beg that he would put them in some inferior post under the priests, to do the meanest offices for them, slay the sacrifices for them, wash their pots, open and shut up doors, and the like, that so they might have a living, though a poor one; and this may reasonably be thought to be the case of Eli's posterity, in process of time, after Abiathar was deposed from the high priest's office, and was ordered to go and live upon his fields and farm at Anathoth, 1Ki_ 2:26 with which compare Eze_44:10. This, as Ben Gersom observes, was a fit punishment, and a righteous retaliation on Eli's posterity, that they should be brought to crouch to others, and be glad of a morsel of bread, who had behaved so imperiously towards the Lord's people, and had taken away their flesh from them by force; and, not content with their allowance, took the best pieces of the sacrifices, to make themselves fat with them. BENSON, "1 Samuel 2:36. Every one that is left in thy house — That remains of thy family, not being cut off; shall crouch to him for a piece of silver, &c. — Shall humble himself to Zadok, or the high-priests of his line, begging a small relief in the great poverty to which he shall be reduced. Put me, I pray thee, into one of the priests’ offices, &c. — Or, Put me into somewhat belonging to the priesthood, as it is in the Hebrew; that is, Give me the meanest pension that is allowed to those priests who are prohibited from officiating, or some part, of what belongs to the priests. See 2 Kings 23:9; Ezekiel 44:13. This was fulfilled in the days of Abiathar, who, for treason, was not only put out of his office, but sent to live upon his own farm in the country; and not suffered to enjoy the portion given to the priests at the temple, 1 Kings 2:26-27. Through this, his posterity fell into extreme want, in which the just judgment of God may be observed, in that the children of those who were so wanton, that they would not be content unless they had the choicest parts of the sacrifices for their portion, should fall into so low a condition as to beg their bread! COKE, "1 Samuel 2:36. Put me, I pray thee, &c.— See 1 Kings 2:27. From a review 274
- 275. of this usefuland instructive chapter, we may draw several reflections of importance. The song of Hannah the mother of Samuel, and her public and solemn thanksgiving to God, are a new proof of her piety, and teach us to express our gratitude, and bless the Lord when he grants us any signal favour. We learn particularly in this song, that Providence overrules all things; that God confounds the proud; that he takes care of the weak and afflicted who fear him; that he protects them, and hears their prayers. This is a doctrine full of comfort and consolation to good men, supporting them in their trials, and leading them to holiness, and trust in God. The account of the horrid impiety and sacrilege of the sons of Eli should convince us, that the loose and evil life of the ministers of religion is the greatest of all scandals; and that nothing corrupts the people more, nor more certainly exposes them to the judgments of God. The conduct of Eli demands our serious attention; instead of punishing his sons as they deserved, he only gently reproved them; and therefore God by his prophet declared, that for this very thing his children and his posterity should be destroyed. This very remarkable example should teach parents, that indulging their children is a very great sin; that God punishes such over-tender and indulgent parents by the children themselves; and that it often occasions the ruin and destruction of families. But this indulgence is particularly sinful in persons of a public character, and especially in church- governors and magistrates, when they do not suppress vice and irregularity by opposing it with becoming steadiness and resolution to the utmost of their power. God's sharp reproof of Eli by the prophet, and the miseries which soon after befel his children and all the people, prove, that great misfortunes are owing to this indulgence; and that not only private persons, but the public likewise, are thereby exposed to the divine vengeance. See Ostervald. HAWKER, "REFLECTIONS READER! Stand still, and fully contemplate the character of Hannah, and observe, how the harp which was before hung on the willow, is now strung and sounded to the praise of Jehovah. See, how her note is changed. And the countenance which was before sad, is now lighted up in praise, and thanksgiving. And in remarking the blessed effects of grace, in this woman's experience; do not overlook the principal feature of it, in that her song of joy is not merely directed to praise God for his gift, but to praise the great Giver. She doth not dwell upon the loveliness of her Samuel, and celebrate, as a fond parent might be supposed to do, the features of his body, or the promising features of his mind. But her whole soul seems to be swallowed up in adoring the God and giver of her Samuel. Oh! how delightfully doth she hold forth the holiness, the faithfulness, the goodness and wisdom of a prayer-hearing and a 275
