[2 Sam. 227] 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?
Eli was chosen by G-d to be His priest, to serve as a mediator between G-d and His people; but in this calling Eli and his house failed. Consequently, words of judgment came upon them. Election, according to the O.T. is not for privilege but for responsibility. Failure to fulfill one’s responsibility makes one doubly accountable to G-d (Amos 3:2).
A man of G-d probably refers to a prophet. Samuel appears to be the natural successor; subsequently other members of Eli’s house have also been functioning in different locations – Ahijah (14:3) and Abithar (22:20). Eventually Abiathar was exiled, and thus Eli’s line came to an end. Zadok then became the head of the priestly order.
[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?
House of your father is a reference to Levi, to the Aaronite line in particular. A promise by G-d cannot stand unless there is corresponding obedience because G-d deals with humans who possess free will.
[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?
Eli exercises his responsibility as father in warning his children against their evil practices in the Temple. How he is charged for not restraining his sons.
Eli reproved his sons too gently, and did not threaten them as he should, and therefore G-d 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.
His children did wickedly, and he connived at it, and thereby involved himself in the guilt; the indictment therefore runs against them all.
[30] Wherefore the LORD God of Israel saith, 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.
The promise carried its own condition along with it: “They shall walk before me forever, that is, "they shall have the honor, provided they faithfully do the service." Walking before G-d is the great condition of the covenant, Genesis 17:1.
[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.
Eli’s posterity will be cut off. Israelites seem to have believed in some kind of an ongoing existence remembrance through their posterity, through male progeny. That is why they saw the need for the levirate marriage system, which covered the case of a man dying without issue. To have one’s posterity cut off was considered to be a great curse and a terrible misfortune. By the withdrawal of the high priesthood from Eleazar, the elder of Aaron's two sons (after Nadab and Abihu were destroyed, (Numbers 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.
To die in old age was a sign of G-d’s blessings in Israel, but to die prematurely was considered to be a curse. 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 because he honored his sons above G-d.
The message is sent to Eli himself, because G-d 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 distinguishing favors we have received from G-d, 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, Deuteronomy 32:6, 2 Sam. 12:7, 8.
[3:13] For I have told him that I will judge his house for ever for the iniquity which he knoweth; because his sons made themselves vile, and he restrained them not.
[1 Cor. 5:9] I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
[10] Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
[11] But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
[12] For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
[13] But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
He tells them that if any man called a brother, any one professing Christianity, and being a member of a Christian church, were a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, that they should not keep company with him, nor so much as eat with such a one. They were to avoid all familiarity with him; they were to have no commerce with him; they were to have no commerce with him: but, that they might shame him, and bring him to repentance, must disclaim and shun him. Christians are to avoid the familiar conversation of fellow-Christians that are notoriously wicked, and under just censure for their flagitious practices. Such disgrace the Christian name. They may call themselves brethren in Christ, but they are not Christian brethren. They are only fit companions for the brethren in iniquity; and to such company they should be left, till they mend their ways and doings.
How he limits this advice. He does not forbid the Christians the like commerce with scandalously wicked heathens. He does not forbid their eating nor conversing with the fornicators of this world. They know no better. They profess no better. The idols they serve, and the worship they render to many of them, countenance such wickedness. "You must needs go out of the world if you will have no conversation with such men. Your Gentile neighbors are generally vicious and profane; and it is impossible, as long as you are in the world, and have any worldly business to do, but you must fall into their company. This cannot be wholly avoided." Note, Christians may and ought to testify more respect to loose worldlings than to loose Christians. This seems a paradox. Why should we shun the company of a profane or loose Christian, rather than that of a profane or loose heathen?
G-d can and will preserve them from contagion. Besides, they carry an antidote against the infection of their bad example, and are naturally upon their guard. They are apt to have a horror at their wicked practices. But the dread of sin wears off by familiar converse with wicked Christians. Our own safety and preservation are a reason of this difference. But, besides, heathens were such as Christians had nothing to do to judge and censure, and avoid upon a censure passed; for they are without, and must be left to G-d's judgment. But, as to members of the church, they are within, are professedly bound by the Laws and rules of Christianity, and not only liable to the judgment of G-d, but to the censures of those who are set over them, and the fellow-members of the same body, when they transgress those rules. Every Christian is bound to judge them unfit for communion and familiar converse. They are to be punished, by having this mark of disgrace put upon them, that they may be shamed, and, if possible, reclaimed thereby: and the more because the sins of such much more dishonor G-d than the sins of the openly wicked and profane can do. The church therefore is obliged to clear herself from all confederacy with them, or connivance at them, and to bear testimony against their wicked practices. Though the church has nothing to do with those without, it must endeavor to keep clear of the guilt and reproach of those within. Cast him out of your fellowship, and avoid his conversation.
Eli was not cast out of the body because of the sins of his children, he was the believer not his children, his curse was caused because he honored his children in his house above G-d, by his indulgence of them.
Showing posts with label 1 Samuel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1 Samuel. Show all posts
Price for a Wife
[1 Sam. 18:1] And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.
Though bound to this already (17:25), he had found it convenient to forget his former promise. He now holds it out as a new offer, which would tempt David to give additional proofs of his valor. But the fickle and disloyal monarch broke his pledge at the time when the marriage was on the eve of being celebrated, and bestowed Merab on another man an indignity as well as a wrong, which was calculated deeply to wound the feelings and provoke the resentment of David.
Perhaps it was intended to do so, that advantage might be taken of his indiscretion. But David was preserved from this snare.
The account of David’s marriage with Saul’s daughter marks an important stage in the accession narrative. To become the son-in-law of the king was a great thing, for it is stressed repeatedly. Such a marriage implied a claim to the succession to Saul’s throne.
It was when Michal fell in love with David that David claimed Michal, not as a reward but at the price of a hundred foreskins of the Philistines. Saul’s demand for a hundred foreskins of the Philistines reveals a double purpose.
1. First he wants to ensure that David does not kill anyone from among the Israelites but from their enemies, the Philistines. Because the Philistines were uncircumcised, the production of their foreskins would be evidence that David had killed only Philistines.
2. Second the danger involved in killing all those Philistines was great.
In Eastern countries the husband purchases his wife either by gifts or services. As neither David nor his family were in circumstances to give a suitable dowry for a princess, the king intimated that he would be graciously pleased to accept some gallant deed in the public service.
A hundred foreskins of the Philistines, such mutilations on the bodies of their slain enemies were commonly practiced in ancient war, and the number told indicated the glory of the victory.
Saul's willingness to accept a public service had an air of liberality, while his choice of so difficult and hazardous a service seemed only putting a proper value on gaining the hand of a king's daughter. But he covered unprincipled malice against David under this proposal, which exhibited a zeal for G-d and the covenant of circumcision.
Michal, whom Saul intended to become a snare to David, turned out to be a strong supporter of David. G-d overrules human plans. He appropriates even the evil intentions of mankind for the fulfillment of his ultimate plan of salvation.
Though bound to this already (17:25), he had found it convenient to forget his former promise. He now holds it out as a new offer, which would tempt David to give additional proofs of his valor. But the fickle and disloyal monarch broke his pledge at the time when the marriage was on the eve of being celebrated, and bestowed Merab on another man an indignity as well as a wrong, which was calculated deeply to wound the feelings and provoke the resentment of David.
Perhaps it was intended to do so, that advantage might be taken of his indiscretion. But David was preserved from this snare.
The account of David’s marriage with Saul’s daughter marks an important stage in the accession narrative. To become the son-in-law of the king was a great thing, for it is stressed repeatedly. Such a marriage implied a claim to the succession to Saul’s throne.
It was when Michal fell in love with David that David claimed Michal, not as a reward but at the price of a hundred foreskins of the Philistines. Saul’s demand for a hundred foreskins of the Philistines reveals a double purpose.
1. First he wants to ensure that David does not kill anyone from among the Israelites but from their enemies, the Philistines. Because the Philistines were uncircumcised, the production of their foreskins would be evidence that David had killed only Philistines.
2. Second the danger involved in killing all those Philistines was great.
In Eastern countries the husband purchases his wife either by gifts or services. As neither David nor his family were in circumstances to give a suitable dowry for a princess, the king intimated that he would be graciously pleased to accept some gallant deed in the public service.
A hundred foreskins of the Philistines, such mutilations on the bodies of their slain enemies were commonly practiced in ancient war, and the number told indicated the glory of the victory.
Saul's willingness to accept a public service had an air of liberality, while his choice of so difficult and hazardous a service seemed only putting a proper value on gaining the hand of a king's daughter. But he covered unprincipled malice against David under this proposal, which exhibited a zeal for G-d and the covenant of circumcision.
Michal, whom Saul intended to become a snare to David, turned out to be a strong supporter of David. G-d overrules human plans. He appropriates even the evil intentions of mankind for the fulfillment of his ultimate plan of salvation.
David vs Goliath
[1 Sam. !6:40] And he took his staff in his hand, and chose him five smooth stones out of the brook, and put them in a shepherd's bag which he had, even in a scrip; and his sling was in his hand: and he drew near to the Philistine.
Saul, because he was Israel’s first king had to face many odds – a disorganized people divided into several tribal groups. These had first to be united. They were a people with no military training and with no up-to-date weapons, with powerful enemies round, about, and experiencing conflict with the old power structure of the judges.
David had the advantage also of being trained in Saul’s royal circle as an armourbearer and a commander over the men of war, as well as being the king’s son-in-law. Consequently, from an organizational standpoint David did not have to start from scratch; much of what Saul had built up was now available for David’s use.
David was primarily recruited into Saul’s military service, true to what was said about Saul in 14:52. That Saul later set him over the men of war (18:5) to become a commander of a thousand (18: 13) speaks in support of this tradition. According to the other tradition, the musician-cum-shepherd David was brought to Saul’s court mainly to play music whenever the evil spirit tormented Saul verse 23. Only in 17:32-54 is David described as a boy.
David’s experiences of valor hitherto have been with lions and bears. There were two different reencounters, for those animals prowl alone. The bear must have been a Syrian bear, which is believed to be a distinct species, or perhaps a variety, of the brown bear. The beard applies to the lion alone. Those feats seem to have been performed with no weapons more effective than the rude staves and stones of the field, or his shepherd's crook.
David choose to stand up for G-d’s honor though a youth, he was the only one to show faith and courage. David went in the name of the L-rd of host.
The shepherd’s scrip is a bag made of skin, carried over the shepherd’s shoulder by means of a heavy cord, in which he carries his supply of bread, olives, cheese, dried figs and parched grain. Sometimes these bags are crudely made of raw skins, but quite often they are made of well-tanned and attractively dyed leather with exquisitely embroidered designs. Merchants carry their money and other valuables in scrip’s. Shepherds use it not only to carry supplies for their own needs but also emergency items for the care of injured or sick sheep, since they must be both physician and surgeon to their flocks. The emphasis here is that it is not so much David who is going to fight, but the L-rd.
Brook - wady.
Bag or scrip for containing his daily food.
The sling consisted of a double rope with a thong, probably of leather, to receive the stone. The slinger held a second stone in his left hand. David chose five stones, as a reserve, in case Goliath four brothers came at him. Shepherds in the East carry a sling and stones still, for the purpose of driving away, or killing, the enemies that prowl about the flock.
When the two champions met, they generally made each of them a speech, and sometimes recited some verses, filled with allusions and epithets of the most opprobrious kind, hurling contempt and defiance at one another. This kind of abusive dialogue is common among the Arab combatants still. David's speech, however, presents a striking contrast to the usual strain of these invectives. It was full of pious trust, and to G-d he ascribed all the glory of the triumph he anticipated.
Sounds kind of like politicians today, don’t it.
David cuts off Goliath’s head with the enemy’s own sword. That all this assembly may know that the L-rd saves not with sword and spear; for the battle is the L-rd’s!
Do you have a Goliath in your life? Turn it over to G-d and let Him fight it for you!
