Hophni & Phinehas

[1:Sam. 2:12] Now the sons of Eli were sons of Belial; they knew not the LORD.The author explains in detail how the religion of Israel was distorted by the priesthood, in the absence of judges or kings. The priesthood which had only a mediatory role had become an end in itself. The priests, with no regard for the L-rd had made religion a means to further their own interests, to meet their own avaricious ends not only careless and ungodly, 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 well-known ministers, to the opposite extreme of reckless and open profligacy.
The sons of Eli are described here as worthless men, sons of Belial. The priest occupied a socially higher status is evident from the fact that he had at his disposal servants. According to Lev. 7:34, the priest’s rightful share of an animal sacrifice was the breast and the right thigh; but according to Deut. 18:3, the priest should get the shoulder and the two cheeks and the stomach. Eli’s sons were not content with their due shares. When one wields authority and possesses power, the temptation is always to acquire more than what is legally due.
[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;
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 L-rd'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 privilege appointed to them by the divine law (Exodus 29:27, Leviticus 7:31, 32), not only claimed part of the offerer's share, but greedily seized them previous to the sacred ceremony of 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 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 greedy eagerness of Eli's sons.
The three-pronged fork is a common Temple instrument. Burning the fat is required by the Law. Sin according to Hebrew means missing the mark or missing the goal. Here the sons of Eli missed the goal of serving the L-rd and guiding people to him; and that was the great sin in the sight of the L-rd.
The sin of Eli’s sons is actually sin against G-d and therefore unforgivable. The implied meaning that G-d is the source of forgiveness; so if one rejects G-d, then there is no possibility for the person to avail himself of forgiveness from another source.
His sons lying with women at the entrance of the tent of meeting is new here; it is not mentioned among the evil listed earlier in v. 12-17. Temple prostitution was common among the Canaanites, and it was condemned in Israel.
The women that assembled at the door of the Tabernacle - This was an institution of holy women of a strictly severe order, who had relinquished worldly cares and devoted themselves to the L-rd; an institution which continued down to the time of Y’Shua (Luke 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 yet, from fear or laziness, he shrank from laying on them the restraints, or subjecting them to the discipline, their gross actions called for. In his judicial capacity, he winked at their unashamed acts of making an allowance for and suffered them to make reckless endanger on the foundation, by which the most serious injuries were inflicted both on the rights of the people and the Laws of G-d.
Eli’s sons would not listen to the voice of their father and that meant their self-destruction. The author comments, for it was the will of the L-rd to slay them. According to the O.T. nothing happens outside the sovereign purpose of G-d.
Because - it should be therefore.
The L-rd would slay them - It was not G-d's preordination, but their own willful and shameless disobedience which was the cause of their destruction
1. Eli was the high priest of Israel, the spiritual leader of the 12 tribes.
a. His potential to influence the nation for good was incredible because 3 times a year all adult men went to Shiloh to celebrate the holidays commemorating the Exodus.
b. During these times, Eli could have taught the people how to walk with God.
c. But from what we read about him, it seems he’d grown lazy & had become little more than an office-holder.
2. His laziness extended beyond his role as high priest to his role as father.
3. His sons are described as corrupt; literally in Hebrew, it’s “sons of Belial.”
a. ‘Belial’ means worthless, without moral value = we’d say naughty!
b. To be called a ‘son’ of something referred to one’s nature, the inner disposition.
c. Eli’s sons, who in ch. 1 are named Hophni & Phinehas, were thoroughly nasty; rotten to the core!
d. They weren’t mostly good kids who occasionally got into trouble; they were naughty sons of guns!
4. Obviously, as v. 12 says, they didn’t know God--meaning they lived without any reference to Him.
a. As the sons of the high priest of Israel, of course they’d heard of God.
b. They’d knew Israel’s history; they’d heard of Abraham, Isaac, & Jacob, their bondage in Egypt, the Exodus, crossing the Red Sea, & the Conquest of Canaan.
c. But it was all just a story to Hophni & Phinehas.
d. They made no connection between the God of Israel’s past & the reality of their daily lives.
5. And what they lived for was enjoying the perks of the family business – being priests.
6. They’d watched their father Eli long enough to know they could go through the motions of their office without any reality behind it.
7. As the story of Eli unfolds we discover that while he was far from the ideal of a high priest, he did believe in God.
a. It’s just that his own comfort was more important to him than God’s glory.
b. While believing in the Lord, Eli allowed his decisions to be shaped more by what was convenient & fashionable, than what was right before God.
8. Why, we see this in the names he chose for his sons.
a. Hophni & Phinehas are Egyptian, not Hebrew names.
b. At this moment, the Egyptians were once again exerting their influence northward into Israel.
c. After years of internal trouble, they’d regrouped & were once more flexing their economic & cultural muscles.
d. Eli was attracted to the luxuriant Egyptian culture & goods the caravans traded throughout the land.
e. Enamored with Egypt, he gave his sons foreign, or we could say worldly names.
f. Since names were often descriptive of a parent’s wishes for his/her child, it’s not surprising Hophni & Phinehas grew up to be ultra worldly!
9. It’s oft been said that when it comes to raising children, values are more often caught than taught.
a. Parents can profess faith in God & go to church.
b. But what children see & put more stock in is what values shape Mom’s & Dad’s choices.
c. Dad, you say you believe in God. When you make decisions regarding business or work, does God effect those decisions? Johnny’s watching.
d. Mom, you go to church on Sunday. But do you enjoy TV programs during the week that glorify immorality? Suzy’s listening.
10. It’s unfortunate but true that while it takes months & sometimes years to build a good reputation, only a moment of failure can destroy it.
11. So it’s crucial that parents be honest with their children about their struggle to live a godly life in the midst of a corrupt world that makes sin easy.
a. Our children are going to see us fail.
b. If we’re prompt in our repentance, & resist the temptation to cover up or deny our sin, even our failures can be turned to good in training our children.