- 276. prayer-answering God: andhow sweetly she triumphs in the assurance of having this God for her Rock, and as the horn of her salvation. Reader! do not overlook that this precious covenant God is the believer's God in Jesus, in all generations. He is the same yesterday, and today, and forever. And why should not you and I find the same confidence? Oh! for grace to adopt the same assurance of faith, and in the contemplation of all his rich mercies in Jesus, to cry out, with one of old, For this God is our God, forever, and ever; he will be our guide even unto death. While the sad contrast to Hannah's song, in the awful example of Eli's family, should fill our minds with suitable reflections, and call forth prayer to be kept from all presumptuous transgressions; let us, from lamenting the wretched and corrupt state of all Levitical and Priestly ministrations, direct our thoughts, and call forth our warmest affections to Jesus, that faithful priest of God our Father, the Mediator of a better covenant, founded upon better promises. Yes! thou clear Redeemer, thou art indeed the faithful priest our God promised to raise up. Thou hast done all, according to what was in thine and our Father's heart, and in his mind. And God our Father hath built thee a sure house forever. Oh! grant, thou great Melchisedeck, that we, whom thou past made kings and priests to God and thy Father, may walk before thee, the Lord's anointed, forever. And give us to rejoice that we have such an High Priest, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. And while, as in the instance of Eli, we perceive that none among the sons of Aaron, whose race is mortal, and whose stock corrupt, can be exempt from sin: though the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated forevermore. LANGE, "In 1 Samuel 2:36 is added another feature in the portraiture of the faithful priest: in this close connection with the kingdom, he will occupy so exalted, honorable and mighty a position over against the fallen house of Eli, that the needy and wretched survivors of that house will be dependent on him for existence and support.—On the כּל before ר ָנּוֹתַ,ה where, on account of the following Article, it signifies all, whole, comp. Ges, § III, 1Rem, Ew, § 290 c. “All the rest, all that remains.” The ףֶסֶבּ ת ַגוֹרֲא is “a small silver coin collected by begging” (Keil). The lower the remains of Eli’s house sink even to beggary, the higher will the “faithful, approved priest,” of whom the prophet here speaks, stand. In the immediate future of the theocratic kingdom he will see far beneath him those of Eli’s house who are still priests in humble dependence on him. 276
- 277. This prophecy foundits fulfillment from the stand-point of historical exposition in Samuel. That the author of our Books had him in view in his account of the man of God’s announcement is clear from the narration immediately following in 1 Samuel3; here the voice of the divine call comes to the child Samuel at the same time with the revelation imparted to him of the judgment against the house of Eli. He is indeed expressly called by the divine voice to be prophet; his first prophetic duty, which he performs as God’s organ, is the announcement of the judgment on Eli in the name of the Lord; it is true, it is said of him in 1 Samuel 2:20, that he was known in all Israel to be faithful and confirmed (ן ָמֱֶאנ) as a prophet. But the summary statement of his prophetical vigor and work in 1 Samuel 21-2:19 , in which the epithet “faithful, confirmed,” points back to the same expression in 1 Samuel 2:35, is connected with the reference to Shiloh and the constant revelations there, which had begun with the one made to Samuel; by the express reference to Shiloh Samuel’s prophetic character and work are at the same time presented under the sacerdotal point of view. An essential element of the calling of priest was instruction in the Law, the announcement of the divine will ( Leviticus 10:11; Deuteronomy 33:10), and Malachi 2:7, expressly declares the duty of the priest in these words: “the priest’s lips shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law from his mouth, for he is a messenger of heaven;” and so that prophecy of a faithful priest is all the more fulfilled in Samuel (whose words to the people, 1 Samuel 21-3:19 , had the pure and the practical word of God in the Law for their content), because the priesthood of his time had proved itself unworthy and unable to fulfil this calling. The further sacred priestly acts which Samuel performed ( 1 Samuel 21-3:19 ), and the mediating position between God and the people as advocate and intercessor expressly ascribed