The story of David and Goliath stands for all times as a paradigm for the encounter between the power of the Spirit, which is the power of G-d, and the power of the flesh, which is the power of the world. It is the encounter between righteousness and unrighteousness, liberation and oppression. The power of the Spirit will ultimately triumph in human history. That is the vital message of this paradigm.
Saul, because he was Israel’s first king had to face many odds – a disorganized people divided into several tribal groups. These had first to be united. They were a people with no military training and with no up-to-date weapons, with powerful enemies round, about, and experiencing conflict with the old power structure of the judges.
David had the advantage also of being trained in Saul’s royal circle as an armourbearer and a commander over the men of war, as well as being the king’s son-in-law. Consequently, from an organizational standpoint David did not have to start from scratch; much of what Saul had built up was now available for David’s use.
David was primarily recruited into Saul’s military service, true to what was said about Saul in 14:52. That Saul later set him over the men of war (18:5) to become a commander of a thousand (18: 13) speaks in support of this tradition. According to the other tradition, the musician-cum-shepherd David was brought to Saul’s court mainly to play music whenever the evil spirit tormented Saul verse 23. Only in 17:32-54 is David described as a boy.
David’s experiences of valor hitherto have been with lions and bears. There were two different reencounters, for those animals prowl alone. The bear must have been a Syrian bear, which is believed to be a distinct species, or perhaps a variety, of the brown bear. The beard applies to the lion alone. Those feats seem to have been performed with no weapons more effective than the rude staves and stones of the field, or his shepherd's crook.
David choose to stand up for G-d’s honor though a youth, he was the only one to show faith and courage. David went in the name of the L-rd of host.
The shepherd’s scrip is a bag made of skin, carried over the shepherd’s shoulder by means of a heavy cord, in which he carries his supply of bread, olives, cheese, dried figs and parched grain. Sometimes these bags are crudely made of raw skins, but quite often they are made of well-tanned and attractively dyed leather with exquisitely embroidered designs. Merchants carry their money and other valuables in scrip’s. Shepherds use it not only to carry supplies for their own needs but also emergency items for the care of injured or sick sheep, since they must be both physician and surgeon to their flocks. The emphasis here is that it is not so much David who is going to fight, but the L-rd.
Brook - wady.
Bag or scrip for containing his daily food.
The sling consisted of a double rope with a thong, probably of leather, to receive the stone. The slinger held a second stone in his left hand. David chose five stones, as a reserve, in case Goliath four brothers came at him. Shepherds in the East carry a sling and stones still, for the purpose of driving away, or killing, the enemies that prowl about the flock.
When the two champions met, they generally made each of them a speech, and sometimes recited some verses, filled with allusions and epithets of the most opprobrious kind, hurling contempt and defiance at one another. This kind of abusive dialogue is common among the Arab combatants still. David's speech, however, presents a striking contrast to the usual strain of these invectives. It was full of pious trust, and to G-d he ascribed all the glory of the triumph he anticipated.
Sounds kind of like politicians today, don’t it.
David cuts off Goliath’s head with the enemy’s own sword. That all this assembly may know that the L-rd saves not with sword and spear; for the battle is the L-rd’s!
Do you have a Goliath in your life? Turn it over to G-d and let Him fight it for you!
The story of David and Goliath stands for all times as a paradigm for the encounter between the power of the Spirit, which is the power of G-d, and the power of the flesh, which is the power of the world. It is the encounter between righteousness and unrighteousness, liberation and oppression. The power of the Spirit will ultimately triumph in human history. That is the vital message of this paradigm.
Obey is better than Sacrifice
[1 Sam. 15:22] And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.
[27] And as Samuel turned about to go away, he laid hold upon the skirt of his mantle, and it rent.
The faith response in Israelite religion lacked in rational and moral content. G-d’s words (commandments), whether they are rationally acceptable (explainable) or not, whether they sound moral or amoral must be obeyed. Obedience was thus regarded as the highest virtue in religion!
14-15, 22 the message of the writing of prophets in perfunctory acts of worship and ritual, apart from diligent obedience, were basically worthless to G-d and the individual. What was needed was a whole new heart attitude as the proper preparation for meeting G-d, and then real sacrifices could be offered. Deceptive was the nation’s trust in this hollow worship that G-d had wanted more than sacrifices; He wanted the people to trust Him.
Samuel’s rebuke belongs to the same class of complaints. It was couched in poetry and it also had a proverbial form. Thus its absolute moral truth must be understood comparatively, even though the full form was not always stated that way. The proverb was stated in terms that call for setting priorities. This first and then that, ‘better’ directly point to such a priority.
G-d does approve of sacrificing, but He does not wish to have it at the expense of full obedience to His Word or as a substitute for a personal relationship of love and trust.
What use is performing outward acts of religion with all of its bits and pieces if that religious activity is not grounded in an obedient heart of faith? True religious affection for G-d begins in the heart and not in acts of worship or the accompanying vestments and ritual!
As Samuel turned from pronouncing G-d’s judgment upon Saul, the king grasped at the “skirt of {Samuel’s} mantle, (tattit), and it rent”. A more accurate translation of this statement would aid in its interpretation “…he caught the corner of Samuel’s mantle, and it tore” The word skirt is actually kanaph, which means “wing or corner”. It was the tzitzit that Saul grasped, and in his desperation ripped, from the corner of Samuel’s tallit, or mantle. In this case, the word for mantle is meil, which meant a robe, a garment worn over a tunic by men of rank. Samuel made this prediction on the basis of Saul’s act of ripping the tzitzit from the corner of his mantle: “The L-rd has rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbor of yours, that is better than you.” Just as Saul had grasped and torn the outward symbol of Samuel’s authority with G-d, so G-d would remove the monarchial dynasty from the house of Saul and give it to another. Just as the very act of ripping the tzitzit from the tallit rendered it ceremonially invalid, so Saul’s leadership of Israel would be invalid.]
it is said that the L-rd repented for making Saul king. The Glory of Israel is one of the titles for Yahweh. That Yahweh is not a man but G-d is an important theme in the OT. It can be affirmed from the start that G-d’s essence and character, His resolute determination to punish sin and to reward virtue are unchanging (Mal. 3:6). This does not mean that all His promises and warnings are unconditional. Many turn on either an expressed or an implied condition.
A classic example of this conditional teaching is Jer. 18:7-10. “If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, than I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, and if it does evil in My sight and does not obey Me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.”
Therefore, whenever G-d does not fulfill a promise or execute a threat that He has made, the explanation is obvious: in all of these cases, the change has not come in G-d, but in the individual or nation.
Of course some of G-d’s promises are unconditional for they rest solely on His mercy and grace. These would be His covenant with the seasons after Noah’s flood in Gen. 8:22, His promise of salvation in the oft-repeated covenant to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and David; His promise of the New Covenant; and His promise of the New Heaven and the New Earth.
If G-d is unchangeable, why did He repent or grieve over the fact that He had made Saul king? G-d is not a frozen robot that cannot respond to persons; He is a living person who can and does react to others as much, and more genuinely, than we do to each other. Thus the same word repent, is used for two different concepts both in this passage and elsewhere in the Bible. One shows His responsiveness to individuals and the other show His steadfastness to Himself and to His thoughts and designs.
G-d changed His actions toward Saul in order to remain true to His character or essence. Repentance in G-d is not, as it is in us, an evidence of indecisiveness. It is rather a change in His method of responding to another person based on some change in the other individual. The change, then, was in Saul. The problem was in Saul’s partial obedience, his wayward heart and covetousness.
While G-d repented that He had given Saul the kingdom along with its honor and power, He did not repent giving him wisdom and grace or his fear and love; indeed, the gifts and callings of G-d are without repentance.
To assert that G-d is unchanging does not mean He cannot experience regret, grief and repentance. G-d enters into a relationship with mortal beings that demonstrates His willingness to respond to each person’s action within the ethical sphere of their obedience to His will.
When our sin or repentance change our relationship with G-d, His changing responses to us no more affect His essential happiness or blessedness than Messiah’s deity affects His ability genuinely to suffer on the cross for our sins.
[27] And as Samuel turned about to go away, he laid hold upon the skirt of his mantle, and it rent.
The faith response in Israelite religion lacked in rational and moral content. G-d’s words (commandments), whether they are rationally acceptable (explainable) or not, whether they sound moral or amoral must be obeyed. Obedience was thus regarded as the highest virtue in religion!
14-15, 22 the message of the writing of prophets in perfunctory acts of worship and ritual, apart from diligent obedience, were basically worthless to G-d and the individual. What was needed was a whole new heart attitude as the proper preparation for meeting G-d, and then real sacrifices could be offered. Deceptive was the nation’s trust in this hollow worship that G-d had wanted more than sacrifices; He wanted the people to trust Him.
Samuel’s rebuke belongs to the same class of complaints. It was couched in poetry and it also had a proverbial form. Thus its absolute moral truth must be understood comparatively, even though the full form was not always stated that way. The proverb was stated in terms that call for setting priorities. This first and then that, ‘better’ directly point to such a priority.
G-d does approve of sacrificing, but He does not wish to have it at the expense of full obedience to His Word or as a substitute for a personal relationship of love and trust.
What use is performing outward acts of religion with all of its bits and pieces if that religious activity is not grounded in an obedient heart of faith? True religious affection for G-d begins in the heart and not in acts of worship or the accompanying vestments and ritual!
As Samuel turned from pronouncing G-d’s judgment upon Saul, the king grasped at the “skirt of {Samuel’s} mantle, (tattit), and it rent”. A more accurate translation of this statement would aid in its interpretation “…he caught the corner of Samuel’s mantle, and it tore” The word skirt is actually kanaph, which means “wing or corner”. It was the tzitzit that Saul grasped, and in his desperation ripped, from the corner of Samuel’s tallit, or mantle. In this case, the word for mantle is meil, which meant a robe, a garment worn over a tunic by men of rank. Samuel made this prediction on the basis of Saul’s act of ripping the tzitzit from the corner of his mantle: “The L-rd has rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbor of yours, that is better than you.” Just as Saul had grasped and torn the outward symbol of Samuel’s authority with G-d, so G-d would remove the monarchial dynasty from the house of Saul and give it to another. Just as the very act of ripping the tzitzit from the tallit rendered it ceremonially invalid, so Saul’s leadership of Israel would be invalid.]
it is said that the L-rd repented for making Saul king. The Glory of Israel is one of the titles for Yahweh. That Yahweh is not a man but G-d is an important theme in the OT. It can be affirmed from the start that G-d’s essence and character, His resolute determination to punish sin and to reward virtue are unchanging (Mal. 3:6). This does not mean that all His promises and warnings are unconditional. Many turn on either an expressed or an implied condition.
A classic example of this conditional teaching is Jer. 18:7-10. “If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, than I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, and if it does evil in My sight and does not obey Me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.”
Therefore, whenever G-d does not fulfill a promise or execute a threat that He has made, the explanation is obvious: in all of these cases, the change has not come in G-d, but in the individual or nation.
Of course some of G-d’s promises are unconditional for they rest solely on His mercy and grace. These would be His covenant with the seasons after Noah’s flood in Gen. 8:22, His promise of salvation in the oft-repeated covenant to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and David; His promise of the New Covenant; and His promise of the New Heaven and the New Earth.
If G-d is unchangeable, why did He repent or grieve over the fact that He had made Saul king? G-d is not a frozen robot that cannot respond to persons; He is a living person who can and does react to others as much, and more genuinely, than we do to each other. Thus the same word repent, is used for two different concepts both in this passage and elsewhere in the Bible. One shows His responsiveness to individuals and the other show His steadfastness to Himself and to His thoughts and designs.
G-d changed His actions toward Saul in order to remain true to His character or essence. Repentance in G-d is not, as it is in us, an evidence of indecisiveness. It is rather a change in His method of responding to another person based on some change in the other individual. The change, then, was in Saul. The problem was in Saul’s partial obedience, his wayward heart and covetousness.
While G-d repented that He had given Saul the kingdom along with its honor and power, He did not repent giving him wisdom and grace or his fear and love; indeed, the gifts and callings of G-d are without repentance.