to him in 1 Samuel 7:5 characterize him as the faithful, approved priest who is announced here in 1 Samuel 36-2:35 . The other single traits in the picture suit Samuel. In the list of theocratic instruments of the succeeding period there is none that surpasses him; he surpasses them all so far, that our gaze fixes itself on him in seeking for a realization of this announcement in connection with the fulfilment of the threat against Eli and his house. Samuel’s bearing and conduct is everywhere such that the declaration “ he shall do according to what is in my heart and soul,” is verified in no other theocratic-prophetic and priestly person so eminently as in him. A sure house the Lord built him according to 1 Chronicles 6:33; 1 Chronicles 5-25:4 . His grandson was Heman “the singer, the king’s seer in the words of God,” father of fourteen sons and three daughters. The intimate relation of Samuel to the theocratic kingdom under Saul and David, the Lord’s anointed kings, is an obvious fulfilment of the prophecy “he shall walk before my anointed for ever.” The raising up of the fore-announced priest was to follow immediately on the punishment of Eli 277
- 278. and his house.In point of fact Samuel steps into the gap in the priesthood which that judgment made as priestly and high-priestly mediator between God and the people, as is shown by the passages cited and by the whole character of his work. By the corruption of its traditional representatives the hereditary priesthood had come to be so at variance with its theocratic significance and mission, that the fulfilment of this mission could be attained, in this great crisis in the development of Israel’s history into the theocratic kingdom, only in an extraordinary way, through direct divine calling, by such an instrument as Samuel. The statement, in the concluding words, of the walking of the faithful priest before the Lord’s anointed is fulfilled exactly (according to the above explanation) in Samuel’s relation to this kingdom.— It is held by some that the prophecy in 1 Samuel 2:30-36, (compared with 1 Kings 2:27, and Joseph. V:11, 5; VIII:1, 3), refers to the transition of the priestly dignity from the house of Ithamar to the house of Eleazar, and therefore that this prophecy, in whole or in some parts, was composed in or after the time of Song of Solomon, (De Wette, Einl. § 178 b.; Bertholdt, Einl. III:916, and Ewald, Gesch. I:190); against which Thenius (p15) properly points out that even after this change the high- priesthood remained still in the family of Aaron, while the words “and the house of thy father,” ( 1 Samuel 2:30-31), clearly shows that the prophecy does not speak of a change in the family, and that in 1 Samuel 2:27-36 we have a genuine ancient prediction of a prophet. Against the view that the prophecy of the “faithful priest” was, according to 1 Kings 2:27 fulfilled in the complete transference of the high- priesthood, by the deposition of Abiathar, to the family of Eleazar, to which Zadok belonged, we remark: 1) that (if the advocates of this view mean this family and its succeeding line of high-priests) the words of the prophecy speak of a single person, not of several, or collectively of a body; and2) that, if Zadok is held to be the “faithful priest” in whom the prophetic word was fulfilled, his person and work have no such epoch-making theocratic significance in the history as we should expect from the prophecy; the expectation is satisfied only in Samuel’s priestly- prophetical eminence. For the rest, the words of 1 Kings 2:27 give no ground for the opinion that the prophecy in 1 Samuel 2:35 is in them referred to Zadok (Thenius), since the passage, having in view Abiathar’s deposition, is speaking merely of the fulfilment of the threatened punishment of Eli’s house, and not at all of the fulfilment of the positive part of the prophecy; there Isaiah, therefore, no occasion to speak (with Thenius) of a false conception of this prophecy as early as Solomon’s time. The lofty priestly position, which Samuel took in his calling as Judge and Prophet before the Lord and His people, the priestly work, by which (the regular priesthood completely retiring) he stood as mediator between Jehovah and His people in sacrifice, prayer, intercession and advocacy, and the high theocratic- reformatory calling, in which his “important, sacred duty was to walk before the anointed, the king, whom Israel was to receive through him, while the Aaronic 278