To assert that G-d is unchanging does not mean He cannot experience regret, grief and repentance. G-d enters into a relationship with mortal beings that demonstrates His willingness to respond to each person’s action within the ethical sphere of their obedience to His will.
When our sin or repentance change our relationship with G-d, His changing responses to us no more affect His essential happiness or blessedness than Messiah’s deity affects His ability genuinely to suffer on the cross for our sins.
President, King & Lawgiver
[1 Sam. 8:18] And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.
[19] Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said,
Nay; but we will have a king over us;
Kings in Israel were not meant to dominate and oppress people; they were called to guide and serve people as shepherds and servants. This image of an ideal king in Israel was slowly ascribed to the Messianic King, under whose rule people could live with equity and justice. The true meaning of kingship in Israel eventually flowers in the title of Y’Shua as the Servant King who came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many (Mk. 10:45).
[The people persisted in their demands and would not listen to Yahweh’s voice. Finally, Yahweh yielded and asked Samuel to make them a king. This tradition is picked up again in 10:17. They sneered at Samuel's description as a concern to frighten them. Determined, at all hazards, to gain their object, they insisted on being made like all the other nations, though it was their glory and happiness to be unlike other nations in having the L-rd for their King and Lawgiver (Numbers 23:9, Deuteronomy 33:28). Their demand was conceded, for the government of a king had been provided for in the law; and they were dismissed to wait the appointment, which G-d had reserved to Himself (Deuteronomy 17:14-20).
The people desire to be like all the nations blinded their reason, and they insisted on having a king. Egoistic human pursuits blind reason. People in such pursuits do not see the consequences of their decisions and actions, only to regret them later.
Saul is introduced here as a Benjaminite, tall and handsome, suited to be a hero in every respect. He had a fine appearance; for it is evident that he must have been only a little less than seven feet tall. A gigantic stature and an athletic frame must have been a popular recommendation at that time in that country.
G-d gave him another heart iInfluenced by the words of Samuel, as well as by the accomplishment of these signs, Saul's reluctance to undertake the onerous office was overcome. The fulfillments of the two first signs (10:7,8) is passed over, but the third is specially described. The spectacle of a man, though more fit to look after his father's cattle than to take part in the sacred exercises of the young prophets - a man without any previous instruction, or any known taste, entering with passion into the spirit, and skillfully accompanying the melodies of the sacred band, was so extraordinary a phenomenon, that it gave rise to the proverb, "Is Saul also among the prophets?" (19:24). The prophetic spirit had come upon him; and to Saul it was as personal and experimental an evidence of the truth of G-d's word that had been spoken to him.
Later, when Saul’s kingship was rejected, the spirit left him (16:14), but it came upon David. This shows that the Israelite kingship was originally meant to be a charismatic kingship and not a hereditary monarchy as it later turned out to be.
A servant of G-d, when called to serve his people, is thereupon endowed with the spirit of G-d, in order that he or she may carry out the will of G-d…no one comprehends the thoughts of G-d except the Spirit of G-d. Saul was elected through the process of casting lots, most likely using Urim and Thummim. It was a process of elimination – first of the tribes, then of the clans, and then of the families. The lot could give only a yes or a no answer.
[1 Sam. 12:5] And he said unto them, The LORD is witness against you, and his anointed is witness this day, that ye have not found ought in my hand. And they answered, He is witness.
The L-rd is witness against you, and his anointed is witness - that, by their own acknowledgment, he had given them no cause to weary of the divine government by judges, and that, therefore, the blame of desiring a change of government rested with themselves. This was only insinuating, and they did not fully perceive his drift.
Folks we asked for a different government and for a president, now we shall reap what we have sown.
[19] Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said,
Nay; but we will have a king over us;
Kings in Israel were not meant to dominate and oppress people; they were called to guide and serve people as shepherds and servants. This image of an ideal king in Israel was slowly ascribed to the Messianic King, under whose rule people could live with equity and justice. The true meaning of kingship in Israel eventually flowers in the title of Y’Shua as the Servant King who came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many (Mk. 10:45).
[The people persisted in their demands and would not listen to Yahweh’s voice. Finally, Yahweh yielded and asked Samuel to make them a king. This tradition is picked up again in 10:17. They sneered at Samuel's description as a concern to frighten them. Determined, at all hazards, to gain their object, they insisted on being made like all the other nations, though it was their glory and happiness to be unlike other nations in having the L-rd for their King and Lawgiver (Numbers 23:9, Deuteronomy 33:28). Their demand was conceded, for the government of a king had been provided for in the law; and they were dismissed to wait the appointment, which G-d had reserved to Himself (Deuteronomy 17:14-20).
The people desire to be like all the nations blinded their reason, and they insisted on having a king. Egoistic human pursuits blind reason. People in such pursuits do not see the consequences of their decisions and actions, only to regret them later.
Saul is introduced here as a Benjaminite, tall and handsome, suited to be a hero in every respect. He had a fine appearance; for it is evident that he must have been only a little less than seven feet tall. A gigantic stature and an athletic frame must have been a popular recommendation at that time in that country.
G-d gave him another heart iInfluenced by the words of Samuel, as well as by the accomplishment of these signs, Saul's reluctance to undertake the onerous office was overcome. The fulfillments of the two first signs (10:7,8) is passed over, but the third is specially described. The spectacle of a man, though more fit to look after his father's cattle than to take part in the sacred exercises of the young prophets - a man without any previous instruction, or any known taste, entering with passion into the spirit, and skillfully accompanying the melodies of the sacred band, was so extraordinary a phenomenon, that it gave rise to the proverb, "Is Saul also among the prophets?" (19:24). The prophetic spirit had come upon him; and to Saul it was as personal and experimental an evidence of the truth of G-d's word that had been spoken to him.
Later, when Saul’s kingship was rejected, the spirit left him (16:14), but it came upon David. This shows that the Israelite kingship was originally meant to be a charismatic kingship and not a hereditary monarchy as it later turned out to be.
A servant of G-d, when called to serve his people, is thereupon endowed with the spirit of G-d, in order that he or she may carry out the will of G-d…no one comprehends the thoughts of G-d except the Spirit of G-d. Saul was elected through the process of casting lots, most likely using Urim and Thummim. It was a process of elimination – first of the tribes, then of the clans, and then of the families. The lot could give only a yes or a no answer.
[1 Sam. 12:5] And he said unto them, The LORD is witness against you, and his anointed is witness this day, that ye have not found ought in my hand. And they answered, He is witness.
The L-rd is witness against you, and his anointed is witness - that, by their own acknowledgment, he had given them no cause to weary of the divine government by judges, and that, therefore, the blame of desiring a change of government rested with themselves. This was only insinuating, and they did not fully perceive his drift.
Folks we asked for a different government and for a president, now we shall reap what we have sown.
Heathens Return Ark
[1 Sam. 5:4] Then said they, What shall be the trespass offering which we shall return to him? They answered, Five golden emerods, and five golden mice, according to the number of the lords of the Philistines: for one plague was on you all, and on your lords.
It denotes primarily compensation or reparation for the infringement of the rights of another or for the misappropriation of one’s property. Here the Philistines have misappropriated Yahweh’s ark; that is their sin.
The guilt offering consisted of five golden tumors and five golden mice, one each for every Philistine city ruled by one of the ‘lords’; the five cities are Ashdod, Gaza, Ashkelon, Gath, and Ekron (1 Sam. 6:17).
Five Emerods, (hemorrhoids), thank offerings were commonly made by the heathen in prayer for, or gratitude after, deliverance from lingering or dangerous disorders, in the form of metallic (generally silver) models or images of the diseased parts of the body. This is common still in Roman Catholic countries, as well as in the temples of the Hindus and other modern heathen.
Five golden mice, this animal is supposed by some to be the jerboa or jumping mouse of Syria and Egypt; by others, to be the short-tailed field mouse, which often swarms in unusual numbers and commits great ravages in the cultivated fields of Palestine.
Glory unto the G-d of Israel by these propitiatory presents, the Philistines would acknowledge His power and make reparation for the injury done to His ark
Their object in making a new one for the purpose seems to have been not only for cleanliness and neatness, but from an impression that there would have been an impropriety in using one that had been applied to meaner or more common services.
It appears to have been a covered wagon.
Two milch kine such untrained heifers, wanton and vagrant would pursue no certain and regular path, like those accustomed to the yoke, and therefore were most unlikely of their own spontaneous motion to indict the direct road to the land of Israel.
Bring their calves’ home from them, the strong natural affection of the dams might be supposed to stimulate their return homewards, rather than direct their steps in a foreign country.
The Philistines are required to prepare a new cart and two milch cows upon which there has never come a yoke (Num. 19:2; Deut. 21:3). When the ark is placed in the cart, the cart and the cows come into contact with is placed in the cart, the cart and the cows come into contact with the ark and thus become holy too; therefore they cannot be used for any other purpose. That is why the cows and the wood of the cart were later offered as burnt offerings to Yahweh (6:14).
The purpose of taking the calves’ home, away from them was to find out whether the cows were moved by their natural motherly instinct of following their own calves or whether they were animated by the spirit of Yahweh. The priest and diviners are not 100 percent sure if the plagues were caused by the spirit of the G-d of Israel. They use this trial-and-error method to determine whether the plagues were actually caused by the G-d of Israel or whether they happened by chance. If the cows were moved by their natural instinct and returned to their calves, then it was evident that the plagues happened by chance; but if the cows moved against the natural instinct and went towards Israel to Beth-shemesh, then it was a clear indication that they were animated by the spirit of Yahweh and that Yahweh was the cause of the plagues.
This mode of carrying the sacred symbol was forbidden; but the ignorance of the Philistines made the indignity excusable
Put the jewels . . . in a coffer by the side thereof it was the way of securing treasure in the East is still in a chest, chained to the house wall or some solid part of the furniture.
When the Ephraimites were defeated by the Philistines, it is possible that the ark was brought to Beth-shemesh, the border town, and there it received cultic treatment. Due to the unfortunate events happening in Beth-shemesh, for which the ark was considered to be the cause, the ark was sent to Kiriath-jearim, a Canaanite city (1 Sam. 6:21). Beth-shemesh - "house of the sun," now Ain Shems, a city of priests in Judah, in the southeast border of Dan, lying in a beautiful and extensive valley. Josephus says they were set
a-going near a place where the road divided into two - the one leading back to Ekron, where were their calves, and the other to Beth-shemesh. Their frequent lowing attested their keen longing for their young and at the same time the supernatural influence that controlled their movements in a contrary direction.
Imagine this, they took two milk cows and shut up the calves to restrain them from following the cows, which would disturb them in drawing the cart. Can you hear the calves crying for their mother? They set the ark of the L-RD on the cart, and the chest with the gold rats and the images of their hemorrhoids. Can you imagine they put mice and hemorrhoids in G-d’s holy ark!
Straight way - What a miracle! Two cows who had never pulled a cart before, either alone or together. No driver leads them, yet they leave home, and march the ten miles or so to a city they had never been to. They leave their own calves behind, and go straight on a certain road, with never a wrong turn, never a stop, never turning aside into the fields to feed themselves, never turning back to feed their own calves.
Lowing as they went means the cows were not especially happy. They were longing for their calves at home, yet they still did the will of G-d.
The lords of the Philistines went after them to give their tribute of homage, to prevent imposture, and to obtain the most reliable evidence of the truth. The result of this journey tended to their own deeper humiliation, and the greater illustration of G-d's glory.
As the cows are on the road back to Israel, can you see the Israelites mourning over the loss of the ark? Perhaps at that very moment they were crying out to G-d, grieving because they thought the glory had departed. G-d's glory had left anywhere! The Israelites and the Philistines were both resisting Him, so the L-RD found a few cows to show His glory through! Israel had no reason to mourn, even though they thought all was lost and there was no hope, because they thought the glory had departed.
Field of Joshua after being guided for some ten miles from the Philistine city, without stopping or go to one side or the other, now the ark stops in Israelite land, at the exact field of one chosen man.
Great Stone was probably a cultic center, and the stone was the altar.
And they clave - that is, the Beth-shemites, in an irrepressible outburst of joy, they split the wood of the cart; nothing was left all to return.
Offered the kine offered the cows as a burnt offering: They knew this was the right thing to do in honor to G-d, yet it really cost them something. Cows and carts were expensive property.
In a burnt offering everything is offered to G-d, noting is left for the use of the priest or the devotees.
In a strict sense, their offering was against the Mosaic Law. First, they offered female animals to G-d, which was forbidden (Leviticus 1:3; 22:19). Second, they made a burnt offering to G-d away from the Tabernacle, which violated the command in Deuteronomy 12:5-6 (though, since the Ark of the Covenant was there, it might be said that the holy place was "there"). Yet, G-d knew both their hearts and the remarkable circumstances and was no doubt honored.
The Holy Ark was not touched by ordinary people, but by the sanctified Levites. They along could touch the sacred ark and the box which contained the guilt offerings. They took up the ark and the box and set them down, not on any common place but on the great stone, which as a cultic stone was obviously holy.
They had wondered if all what had happened to them while they had the ark was an accident. So, they set up an elaborate and difficult test for
G-d to fulfill, and the personally observed, to see if G-d would indeed meet the test. Their reaction isn't recorded, but they must have been persuaded! The L-RD G-d of Israel had glorified Himself before the Philistines!
In the ecstasy of delight at seeing the return of the ark, the Beth-shemesh reapers pried into it beneath the wagon cover; and instead of covering it up again, as a sacred utensil, they let it remain exposed to common inspection, wishing it to be seen, in order that all might enjoy the triumph of seeing the votive offerings presented to it, and gratify curiosity with the sight of the sacred shrine. This was the offense of those Israelites (Levites, as well as common people), who had treated the ark with less reverence than the Philistines themselves.
Because some people of Beth-shemesh looked into the ark of the L-rd, it is said that Yahweh slew seventy men of them. The Hebrew text reads of the people seventy men, fifty thousand men. Fifty thousand men is an exaggeration, and it is probably a gloss. This section stand in contrast to the proceeding section, which speaks of the good natured people of Beth-shemiesh who rejoiced at the coming of the ark. A reason for the death : ‘now the sons of Jeconiah rejoiced not with the other men when they beheld the ark of Yahweh, and he slew them seventy men.’ There were two traditions. According to one, seventy men were killed, and according to the other the whole village of fifty thousand men were killed. G-d, instead of decimating, according to an ancient usage, slew only a twentieth part; that is, according to Josephus, seventy out of fourteen hundred (see Numbers 4:18-22).
It denotes primarily compensation or reparation for the infringement of the rights of another or for the misappropriation of one’s property. Here the Philistines have misappropriated Yahweh’s ark; that is their sin.
The guilt offering consisted of five golden tumors and five golden mice, one each for every Philistine city ruled by one of the ‘lords’; the five cities are Ashdod, Gaza, Ashkelon, Gath, and Ekron (1 Sam. 6:17).
Five Emerods, (hemorrhoids), thank offerings were commonly made by the heathen in prayer for, or gratitude after, deliverance from lingering or dangerous disorders, in the form of metallic (generally silver) models or images of the diseased parts of the body. This is common still in Roman Catholic countries, as well as in the temples of the Hindus and other modern heathen.
Five golden mice, this animal is supposed by some to be the jerboa or jumping mouse of Syria and Egypt; by others, to be the short-tailed field mouse, which often swarms in unusual numbers and commits great ravages in the cultivated fields of Palestine.
Glory unto the G-d of Israel by these propitiatory presents, the Philistines would acknowledge His power and make reparation for the injury done to His ark
Their object in making a new one for the purpose seems to have been not only for cleanliness and neatness, but from an impression that there would have been an impropriety in using one that had been applied to meaner or more common services.
It appears to have been a covered wagon.
Two milch kine such untrained heifers, wanton and vagrant would pursue no certain and regular path, like those accustomed to the yoke, and therefore were most unlikely of their own spontaneous motion to indict the direct road to the land of Israel.
Bring their calves’ home from them, the strong natural affection of the dams might be supposed to stimulate their return homewards, rather than direct their steps in a foreign country.
The Philistines are required to prepare a new cart and two milch cows upon which there has never come a yoke (Num. 19:2; Deut. 21:3). When the ark is placed in the cart, the cart and the cows come into contact with is placed in the cart, the cart and the cows come into contact with the ark and thus become holy too; therefore they cannot be used for any other purpose. That is why the cows and the wood of the cart were later offered as burnt offerings to Yahweh (6:14).
The purpose of taking the calves’ home, away from them was to find out whether the cows were moved by their natural motherly instinct of following their own calves or whether they were animated by the spirit of Yahweh. The priest and diviners are not 100 percent sure if the plagues were caused by the spirit of the G-d of Israel. They use this trial-and-error method to determine whether the plagues were actually caused by the G-d of Israel or whether they happened by chance. If the cows were moved by their natural instinct and returned to their calves, then it was evident that the plagues happened by chance; but if the cows moved against the natural instinct and went towards Israel to Beth-shemesh, then it was a clear indication that they were animated by the spirit of Yahweh and that Yahweh was the cause of the plagues.
This mode of carrying the sacred symbol was forbidden; but the ignorance of the Philistines made the indignity excusable
Put the jewels . . . in a coffer by the side thereof it was the way of securing treasure in the East is still in a chest, chained to the house wall or some solid part of the furniture.
When the Ephraimites were defeated by the Philistines, it is possible that the ark was brought to Beth-shemesh, the border town, and there it received cultic treatment. Due to the unfortunate events happening in Beth-shemesh, for which the ark was considered to be the cause, the ark was sent to Kiriath-jearim, a Canaanite city (1 Sam. 6:21). Beth-shemesh - "house of the sun," now Ain Shems, a city of priests in Judah, in the southeast border of Dan, lying in a beautiful and extensive valley. Josephus says they were set
a-going near a place where the road divided into two - the one leading back to Ekron, where were their calves, and the other to Beth-shemesh. Their frequent lowing attested their keen longing for their young and at the same time the supernatural influence that controlled their movements in a contrary direction.
Imagine this, they took two milk cows and shut up the calves to restrain them from following the cows, which would disturb them in drawing the cart. Can you hear the calves crying for their mother? They set the ark of the L-RD on the cart, and the chest with the gold rats and the images of their hemorrhoids. Can you imagine they put mice and hemorrhoids in G-d’s holy ark!
Straight way - What a miracle! Two cows who had never pulled a cart before, either alone or together. No driver leads them, yet they leave home, and march the ten miles or so to a city they had never been to. They leave their own calves behind, and go straight on a certain road, with never a wrong turn, never a stop, never turning aside into the fields to feed themselves, never turning back to feed their own calves.
Lowing as they went means the cows were not especially happy. They were longing for their calves at home, yet they still did the will of G-d.
The lords of the Philistines went after them to give their tribute of homage, to prevent imposture, and to obtain the most reliable evidence of the truth. The result of this journey tended to their own deeper humiliation, and the greater illustration of G-d's glory.
As the cows are on the road back to Israel, can you see the Israelites mourning over the loss of the ark? Perhaps at that very moment they were crying out to G-d, grieving because they thought the glory had departed. G-d's glory had left anywhere! The Israelites and the Philistines were both resisting Him, so the L-RD found a few cows to show His glory through! Israel had no reason to mourn, even though they thought all was lost and there was no hope, because they thought the glory had departed.
Field of Joshua after being guided for some ten miles from the Philistine city, without stopping or go to one side or the other, now the ark stops in Israelite land, at the exact field of one chosen man.
Great Stone was probably a cultic center, and the stone was the altar.
And they clave - that is, the Beth-shemites, in an irrepressible outburst of joy, they split the wood of the cart; nothing was left all to return.
Offered the kine offered the cows as a burnt offering: They knew this was the right thing to do in honor to G-d, yet it really cost them something. Cows and carts were expensive property.
In a burnt offering everything is offered to G-d, noting is left for the use of the priest or the devotees.
In a strict sense, their offering was against the Mosaic Law. First, they offered female animals to G-d, which was forbidden (Leviticus 1:3; 22:19). Second, they made a burnt offering to G-d away from the Tabernacle, which violated the command in Deuteronomy 12:5-6 (though, since the Ark of the Covenant was there, it might be said that the holy place was "there"). Yet, G-d knew both their hearts and the remarkable circumstances and was no doubt honored.
The Holy Ark was not touched by ordinary people, but by the sanctified Levites. They along could touch the sacred ark and the box which contained the guilt offerings. They took up the ark and the box and set them down, not on any common place but on the great stone, which as a cultic stone was obviously holy.
They had wondered if all what had happened to them while they had the ark was an accident. So, they set up an elaborate and difficult test for
G-d to fulfill, and the personally observed, to see if G-d would indeed meet the test. Their reaction isn't recorded, but they must have been persuaded! The L-RD G-d of Israel had glorified Himself before the Philistines!
In the ecstasy of delight at seeing the return of the ark, the Beth-shemesh reapers pried into it beneath the wagon cover; and instead of covering it up again, as a sacred utensil, they let it remain exposed to common inspection, wishing it to be seen, in order that all might enjoy the triumph of seeing the votive offerings presented to it, and gratify curiosity with the sight of the sacred shrine. This was the offense of those Israelites (Levites, as well as common people), who had treated the ark with less reverence than the Philistines themselves.
Because some people of Beth-shemesh looked into the ark of the L-rd, it is said that Yahweh slew seventy men of them. The Hebrew text reads of the people seventy men, fifty thousand men. Fifty thousand men is an exaggeration, and it is probably a gloss. This section stand in contrast to the proceeding section, which speaks of the good natured people of Beth-shemiesh who rejoiced at the coming of the ark. A reason for the death : ‘now the sons of Jeconiah rejoiced not with the other men when they beheld the ark of Yahweh, and he slew them seventy men.’ There were two traditions. According to one, seventy men were killed, and according to the other the whole village of fifty thousand men were killed. G-d, instead of decimating, according to an ancient usage, slew only a twentieth part; that is, according to Josephus, seventy out of fourteen hundred (see Numbers 4:18-22).
Ark vs Dagon
[1 Sam. 5:1] And the Philistines took the ark of God, and brought it from Eben-ezer unto Ashdod.
The capture of ark was brought from Ebenezer first to the Philistine city Ashdod and was kept here before the Philistine idol Dagon. In so doing the Philistines, just as the Israelites, committed the mistake of taking the symbol for the reality. They thought that by placing the ark before Dagon they could humiliate the G-d of the Israelites and assert Dagon’s superiority over him. Yahweh, who looks at the hearts of men and women, frustrated the Philistines intentions by creating panic among the people and by causing many deaths through plagues such as tumors, and mice. The ark was moved from one city to another, to all five cities of the Philistines, in the hope that such human adjustments would avert the plagues. But wherever the ark went there was a deathly panic throughout the whole city.
Ashdod or Azotus, one of the five Philistine satrapies, and a place of great strength. It was an inland town, thirty-four miles north of Gaza, now called Esdud.
The Israelites adapted the Canaanite sacrificial system and festivals and interpreted them in the context of their faith in Yahweh. Old Canaanite shrines were used for Yahweh worship. The worship of foreign deities such as Dagon was strictly prohibited. Since Baal and Ashtaroth were deities of a fertility cult, the Israelites, who were newly introduced to agriculture, were greatly tempted to worship them. Stately temples were erected in honor of this idol, which was the principal deity of the Philistines, but whose worship extended over all Syria, as well as Mesopotamia and Chaldea; its name being found among the Assyrian gods on the cuneiform inscriptions. It was represented under a hideous combination of a human head, breast, and arms, joined to the belly and tail of a fish. The captured ark was placed in the temple of Dagon, right before this image of the idol.
Ashdod lay midway betweren Joppa and Gaza. A village in that region still bears the name Eshdud today.