- 279. priesthood fell fora good time into such contempt, that, in the universal neglect of divine worship, it had to beg honor and support from him, and became dependent on the new order of things begun by Samuel,” (O. v. Gerlach),—these things prove that, from the theocratic-historical point of view, in him is fulfilled the prophecy of the faithful priest. [Four different interpretations explain the “faithful priest” to be Samuel, Zadok, Christ, or a line of priests, including Samuel and Zadok, and culminating in Christ; the last seems to be the only tenable one. I. We cannot restrict the prophecy to Samuel, for1) the “established house” promised the faithful priest is clearly a priestly house, as is evident from a comparison of 1 Samuel 2:35 with 1 Samuel 2:30-31, where the everlasting official sacerdotal character of this house is contrasted with the fall of Eli’s priestly house; and Samuel founded no such house2) Eli’s house was not immediately deprived of the high-priesthood, nor was it at all excluded from the priesthood. Up to Solomon’s time descendants of Eli were high- priests, and the Jews held that his family continued to exist. Nor did Samuel succeed Eli immediately as Priest and Judges 3) It is an important fact that Samuel is nowhere called a priest, and it is an exaggeration of his position to ascribe to him a complete sacerdotal character. His mediatorial work belonged to him largely as a man of God, and similar work was performed by Moses, David, Song of Solomon, none of whom acted as priests. It is doubtful whether Samuel sacrificed at all, still more whether he usually performed this service. The people are said to have sacrificed ( 1 Samuel 11:15), where is probably meant that they did it through the priests, and one passage ( 1 Samuel 9:13), seems to exclude Samuel from the act of sacrifice. At any rate his performance of sacrificial service may be regarded as extraordinary and unofficial like that of Gideon ( Judges 6:26-27) and Solomon ( 1 Kings 3:4). But it is true that Samuel’s life developed the conception of the theocratically pure and faithful priest in contrast with the self-seeking and immorality of Eli’s sons. He was the first protest against their profane perversion of the holy office, the first exemplification after Eli’s time of pure-hearted service of God. II. Rashi, Abarbanel and the majority of modern commentators suppose the reference to be to Zadok, Christian writers usually adopting also the Messianic interpretation. And, though 1 Kings 2:27 mentions only the deposition of Abiathar as the fulfilment of the judgment on Eli’s house, yet this, taken with 1 Samuel 2:35, can hardly be dissevered from the installation of Zadok as sole high-priest; the final exclusion of Eli’s representative is followed immediately by the elevation of the Zadokite family, which continues in an unbroken line to Christ. That the Zadokites were the true divinely-appointed priests, is assumed throughout the following books 279
- 280. of the OldTestament, and especially in such passages as Ezekiel 44:15, (quoted by Keil). Erdmann’s objections to this view do not seem conclusive. He urges: 1) that the prophecy ( 1 Samuel 2:27-36) speaks not of a change within the Aaronic family, but of a setting aside of that family in favor of a non-Aaronic priest.—But this is not the declaration of the prophecy, ( 1 Samuel 2:30 speaks of the exclusion of unworthy members, and the reference is plainly to Eli’s immediate family), and is contradicted by the facts of history; for the Aaronic priesthood did continue to the end, while the change announced ( 1 Samuel 2:36) was to take place in the history of Israel. Samuel founded no priestly family, and the restriction of the prophecy to him alone is not in keeping with the broadness of its declarations2) That Zadok was not specially prominent, and does not exhibit a commanding character cannot be urged against this view, since the prophecy promises not intellectual vigor in the “faithful priest” but theocratic official purity and personal godliness, which Zadok and his descendants in the main exhibited. III. Augustine (De Civ. Dei17, 5) explains the priest here announced to be Christ alone, basing his view on the breadth and fulness of the statements made about Him. The text does not allow this exclusive reference to Christ, looking plainly, as it does, to the then existing order of things (as in 1 Samuel 2:36, which Augustine interprets of Jewish priests coming to worship Christ), but it may include Him, or rather point to Him as the consummation of the blessedness which it promises; and the remarkable fulness of the terms in 1 Samuel 2:35 naturally leads us to this explanation. IV. If the prophecy finds a partial fulfilment in Samuel and Zadok, and also points to Christ, then it would seem best to regard it as announcing a line of faithful men who would do God’s will in full official and personal sympathy with His law. First comes Samuel, not indeed an official priest, but a true representative of the spirituality of the divine service (see 1 Samuel 15:22). He is followed by Zadok, the father of a long line of priests, who (with many defects) in the main preserve among the people and in the presence of the king the fundamental ideas of the sacrificial service, and are a type ( Ezekiel 44:15) of the perfect priesthood into which they are finally merged. To this Erdmann objects that the reference is plainly ( 1 Samuel 2:35) to one person, and not to a body of men; but he himself understands the “anointed,” in which the expression of singleness is not less distinct, of Saul and David. If the anointed is to be understood of a line of kings, why not the priest of a line of priests?