Arose early - They were filled with consternation when they found the object of their stupid reverence prostrate before the symbol of the divine presence. Though set up, it fell again, and lay in a state of complete mutilation; its head and arms, severed from the trunk, were lying in distant and separate places, as if violently cast off, and only the fishy part remained. The degradation of their idol, though concealed by the priests on the former occasion, was now more manifest and infamous. It lay in the attitude of a beaten enemy and a suppliant, and this picture of humiliation significantly declared the superiority of the G-d of Israel.
The temple of Dagon, said to have existed there, seems to have continued until the time of the Maccabees. There was another shrine of Dagon in Gaza. The nature and attributes of Dagon are not fully known to us. It is possible to relate this name to two Hebrew words – fish and corn.
The worship in Syria of the fish-god with the head and hands of a man and the body of a fish is well attested. This would make Dagon a fertility idol, the idol of the corn. He would be at home in the five grain growing cities of the plains of the Shephelah. Dagon fall, no head and no hands, only the trunk remained. This word trunk is not found in the Hebrew; it is supplied from the Targum and other ancient versions. One says that this half-fish and half human – leaped over the threshold are parallel by the Fish Gate. Such a ritual jumping over the threshold of temples was widely practiced in ancient times.
Yahweh proves to the Philistines to be more than the symbol of Yahweh’s presence, the ark, and the capture of the ark does not mean Dagon’s supremacy over him. This was symbolically indicated by the fact that the image of Dagon fell down before the ark and that its head and hands were cut off and were laying on the threshold of the temple. According to Philistine belief, the threshold itself now became holy in a special way.
The hand of the L-rd was heavy upon them of Ashdod - The presumption of the Ashdodites was punished by a severe judgment that overtook them in the form of a pestilence.
Emerods – tumors here are similar to the boils in Egypt. The Hebrew word for tumors is used elsewhere only in Deut. 28:27, where it refers to the boils in Egypt. Bleeding piles, hemorrhoids (Psalms 78:66), in a very irritated form. As the heathens generally regarded diseases affecting the secret parts of the body as punishments from the gods for trespasses committed against themselves, the Ashdodites would be the more ready to look upon the prevailing epidemic as demonstrating the anger of G-d, already shown against their idol.
The ark of G-d shall not abide with us - It was removed successively to several of the large towns of the country, but the same pestilence broke out in every place and raged so fiercely and fatally that the authorities were forced to send the ark back into the land of Israel (5:8-10).
So the ark was first sent to Gath and then to Ekron. 1 Sam. 6:17, however implies that the ark was sent to all five cities of the Philistines and that wherever it went the people were affected by the plagues. Ekron was the most northerly of the Philistine cities but the nearest one to the land of Israel.
Up to heaven is an idiomatic expression for prayers reaching to G-d. G-d answered their cry for all genuine cries of repentance and prayers reach Him, Acts 10:34-35.
The disease is attended with acute pain, and it is far from being a rare phenomenon in the Philistian plain.
The capture of ark was brought from Ebenezer first to the Philistine city Ashdod and was kept here before the Philistine idol Dagon. In so doing the Philistines, just as the Israelites, committed the mistake of taking the symbol for the reality. They thought that by placing the ark before Dagon they could humiliate the G-d of the Israelites and assert Dagon’s superiority over him. Yahweh, who looks at the hearts of men and women, frustrated the Philistines intentions by creating panic among the people and by causing many deaths through plagues such as tumors, and mice. The ark was moved from one city to another, to all five cities of the Philistines, in the hope that such human adjustments would avert the plagues. But wherever the ark went there was a deathly panic throughout the whole city.
Ashdod or Azotus, one of the five Philistine satrapies, and a place of great strength. It was an inland town, thirty-four miles north of Gaza, now called Esdud.
The Israelites adapted the Canaanite sacrificial system and festivals and interpreted them in the context of their faith in Yahweh. Old Canaanite shrines were used for Yahweh worship. The worship of foreign deities such as Dagon was strictly prohibited. Since Baal and Ashtaroth were deities of a fertility cult, the Israelites, who were newly introduced to agriculture, were greatly tempted to worship them. Stately temples were erected in honor of this idol, which was the principal deity of the Philistines, but whose worship extended over all Syria, as well as Mesopotamia and Chaldea; its name being found among the Assyrian gods on the cuneiform inscriptions. It was represented under a hideous combination of a human head, breast, and arms, joined to the belly and tail of a fish. The captured ark was placed in the temple of Dagon, right before this image of the idol.
Ashdod lay midway betweren Joppa and Gaza. A village in that region still bears the name Eshdud today.
Arose early - They were filled with consternation when they found the object of their stupid reverence prostrate before the symbol of the divine presence. Though set up, it fell again, and lay in a state of complete mutilation; its head and arms, severed from the trunk, were lying in distant and separate places, as if violently cast off, and only the fishy part remained. The degradation of their idol, though concealed by the priests on the former occasion, was now more manifest and infamous. It lay in the attitude of a beaten enemy and a suppliant, and this picture of humiliation significantly declared the superiority of the G-d of Israel.
The temple of Dagon, said to have existed there, seems to have continued until the time of the Maccabees. There was another shrine of Dagon in Gaza. The nature and attributes of Dagon are not fully known to us. It is possible to relate this name to two Hebrew words – fish and corn.
The worship in Syria of the fish-god with the head and hands of a man and the body of a fish is well attested. This would make Dagon a fertility idol, the idol of the corn. He would be at home in the five grain growing cities of the plains of the Shephelah. Dagon fall, no head and no hands, only the trunk remained. This word trunk is not found in the Hebrew; it is supplied from the Targum and other ancient versions. One says that this half-fish and half human – leaped over the threshold are parallel by the Fish Gate. Such a ritual jumping over the threshold of temples was widely practiced in ancient times.
Yahweh proves to the Philistines to be more than the symbol of Yahweh’s presence, the ark, and the capture of the ark does not mean Dagon’s supremacy over him. This was symbolically indicated by the fact that the image of Dagon fell down before the ark and that its head and hands were cut off and were laying on the threshold of the temple. According to Philistine belief, the threshold itself now became holy in a special way.
The hand of the L-rd was heavy upon them of Ashdod - The presumption of the Ashdodites was punished by a severe judgment that overtook them in the form of a pestilence.
Emerods – tumors here are similar to the boils in Egypt. The Hebrew word for tumors is used elsewhere only in Deut. 28:27, where it refers to the boils in Egypt. Bleeding piles, hemorrhoids (Psalms 78:66), in a very irritated form. As the heathens generally regarded diseases affecting the secret parts of the body as punishments from the gods for trespasses committed against themselves, the Ashdodites would be the more ready to look upon the prevailing epidemic as demonstrating the anger of G-d, already shown against their idol.
The ark of G-d shall not abide with us - It was removed successively to several of the large towns of the country, but the same pestilence broke out in every place and raged so fiercely and fatally that the authorities were forced to send the ark back into the land of Israel (5:8-10).
So the ark was first sent to Gath and then to Ekron. 1 Sam. 6:17, however implies that the ark was sent to all five cities of the Philistines and that wherever it went the people were affected by the plagues. Ekron was the most northerly of the Philistine cities but the nearest one to the land of Israel.
Up to heaven is an idiomatic expression for prayers reaching to G-d. G-d answered their cry for all genuine cries of repentance and prayers reach Him, Acts 10:34-35.
The disease is attended with acute pain, and it is far from being a rare phenomenon in the Philistian plain.
Mourning & Weeping
[1 Sam. 4:11] And the ark of God was taken; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were slain.
Ritual mourning and weeping was common practice mourning at personal tragedies, at the death of personal friends, relatives, and national heroes, and over national calamities. As a sign of deep grief clothes were rent. The head was not anointed with oil, but ashes or dust was put on the head. Fasting and lying on the ground were also used. Messengers of sad news arrived in mourning clothes.
13-22 deals with the news of the capture of the ark being brought to Eli and the people in Shiloh and its impact on Eli’s house. It is possible that these verses come from a different hand. Since these various sources all refer to the same historical incident, the historicity of that incident is thereby enhanced.
The fact that the destiny of the house of Eli is closely tied up with the ark indicates that this narrative in its present form should have come from the time of David, when the Zadokite priesthood of Eli’s lineage was still in active service. That also explains the positive attitude to the house of Eli here, as different from what is said in chp. 2 and 3. This means that the Eli account here is independent of the account in chp. 2 and 3.
Eli is presented here not only as the priest but also, for the first time, as the judge who judged Israel forty years. Seat himself daily in a spacious recess at the entrance gate of the city. In his intense anxiety to learn the issue of the battle, he took up his usual place as the most convenient for meeting with passers-by. His seat was an official chair, similar to those of the ancient Egyptian judges, richly carved, superbly ornamented, high, and without a back. The calamities announced to Samuel as about to fall upon the family of Eli (2:34) were now inflicted in the death of his two sons, and after his death, by that of his daughter-in-law, whose infant son received a name that perpetuated the fallen glory of the church and nation (4:19-22). The public disaster was completed by the capture of the ark. Poor Eli! He was a good man, in spite of his unhappy weaknesses. So strongly were his sensibilities enlisted on the side of religion, that the news of the capture of the ark proved to him a knell of death; and yet his overindulgence, or sad neglect of his family - the main cause of all the evils that led to its fall - has been recorded, as a beacon to warn all heads of believing families against making shipwreck on the same rock.
All the city cried out which perhaps refers to the national mourning. The news of the capture of the ark causes the immediate death of Eli, for his heart trembled for the ark of G-d. On hearing the shocking news of the capture of the ark and the death of her husband and father-in-law, Eli’s daughter-in-law, Phinehas wife, who was in full pregnancy, was overcome by pains and delivered of a son, whom she named before dying as Ichabod. This means literally no glory. This name was supposed to indicate that the glory has departed from Israel. The women greeted Eli’s daughter-in-law about the time of her death with the words fear not, for you have borne a son. These words seem to imply that because she had given birth to a son she could now die in peace, for she had achieved the purpose of her life. Bearing a male heir to the husband was regarded as the primary role of women in Israelite society. This was obviously the intention of the institution of levirate marriage (Gen. 38:1).
Naming children with symbolic meanings which have national, as well as cultic, significance was a practice known in Israel (Hos. 1:3-9). Naming the child in Israelite society was normally the privilege of the father; in later days, however, the woman also seemed to have had a say in the matter (Lk. 1:59-63). Here Phinehas’ wife named her child during a crisis when the father was no more and she herself was about to die.
Ritual mourning and weeping was common practice mourning at personal tragedies, at the death of personal friends, relatives, and national heroes, and over national calamities. As a sign of deep grief clothes were rent. The head was not anointed with oil, but ashes or dust was put on the head. Fasting and lying on the ground were also used. Messengers of sad news arrived in mourning clothes.
13-22 deals with the news of the capture of the ark being brought to Eli and the people in Shiloh and its impact on Eli’s house. It is possible that these verses come from a different hand. Since these various sources all refer to the same historical incident, the historicity of that incident is thereby enhanced.
The fact that the destiny of the house of Eli is closely tied up with the ark indicates that this narrative in its present form should have come from the time of David, when the Zadokite priesthood of Eli’s lineage was still in active service. That also explains the positive attitude to the house of Eli here, as different from what is said in chp. 2 and 3. This means that the Eli account here is independent of the account in chp. 2 and 3.
Eli is presented here not only as the priest but also, for the first time, as the judge who judged Israel forty years. Seat himself daily in a spacious recess at the entrance gate of the city. In his intense anxiety to learn the issue of the battle, he took up his usual place as the most convenient for meeting with passers-by. His seat was an official chair, similar to those of the ancient Egyptian judges, richly carved, superbly ornamented, high, and without a back. The calamities announced to Samuel as about to fall upon the family of Eli (2:34) were now inflicted in the death of his two sons, and after his death, by that of his daughter-in-law, whose infant son received a name that perpetuated the fallen glory of the church and nation (4:19-22). The public disaster was completed by the capture of the ark. Poor Eli! He was a good man, in spite of his unhappy weaknesses. So strongly were his sensibilities enlisted on the side of religion, that the news of the capture of the ark proved to him a knell of death; and yet his overindulgence, or sad neglect of his family - the main cause of all the evils that led to its fall - has been recorded, as a beacon to warn all heads of believing families against making shipwreck on the same rock.