—This last view then seems best to meet the demands of this confessedly difficult passage. See Keil and Wordsworth in loco.—Tr.]. PETT, "1 Samuel 2:36 “And it will come about that every one who is left in your house will come and bow down to him for a piece of silver and a loaf of bread, and will say, “Put me, I pray 280
- 281. you, into oneof the priests’ offices, that I may eat a morsel of bread.” In terms of Messianic expectation the thought here is that the coming High Priest will be so exalted that this current priesthood will have to humble themselves before Him in order to receive life’s necessities, desiring to serve Him in order to enjoy their bread. We find a fulfilment of this depicted in the covenant meal offered to the crowds by Jesus, followed by His exposition of it in terms of the need to receive Him as the Bread of life John 6:35. All would have to come to Him in this way. If we would live, we too must eat of Him. But this vivid picture also emphasises how the line of Eli will be humbled in the nearer future. In the near future those who are of his line will have to submit to the line of Eleazar in order to receive their priest’s portion, and their humiliation is emphasised. They will be relatively destitute. Such will be the destiny of Eli’s house because of their atrocious behaviour and sacrilege. PULPIT, "Piece of silver is lit. a small silver coin got by begging and the word marks the extreme penury into which the race of Eli fell Gathered round the sanctuary at Shiloh, they were the chief sufferers by its ruin, and we have noticed how for a time they fall entirely out of view. During the miserable period of Philistine domination which followed, Samuel became to the oppressed nation a centre of hope, and by wise government he first reformed the people internally, and then gave them freedom from foreign rule. During this period we may be sure that he did much to raise from their misery the descendants of Eli, and finally Ahiah, Eli's grandson, ministers as high priest before Saul. Though his grandson, Abiathar, was deposed from the office by Solomon, there is no reason for imagining that the family ever again fell into distress, nor do the terms of the prophecy warrant such a supposition. K&D, "1Sa_2:36 Whoever, on the other hand, should still remain of Eli's house, would come “bowing before him (to get) a silver penny and a slice of bread,” and would say, “Put me, I pray, in one of the priests' offices, that I may get a piece of bread to eat.” ה ָר ֲגא, that which is collected, signifies some small coin, of which a collection was made by begging single coins. Commentators are divided in their opinions as to the historical allusions contained in this prophecy. By the “tried priest,” Ephraem Syrus understood both the prophet Samuel and the priest Zadok. “As for the facts themselves,” he says, “it is evident that, when Eli 281
- 282. died, Samuel succeededhim in the government, and that Zadok received the high- priesthood when it was taken from his family.” Since his time, most of the commentators, including Theodoret and the Rabbins, have decided in favour of Zadok. Augustine, however, and in modern times Thenius and O. v. Gerlach, give the preference to Samuel. The fathers and earlier theologians also regarded Samuel and Zadok as the type of Christ, and supposed the passage to contain a prediction of the abrogation of the Aaronic priesthood by Jesus Christ. (Note: Theodoret, qu. vii. in 1 Reg. Οὐκοῦν ἡ πρόῤῥησις κυρίως μὲν ἁρμόττει τῷ σωτὴρι Χριστῷ. Κατὰ δὲ ἱστορίαν τῷ Σαδούκ, ὅς ἐκ τοῦ Ἐλεάζαρ κατάγων τὸ γένος τὴν ἀρχιερωσύνην διὰ τοῦ Σολομῶνος ἐδέξατο. Augustine says (De civit. Dei xvii. 5, 2): “Although Samuel was not of a different tribe from the one which had been appointed by the Lord to serve at the altar, he was not of the sons of Aaron, whose descendants had been set apart as priests; and thus the change is shadowed forth, which was afterwards to be introduced through Jesus Christ.” And again, §3: “What follows (1Sa_2:35) refers to that priest, whose figure was borne by Samuel when succeeding to Eli.” So again in the Berleburger Bible, to the words, “I will raise me up a faithful priest,” this note is added: “Zadok, of the family of Phinehas and Eleazar, whom king Solomon, as the anointed of God, appointed high priest by his ordinance, setting aside the house of Eli (1Ki_2:35; 1Ch_29:22). At the same time, just as in the person of Solomon the Spirit of prophecy