All the city cried out which perhaps refers to the national mourning. The news of the capture of the ark causes the immediate death of Eli, for his heart trembled for the ark of G-d. On hearing the shocking news of the capture of the ark and the death of her husband and father-in-law, Eli’s daughter-in-law, Phinehas wife, who was in full pregnancy, was overcome by pains and delivered of a son, whom she named before dying as Ichabod. This means literally no glory. This name was supposed to indicate that the glory has departed from Israel. The women greeted Eli’s daughter-in-law about the time of her death with the words fear not, for you have borne a son. These words seem to imply that because she had given birth to a son she could now die in peace, for she had achieved the purpose of her life. Bearing a male heir to the husband was regarded as the primary role of women in Israelite society. This was obviously the intention of the institution of levirate marriage (Gen. 38:1).
Naming children with symbolic meanings which have national, as well as cultic, significance was a practice known in Israel (Hos. 1:3-9). Naming the child in Israelite society was normally the privilege of the father; in later days, however, the woman also seemed to have had a say in the matter (Lk. 1:59-63). Here Phinehas’ wife named her child during a crisis when the father was no more and she herself was about to die.
Here am I
[1 Sam. 3:1] And the child Samuel ministered unto the LORD before Eli. And the word of the LORD was precious in those days; there was no open vision.
Josephus says that Samuel had just completed his twelfth year, his ministry consisted, of course, of such duties in or about the sanctuary as were suited to his age. Whether the office had been specially assigned him, or it arose from the interest inspired by the story of his birth, Eli kept him as his immediate attendant; and he resided not in the Sanctuary, but in one of the tents or apartments around it, assigned for the accommodation of the priests and Levites, his being near to that of the high priest.
Word precious in those days was very rarely known to the Israelites; and in point of fact only two prophets are mentioned as having appeared during the whole administration of the judges (Judges 4:4, 6:8).
No open vision, no publicly recognized prophet whom the people could consult, and from whom they might learn the will of G-d. There must have been certain undoubted evidences by which a communication from heaven could be distinguished. Eli knew them, for he may have received them, though not as frequently as is implied in the idea of an "vision open."
The lamp of G-d had not yet gone out means it was the morning hours, but it was still dark and therefore the lamp had not yet been put out. The "Temple" seems to have become the established designation of the Tabernacle, and the time indicated was towards the morning twilight, as the lamps were extinguished at sunrise (Leviticus 6:12, 13).
The fact that Samuel could not identify the source of the voice points to the fact that there was nothing visual; he could only hear the voice. Samuel had heard the voice very clearly but instead of running to G-d he ran to Eli. Eli the priest was perhaps convinced that G-d would speak only through him. He was the one to receive any oracle from G-d and to communicate it to the people. He could not at first believe that G-d could also reveal his will to other people. Therefore, he rejected Samuel’s claim to have heard a call and tried to silence him and make him sleep. It took Eli some time (three is a symbolic number indicating fullness) before he realized that it could be that Yahweh was calling Samuel. Only then did he give proper instructions to Samuel as to how he should receive the call.
It is evident that his sleeping chamber was close to that of the aged high priest and that he was accustomed to be called during the night. The three successive calls addressed to the boy convinced Eli of the divine character of the speaker, and he therefore exhorted the child to give a respectful attention to the message. The burden of the L-rd's message was an extraordinary forewarning of the judgments that impended over Eli's house; and the aged priest, having drawn the painful secret from the child, exclaimed, "It is the L-rd; let him do what seemeth him good." Such is the spirit of meek and unmurmuring submission in which we ought to receive the dispensations of G-d, however severe and afflictive. But, in order to form a right estimate of Eli's language and conduct on this occasion, we must consider the overwhelming buildup of judgments denounced against his person, his sons, his descendants - his altar, and nation. With such a threatening prospect before him, his piety and meekness were wonderful. In his personal character he seems to have been a good man, but his sons' conduct was openly bad; and though his misfortunes claim our sympathy, it is impossible to approve or defend the weak and unfaithful course which, in the retreated justice of G-d, brought these adversities upon him.
Yahweh says to Samuel, ‘on that day I will fulfill against Eli all that I have spoken concerning his house, from beginning to end’. But according to 2:30, Yahweh has earlier promised to Eli, your house and the house of your father should go in and out before me forever.’ This promise of G-d is no longer honored; the house of Eli is now to be removed. The word of the L-rd is the medium of the communication of the will of G-d. The context of the word has now changed, and so also has the need for the will of G-d to be communicated differently. What came earlier to Eli as an oracle of salvation comes to him now as an oracle of doom. It does not change the content of the Word of G-d, namely, the ultimate purpose of G-d.
The word may be influenced and changed by its context. Thus Eli was only an instrument in the hand of G-d towards the fulfillment of the ultimate purpose of the salvation of his people; it had itself, become a hindrance to the people. Samuel was called to do something new in Israel, something different from what the house of Eli has done. Removal of oppressive structures precedes the creation of liberative structures.
Eli symbolizes institutional religion. The judgment against Eli is not a judgment against an individual person or family, by against a structure. It is against the priestly religion as a whole, which had failed in guiding people to G-d. The task of the priesthood is to guide people to G-d and to help them to abide in an active relation to G-d, and to handle matters according to His will. In this task Eli and his priestly religion had failed. Instead of leading people to G-d, they were leading the people to themselves, to listen to their own words and to act accordingly.
Eli is anxious to know what G-d told Samuel, and Samuel shares everything with him. Eli accepts G-d’s will and submits himself to it. With that Eli’s role comes to an end, though we do meet him again in 4:12-18.
The account of Samuel’s ministry begins. All people from Dan to Beer-sheba (from the whole land, from north to south) came to know him as a prophet. It is important that people who speak in the name of G-d first receive that word from G-d.
Josephus says that Samuel had just completed his twelfth year, his ministry consisted, of course, of such duties in or about the sanctuary as were suited to his age. Whether the office had been specially assigned him, or it arose from the interest inspired by the story of his birth, Eli kept him as his immediate attendant; and he resided not in the Sanctuary, but in one of the tents or apartments around it, assigned for the accommodation of the priests and Levites, his being near to that of the high priest.
Word precious in those days was very rarely known to the Israelites; and in point of fact only two prophets are mentioned as having appeared during the whole administration of the judges (Judges 4:4, 6:8).
No open vision, no publicly recognized prophet whom the people could consult, and from whom they might learn the will of G-d. There must have been certain undoubted evidences by which a communication from heaven could be distinguished. Eli knew them, for he may have received them, though not as frequently as is implied in the idea of an "vision open."
The lamp of G-d had not yet gone out means it was the morning hours, but it was still dark and therefore the lamp had not yet been put out. The "Temple" seems to have become the established designation of the Tabernacle, and the time indicated was towards the morning twilight, as the lamps were extinguished at sunrise (Leviticus 6:12, 13).
The fact that Samuel could not identify the source of the voice points to the fact that there was nothing visual; he could only hear the voice. Samuel had heard the voice very clearly but instead of running to G-d he ran to Eli. Eli the priest was perhaps convinced that G-d would speak only through him. He was the one to receive any oracle from G-d and to communicate it to the people. He could not at first believe that G-d could also reveal his will to other people. Therefore, he rejected Samuel’s claim to have heard a call and tried to silence him and make him sleep. It took Eli some time (three is a symbolic number indicating fullness) before he realized that it could be that Yahweh was calling Samuel. Only then did he give proper instructions to Samuel as to how he should receive the call.
It is evident that his sleeping chamber was close to that of the aged high priest and that he was accustomed to be called during the night. The three successive calls addressed to the boy convinced Eli of the divine character of the speaker, and he therefore exhorted the child to give a respectful attention to the message. The burden of the L-rd's message was an extraordinary forewarning of the judgments that impended over Eli's house; and the aged priest, having drawn the painful secret from the child, exclaimed, "It is the L-rd; let him do what seemeth him good." Such is the spirit of meek and unmurmuring submission in which we ought to receive the dispensations of G-d, however severe and afflictive. But, in order to form a right estimate of Eli's language and conduct on this occasion, we must consider the overwhelming buildup of judgments denounced against his person, his sons, his descendants - his altar, and nation. With such a threatening prospect before him, his piety and meekness were wonderful. In his personal character he seems to have been a good man, but his sons' conduct was openly bad; and though his misfortunes claim our sympathy, it is impossible to approve or defend the weak and unfaithful course which, in the retreated justice of G-d, brought these adversities upon him.
Yahweh says to Samuel, ‘on that day I will fulfill against Eli all that I have spoken concerning his house, from beginning to end’. But according to 2:30, Yahweh has earlier promised to Eli, your house and the house of your father should go in and out before me forever.’ This promise of G-d is no longer honored; the house of Eli is now to be removed. The word of the L-rd is the medium of the communication of the will of G-d. The context of the word has now changed, and so also has the need for the will of G-d to be communicated differently. What came earlier to Eli as an oracle of salvation comes to him now as an oracle of doom. It does not change the content of the Word of G-d, namely, the ultimate purpose of G-d.
The word may be influenced and changed by its context. Thus Eli was only an instrument in the hand of G-d towards the fulfillment of the ultimate purpose of the salvation of his people; it had itself, become a hindrance to the people. Samuel was called to do something new in Israel, something different from what the house of Eli has done. Removal of oppressive structures precedes the creation of liberative structures.
Eli symbolizes institutional religion. The judgment against Eli is not a judgment against an individual person or family, by against a structure. It is against the priestly religion as a whole, which had failed in guiding people to G-d. The task of the priesthood is to guide people to G-d and to help them to abide in an active relation to G-d, and to handle matters according to His will. In this task Eli and his priestly religion had failed. Instead of leading people to G-d, they were leading the people to themselves, to listen to their own words and to act accordingly.
Eli is anxious to know what G-d told Samuel, and Samuel shares everything with him. Eli accepts G-d’s will and submits himself to it. With that Eli’s role comes to an end, though we do meet him again in 4:12-18.
The account of Samuel’s ministry begins. All people from Dan to Beer-sheba (from the whole land, from north to south) came to know him as a prophet. It is important that people who speak in the name of G-d first receive that word from G-d.
Curse of Putting Children First
[1 Sam. 1:29] 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?
Eli was chosen by G-d to be His priest, to serve as a mediator betweren G-d and His people; but in this calling Eli and his house failed.
Consequently words of judgment came upon them.
Election, according to the O.T. is not for privilege but for responsibility. Failure to fulfill one’s responsibility makes one doubly accountable to G-d (Amos 3:2).
Eli exercises his responsibility as father in warning his children against their evil practices in the Temple. How he is charged for not restraining his sons.
Eli’s posterity will be cut off.
Israelites seem to have believed in some kind of an ongoing existence remembrance through their posterity, through male progeny.
That is why they saw the need for the levirate marriage system, which covered the case of a man dying without issue.
To have one’s posterity cut off was considered to be a great curse and a terrible misfortune.
By the withdrawal of the high priesthood from Eleazar, the elder of Aaron's two sons (after Nadab and Abihu were destroyed, (Numbers 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.
To die in old age was a sign of G-d’s blessings in Israel, but to die prematurely was considered to be a curse.
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 (4:11, 14:3, 22:18-23, 1 Kings 2:27).
Enemy in my habitation, a successful rival for the office of high priest shall rise out of another family (2 Samuel 15:35, 1 Chronicles 24:3, 29:22).
All the young men of Eli’s house are to fall by the sword.
Anticipates that some of the priest who still survive from Eli’s line will play a subordinate role in the new order.
The conditions that prevailed after the centralization of worship in Jerusalem, when the priest of the local Sanctuaries lost their jobs and sought subordinate positions in the Jerusalem Temple.
Eli was chosen by G-d to be His priest, to serve as a mediator betweren G-d and His people; but in this calling Eli and his house failed.
Consequently words of judgment came upon them.
Election, according to the O.T. is not for privilege but for responsibility. Failure to fulfill one’s responsibility makes one doubly accountable to G-d (Amos 3:2).
Eli exercises his responsibility as father in warning his children against their evil practices in the Temple. How he is charged for not restraining his sons.
Eli’s posterity will be cut off.
Israelites seem to have believed in some kind of an ongoing existence remembrance through their posterity, through male progeny.
That is why they saw the need for the levirate marriage system, which covered the case of a man dying without issue.
To have one’s posterity cut off was considered to be a great curse and a terrible misfortune.
By the withdrawal of the high priesthood from Eleazar, the elder of Aaron's two sons (after Nadab and Abihu were destroyed, (Numbers 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.
To die in old age was a sign of G-d’s blessings in Israel, but to die prematurely was considered to be a curse.
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 (4:11, 14:3, 22:18-23, 1 Kings 2:27).
Enemy in my habitation, a successful rival for the office of high priest shall rise out of another family (2 Samuel 15:35, 1 Chronicles 24:3, 29:22).
All the young men of Eli’s house are to fall by the sword.
Anticipates that some of the priest who still survive from Eli’s line will play a subordinate role in the new order.
The conditions that prevailed after the centralization of worship in Jerusalem, when the priest of the local Sanctuaries lost their jobs and sought subordinate positions in the Jerusalem Temple.
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.
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.
Birth of Samuel
[1 Sam. 1:27] For this child I prayed; and the LORD hath given me my petition which I asked of him:
[28] Therefore also I have lent him to the LORD; as long as he liveth he shall be lent to the LORD. And he worshipped the LORD there.
Samuel doubtless with her husband's consent, the names of children were given sometimes by the fathers, and sometimes by the mothers (see Genesis 4:1, 26, 5:29, 19:37, 21:3); and among the early Hebrews, they were commonly compound names, one part including the name of G-d.
The word sumu means son, translated Samuel as ‘son or offspring of G-d.
Hannah, in the depth and sincerity of her surrender, gave up her first-born son to G-d utterly.
He was ‘G-d’s son’ from the moment of his birth.
She wanted every one to know that he was altogether the L-rd’s own, and she must have chosen a word that every one could understand.
The name ‘G-d’s son’ takes us a step further.
The resemblance between Hannah’s Song and that of Miriam, the mother of Y’Shua, has always been marked.
Miriam’s Song is not a repetition of Hannah’s, yet both see the same vision.
It is a vision of the earth’s full salvation, and of the Messiah.
“The adversaries of the L-rd,” sings Hannah, “shall be broken to pieces; out of heaven shall He thunder upon them: the L-rd shall judge the ends of the earth; and He shall give strength unto His King, and exalt the horn of His anointed” – that is His Messiah in 1 Sam. 2:10.
“He hath showed strength with His arm,” responds Miriam: “He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts…He hath holpen His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy; as He spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to His seed for ever”
in Lk. 1:51-55.
Hannah’s Song, and the name she gave her child, are alike a prophecy of the Messiah. She has the honor of being the first to use the name ‘Messiah.’
Hannah, in view of her vow to bring Samuel to the Temple after weaning him, excused herself from joining the pilgrimage on this occasion.
(Children in the Orient are fed by their mother’s milk up to the age of two or three years. Weaning was celebrated in ancient times as an important feast.
Hannah, having been granted her wish and having followed through with her difficult end of the bargain which was declared privately to the Father.
She would see her beloved son only once a year, during the annual pilgrimage.
While there, “Eli would bless Elkanah and his wife and say: May the L-rd grant you offspring by this woman in place of the loan she made to the L-rd.”
Child Samuel, in 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 which was a small shoulder-garment or apron, used in the sacred service by the inferior priests and Levites; sometimes also by judges or well-known persons, and hence allowed to Samuel, who, though not a Levite, was devoted to G-d from his birth.
Hanna brought Samuel a linen ephod each 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.
Eli’s assurance to Elkanah that the L-rd would give him children through Hannah in return for the loan which she lent to the L-rd is typical of popular holiness in all religions. This blessing, like that which he had formerly pronounced, had a prophetic virtue; which, before long, appeared in the increase of Hannah's family (2:21), and the growing qualifications of Samuel for the service of the sanctuary.
The once-barren woman bears five more children, three sons and two daughters. “Young Samuel, meanwhile, grew up in the service of the L-rd.”
[28] Therefore also I have lent him to the LORD; as long as he liveth he shall be lent to the LORD. And he worshipped the LORD there.
Samuel doubtless with her husband's consent, the names of children were given sometimes by the fathers, and sometimes by the mothers (see Genesis 4:1, 26, 5:29, 19:37, 21:3); and among the early Hebrews, they were commonly compound names, one part including the name of G-d.
The word sumu means son, translated Samuel as ‘son or offspring of G-d.
Hannah, in the depth and sincerity of her surrender, gave up her first-born son to G-d utterly.
He was ‘G-d’s son’ from the moment of his birth.
She wanted every one to know that he was altogether the L-rd’s own, and she must have chosen a word that every one could understand.
The name ‘G-d’s son’ takes us a step further.
The resemblance between Hannah’s Song and that of Miriam, the mother of Y’Shua, has always been marked.
Miriam’s Song is not a repetition of Hannah’s, yet both see the same vision.
It is a vision of the earth’s full salvation, and of the Messiah.
“The adversaries of the L-rd,” sings Hannah, “shall be broken to pieces; out of heaven shall He thunder upon them: the L-rd shall judge the ends of the earth; and He shall give strength unto His King, and exalt the horn of His anointed” – that is His Messiah in 1 Sam. 2:10.
“He hath showed strength with His arm,” responds Miriam: “He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts…He hath holpen His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy; as He spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to His seed for ever”
in Lk. 1:51-55.
Hannah’s Song, and the name she gave her child, are alike a prophecy of the Messiah. She has the honor of being the first to use the name ‘Messiah.’
Hannah, in view of her vow to bring Samuel to the Temple after weaning him, excused herself from joining the pilgrimage on this occasion.
(Children in the Orient are fed by their mother’s milk up to the age of two or three years. Weaning was celebrated in ancient times as an important feast.
Hannah, having been granted her wish and having followed through with her difficult end of the bargain which was declared privately to the Father.
She would see her beloved son only once a year, during the annual pilgrimage.
While there, “Eli would bless Elkanah and his wife and say: May the L-rd grant you offspring by this woman in place of the loan she made to the L-rd.”
Child Samuel, in 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 which was a small shoulder-garment or apron, used in the sacred service by the inferior priests and Levites; sometimes also by judges or well-known persons, and hence allowed to Samuel, who, though not a Levite, was devoted to G-d from his birth.
Hanna brought Samuel a linen ephod each 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.
Eli’s assurance to Elkanah that the L-rd would give him children through Hannah in return for the loan which she lent to the L-rd is typical of popular holiness in all religions. This blessing, like that which he had formerly pronounced, had a prophetic virtue; which, before long, appeared in the increase of Hannah's family (2:21), and the growing qualifications of Samuel for the service of the sanctuary.
The once-barren woman bears five more children, three sons and two daughters. “Young Samuel, meanwhile, grew up in the service of the L-rd.”
Hannah
[1 Sam. 1:11] And she vowed a vow, and said, O LORD of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thine handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thine handmaid, but wilt give unto thine handmaid a man child, then I will give him unto the LORD all the days of his life, and there shall no rasor come upon his head.
A man named Elkanah, a Levite, lived with his two wives, Hannah and Peninnah. “Peninnah had children, but Hannah was childless”. Despite her condition, Hannah was the more beloved of the two, just as Rachel was in the eyes of Jacob. Like Sarah, it was only upon Hannah’s instigation that her husband took a second wife, having lived together for ten years and being unsuccessful in their efforts to bear a child. Hannah’s name means graciousness or favor. Locked inside her many unhappy days as a taunted, barren woman, she did not know that she would go down in the rabbinic annals as one of the seven named prophetesses of the Scriptures.
Barrenness for women in Eastern countries is seen as a great misfortune even today. In time, she would bear a son who would lead the Israelites towards the establishment of the first Jewish kingdom, a child who would hear the word of G-d in an age when, Scripture tells, vision and prophecy was extremely rare.
Hannah means grace, and Peninnah means woman with rich hair. Because of the social stigma of barrenness, Elkanah was not able to give full expression of his love to his wife, Hannah. Her adversary also provoked her sore for the conduct of Peninnah was most unbecoming. But domestic fights in the houses of polygamists are of frequent occurrence, and the most fruitful cause of them has always been jealousy of the husband's superior affection, as in this case of Hannah. When this second wife conceives, she, like Hagar, treats the childless woman with derision, ceaselessly reminding her of her infertility. Hannah felt abandoned and so was bitterly distressed.
9-18 is Hannah’s prayer. Elkanah’s empty words of consolation did not help Hannah in any way. Words without corresponding actions have no value. She seeks her refuge in the L-rd. From the day that G-d created His world, there was no one who called the Holy One, blessed be He, “L-rd of Hosts,” until Hannah came….Said Hannah before the Holy One, blessed be He: Sovereign of the Universe, of all the hosts and hosts that Thou hast created in Thy world, is it so hard to give me one son? Of all the things that Thou hast created in a woman, Thou hast not created one without a purpose, eyes to see, ears to hear, a nose to smell, a mouth to speak, hands to do work, legs to walk with, breasts to give suck. These breasts that Thou hast put on my heart, are they not to give suck? Give me a son, so that I may suckle with them.”
We seldom find devotion to G-d which does not expect personal gains. It is worth noting that Hannah, instead of praying for a child, prays particularly for a son. Her purpose of dedicating him to the Tabernacle service the circumstance of his birth bound him to this; but his residence within the boundaries of the Sanctuary would have to commence at an earlier age than usual, in consequence of the Nazarite vow. Even her prayer is conditioned by the society in which she lives. Discrimination against women seems still to be deeply rooted in the psyche of many human communities.
For the first time in Scripture we meet with the idea of praying silently, not for the ears of other men. Eli, witnessing this strange activity, accused Hannah of being intoxicated. The intensity of Hannah’s emotional distress is indicated by the fact that her thoughts were internalized and her mind was fixed on G-d, so that her lips moved without sound. Eli mistook this for drunkenness and admonished her to abstain from wine. The suspicion of the aged priest seems to indicate that the vice of intemperance was neither uncommon nor confined to one sex in those times of disorder. Hannah denied the charge and explained that she was only speaking to G-d out of her anxiety and vexation.
Eli stands corrected, and in place of his chiding, he offers his own blessing to support Hannah’s urgent pleas. “May the G-d of Israel grant you what you have ask of Him” (v. 17). The peace oracle from the priest was the assurance Hannah needed that G-d would grant her prayer; and so this faith relieved her from her anxiety and made her happy. Scripture tells us that after her discourse with the Father and the priest’s additional blessing, Hannah’s demeanor completely changed.
This mistaken impression was immediately removed, and, in the words, "G-d grant," or rather, "will grant," was followed by an invocation which, as Hannah regarded it in the light of a prophecy pointing to the accomplishment of her earnest desire, dispelled her sadness, and filled her with confident hope (1:18). The character and services of the expected child were sufficiently important to make his birth a fit subject for prophecy.
Hannah, according to the Scalars, was tried for nineteen years….there were the ten years that she lived with Elkanah when she did not bear any children; then he took Peninnah who bore him ten sons…Now if you allow eight years for the times Peninnah was pregnant, and allow one year for the time Hannah was pregnant with Samuel, you have a total of nineteen years that G-d tried Hannah. And after that, He remembered her.