pointed to the true Solomon and Anointed One, so in this priest did He also point to Jesus Christ the great High Priest.”) This higher reference of the words is in any case to be retained; for the rabbinical interpretation, by which Grotius, Clericus, and others abide, - namely, that the transfer of the high-priesthood from the descendants of Eli to Zadok, the descendant of Eleazar, is all that is predicted, and that the prophecy was entirely fulfilled when Abiathar was deposed by Solomon (1Ki_2:27), - is not in accordance with the words of the text. On the other hand, Theodoret and Augustine both clearly saw that the words of Jehovah, “I revealed myself to thy father's house in Egypt,” and, “Thy house shall walk before me for ever,” do not apply to Ithamar, but to Aaron. “Which of his fathers,” says Augustine, “was in that Egyptian bondage, form which they were liberated when he was chosen to the priesthood, excepting Aaron? It is with reference to his posterity, therefore, that it is here affirmed that they would not be priests for ever; and this we see already fulfilled.” The only thing that appears untenable is the manner in which the fathers combine this historical reference to Eli and Samuel, or Zadok, with the Messianic interpretation, viz., either by referring 1Sa_2:31-34 to Eli and his house, and then regarding the sentence pronounced upon Eli as simply a type of the Messianic fulfilment, or by admitting the Messianic allusion simply as an allegory. The true interpretation may be obtained from a correct insight into the relation in which the prophecy itself stands to its fulfilment. Just as, in the person of Eli and his sons, the threat announces deep degradation and even destruction to all the priests of the house of Aaron who should walk in the footsteps of the sons of Eli, and the death of the two sons of Eli in one day was to be merely a sign that the threatened punishment would be completely fulfilled upon the ungodly priests; so, on the other hand, the promise of the raising up of the tried priest, for whom God would build a lasting house, also refers to all the priests whom the Lord would raise up as faithful servants of His altar, and only receives its complete and final fulfilment in Christ, the true and eternal High Priest. But if we endeavour to determine more precisely from the history itself, which of the Old Testament priests are included, we must not exclude either Samuel or Zadok, but must certainly affirm that the prophecy was partially fulfilled in both. 282
- 283. Samuel, as theprophet of the Lord, was placed at the head of the nation after the death of Eli; so that he not only stepped into Eli's place as judge, but stood forth as priest before the Lord and the nation, and “had the important and sacred duty to perform of going before the anointed, the king, whom Israel was to receive through him; whereas for a long time the Aaronic priesthood fell into such contempt, that, during the general decline of the worship of God, it was obliged to go begging for honour and support, and became dependent upon the new order of things that was introduced by Samuel” (O. v. Gerlach). Moreover, Samuel acquired a strong house in the numerous posterity that was given to him by God. The grandson of Samuel was Heman, “the king's seer in the words of God,” who was placed by David over the choir at the house of God, and had fourteen sons and three daughters (1Ch_6:33; 1Ch_25:4-5). But the very fact that these descendants of Samuel did not follow their father in the priesthood, shows very clearly that a lasting house was not built to Samuel as a tried priest through them, and therefore that we have to seek for the further historical fulfilment of this promise in the priesthood of Zadok. As the word of the Lord concerning the house of Eli, even if it did not find its only fulfilment in the deposition of Abiathar (1Ki_2:27), was at any rate partially fulfilled in that deposition; so the promise concerning the tried priest to be raised up received a new fulfilment in the fact that Zadok thereby became the sole high priest, and transmitted the office to his descendants, though this was neither its last nor its highest fulfilment. This final fulfilment is hinted at in the vision of the new temple, as seen by the prophet Ezekiel, in connection with which the sons of Zadok are named as the priests, who, because they had not fallen away with the children of Israel, were to draw near to the Lord, and perform His service in the new organization of the kingdom of God as set forth in that vision (Eze_40:46; Eze_43:19; Eze_44:15; Eze_48:11). This fulfilment is effected in connection with Christ and His kingdom. Consequently, the anointed of the Lord, before whom the tried priest would walk for ever, is not Solomon, but rather David, and the Son of David, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. 283