A man named Elkanah, a Levite, lived with his two wives, Hannah and Peninnah. “Peninnah had children, but Hannah was childless”. Despite her condition, Hannah was the more beloved of the two, just as Rachel was in the eyes of Jacob. Like Sarah, it was only upon Hannah’s instigation that her husband took a second wife, having lived together for ten years and being unsuccessful in their efforts to bear a child. Hannah’s name means graciousness or favor. Locked inside her many unhappy days as a taunted, barren woman, she did not know that she would go down in the rabbinic annals as one of the seven named prophetesses of the Scriptures.
Barrenness for women in Eastern countries is seen as a great misfortune even today. In time, she would bear a son who would lead the Israelites towards the establishment of the first Jewish kingdom, a child who would hear the word of G-d in an age when, Scripture tells, vision and prophecy was extremely rare.
Hannah means grace, and Peninnah means woman with rich hair. Because of the social stigma of barrenness, Elkanah was not able to give full expression of his love to his wife, Hannah. Her adversary also provoked her sore for the conduct of Peninnah was most unbecoming. But domestic fights in the houses of polygamists are of frequent occurrence, and the most fruitful cause of them has always been jealousy of the husband's superior affection, as in this case of Hannah. When this second wife conceives, she, like Hagar, treats the childless woman with derision, ceaselessly reminding her of her infertility. Hannah felt abandoned and so was bitterly distressed.
9-18 is Hannah’s prayer. Elkanah’s empty words of consolation did not help Hannah in any way. Words without corresponding actions have no value. She seeks her refuge in the L-rd. From the day that G-d created His world, there was no one who called the Holy One, blessed be He, “L-rd of Hosts,” until Hannah came….Said Hannah before the Holy One, blessed be He: Sovereign of the Universe, of all the hosts and hosts that Thou hast created in Thy world, is it so hard to give me one son? Of all the things that Thou hast created in a woman, Thou hast not created one without a purpose, eyes to see, ears to hear, a nose to smell, a mouth to speak, hands to do work, legs to walk with, breasts to give suck. These breasts that Thou hast put on my heart, are they not to give suck? Give me a son, so that I may suckle with them.”
We seldom find devotion to G-d which does not expect personal gains. It is worth noting that Hannah, instead of praying for a child, prays particularly for a son. Her purpose of dedicating him to the Tabernacle service the circumstance of his birth bound him to this; but his residence within the boundaries of the Sanctuary would have to commence at an earlier age than usual, in consequence of the Nazarite vow. Even her prayer is conditioned by the society in which she lives. Discrimination against women seems still to be deeply rooted in the psyche of many human communities.
For the first time in Scripture we meet with the idea of praying silently, not for the ears of other men. Eli, witnessing this strange activity, accused Hannah of being intoxicated. The intensity of Hannah’s emotional distress is indicated by the fact that her thoughts were internalized and her mind was fixed on G-d, so that her lips moved without sound. Eli mistook this for drunkenness and admonished her to abstain from wine. The suspicion of the aged priest seems to indicate that the vice of intemperance was neither uncommon nor confined to one sex in those times of disorder. Hannah denied the charge and explained that she was only speaking to G-d out of her anxiety and vexation.
Eli stands corrected, and in place of his chiding, he offers his own blessing to support Hannah’s urgent pleas. “May the G-d of Israel grant you what you have ask of Him” (v. 17). The peace oracle from the priest was the assurance Hannah needed that G-d would grant her prayer; and so this faith relieved her from her anxiety and made her happy. Scripture tells us that after her discourse with the Father and the priest’s additional blessing, Hannah’s demeanor completely changed.
This mistaken impression was immediately removed, and, in the words, "G-d grant," or rather, "will grant," was followed by an invocation which, as Hannah regarded it in the light of a prophecy pointing to the accomplishment of her earnest desire, dispelled her sadness, and filled her with confident hope (1:18). The character and services of the expected child were sufficiently important to make his birth a fit subject for prophecy.
Hannah, according to the Scalars, was tried for nineteen years….there were the ten years that she lived with Elkanah when she did not bear any children; then he took Peninnah who bore him ten sons…Now if you allow eight years for the times Peninnah was pregnant, and allow one year for the time Hannah was pregnant with Samuel, you have a total of nineteen years that G-d tried Hannah. And after that, He remembered her.
Interduction to 1 Samuel
The name Samuel means ask of G-d. The Septuagint calls 1 Samuel the first book of Kings.
1 Samuel begins the 500 year period of the kings of Israel. The events in 1 Samuel cover approximately 115 years from the birth of Samuel to the death of Saul. This book is divided into three sections relating to the three main characters: Samuel, Saul and David. Four reasons Samuel was one of the most prominent Bible characters: He was a priest, last judge, first prophet, and anointed first king. Four reasons why he was called the prophet of prayer:
1 - Mother (Hanna) was a woman of prayer.
3 - A child of prayer.
7 - Prayed for victory.
12 - Concerned it a sin not to pray.
He established the School of Prophets at Ramah where he lived, which produce every major prophet. In Deut. 17:14-20, G-d promised Israel that they would have a king, but not to become independent of him. Hannah was the first person in Scripture to refer to the Messiah as the anointed one in 2:10. The sons of the Prophets, (work under Samuel, son means students of his), were established in five areas: Shilo, Gilgil, Betho, Semeria, and Romah.
Five things G-d reveals concerning His thoughts about kings of Israel: (Deut. 17:14-20).
Government by a G-dly king is pleasing to Him.
King is to be His choice.
King would have a written charter to guide him.
Appointed by Yaway.
Not pass down to their own sons.
Eight major life principles in 1 Samuel For us today:
How to treat G-d’s person.
Lose the anointing if you do not treat G-d seriously.
Fail when you resent G-d’s priest and take over.
Success comes when you are never whip on the inside.
Lack of discipline to your children.
Repent or you will despise the House of G-d.
Judgment on you for your idols.
Remind yourself G-d has helped you and thank Him (Ebenezer stone).
Two primary reasons for Saul’s backsliding and losing his kingship:
13:8-14 - intruded in the Priest’s job.
15:22 - did what he though right and not what G-d told him.
This is called the book of transition because of its moving from judges, to priests, to prophets, to kings. Judas Iscariots screwed up because he let indignation in his life. Indignation means - you thought someone else was doing your job. You think the preacher treated someone else better than you. Someone else got what you wanted. Judas thought he was better than he was. Offended over something opens the door for Satan to enter your heart.
The key words: Saul 296 times. David, Samuel, prophet, priest and king are:
Anointed used 19 times.
Prayer used 9 times.
Rejected used 8 times
Saul 296 times.
David 291 times.
Samuel 131 times.
Prophet 24 times.
Priest 33 times.
King 88 times.
The purpose of 1 Samuel is two-fold:
G-d will not accept rebellion.
Preserve a G-dly linage.
The importance of the books of Samuel lies in their recording Israel’s history, when the nation was undergoing radical socioeconomic and political changes. Once arrived in Canaan, Israel had been moving from a primarily nomadic, sheep-rearing society into a settled, agrarian society. People were now engaged in settled agricultural activities. The consequent private holding of lands with fixed territories and water resources and the employment of a market economy, coins; pims and shekels; grain measures; the ephod, all contributed to the development of a class society.
As private property developed and wealth increased, protection of the same became important. Since they are not trained in warfare and since they had to depend on the Philistines for their weapons the Israelites defense was not adequate.
At the conclusion of the book, Israel’s government had moved from G-d rules through His man to man rules to what’s right in his own eyes to G-d rules through a G-dly king with His instructions.
1 Samuel begins the 500 year period of the kings of Israel. The events in 1 Samuel cover approximately 115 years from the birth of Samuel to the death of Saul. This book is divided into three sections relating to the three main characters: Samuel, Saul and David. Four reasons Samuel was one of the most prominent Bible characters: He was a priest, last judge, first prophet, and anointed first king. Four reasons why he was called the prophet of prayer:
1 - Mother (Hanna) was a woman of prayer.
3 - A child of prayer.
7 - Prayed for victory.
12 - Concerned it a sin not to pray.
He established the School of Prophets at Ramah where he lived, which produce every major prophet. In Deut. 17:14-20, G-d promised Israel that they would have a king, but not to become independent of him. Hannah was the first person in Scripture to refer to the Messiah as the anointed one in 2:10. The sons of the Prophets, (work under Samuel, son means students of his), were established in five areas: Shilo, Gilgil, Betho, Semeria, and Romah.
Five things G-d reveals concerning His thoughts about kings of Israel: (Deut. 17:14-20).
Government by a G-dly king is pleasing to Him.
King is to be His choice.
King would have a written charter to guide him.
Appointed by Yaway.
Not pass down to their own sons.
Eight major life principles in 1 Samuel For us today:
How to treat G-d’s person.
Lose the anointing if you do not treat G-d seriously.
Fail when you resent G-d’s priest and take over.
Success comes when you are never whip on the inside.
Lack of discipline to your children.
Repent or you will despise the House of G-d.
Judgment on you for your idols.
Remind yourself G-d has helped you and thank Him (Ebenezer stone).
Two primary reasons for Saul’s backsliding and losing his kingship:
13:8-14 - intruded in the Priest’s job.
15:22 - did what he though right and not what G-d told him.
This is called the book of transition because of its moving from judges, to priests, to prophets, to kings. Judas Iscariots screwed up because he let indignation in his life. Indignation means - you thought someone else was doing your job. You think the preacher treated someone else better than you. Someone else got what you wanted. Judas thought he was better than he was. Offended over something opens the door for Satan to enter your heart.
The key words: Saul 296 times. David, Samuel, prophet, priest and king are:
Anointed used 19 times.
Prayer used 9 times.
Rejected used 8 times
Saul 296 times.
David 291 times.
Samuel 131 times.
Prophet 24 times.
Priest 33 times.
King 88 times.
The purpose of 1 Samuel is two-fold:
G-d will not accept rebellion.
Preserve a G-dly linage.
The importance of the books of Samuel lies in their recording Israel’s history, when the nation was undergoing radical socioeconomic and political changes. Once arrived in Canaan, Israel had been moving from a primarily nomadic, sheep-rearing society into a settled, agrarian society. People were now engaged in settled agricultural activities. The consequent private holding of lands with fixed territories and water resources and the employment of a market economy, coins; pims and shekels; grain measures; the ephod, all contributed to the development of a class society.
As private property developed and wealth increased, protection of the same became important. Since they are not trained in warfare and since they had to depend on the Philistines for their weapons the Israelites defense was not adequate.
At the conclusion of the book, Israel’s government had moved from G-d rules through His man to man rules to what’s right in his own eyes to G-d rules through a G-dly king with His instructions.
Golden Hemorrhoids & Mice
[1Sam.6:1] And the ark of the LORD was in the country of the Philistines seven months.
Seven months (1 Sam. 6:1). Seven is a mystical number indicating wholeness or completeness. In seven months, the Philistines received punishment in full for all their iniquities. Relief comes when the punishment for sin is over (Isa. 40:2). Notwithstanding the calamities which its presence had brought on the country and the people, the Philistine lords were unwilling to relinquish such a prize, and tried every means to retain it with peace and safety, but in vain.
[2] And the Philistines called for the priests and the diviners, saying, What shall we do to the ark of the LORD? tell us wherewith we shall send it to his place.
Diviners were later forbidden in Israel; 28:3, ‘medium’. The designed restoration of the ark was not, it seems, universally approved of, and many doubts were expressed whether the prevailing pestilence was really a judgment of Heaven. The priests and diviners united all parties by recommending a course which would enable them easily to discriminate the true character of the calamities and at the same time to prophecy the incensed Deity for any acts of disrespect which might have been shown to His ark.
[3] And they said, If ye send away the ark of the God of Israel, send it not empty; but in any wise return him a trespass offering: then ye shall be healed, and it shall be known to you why his hand is not removed from you.
Trespass offering – guilt offering. Outside the Priestly writings the word occurs only here and in 2 Kgs. 12:16. It denotes primarily compensation or reparation for the infringement of the rights of another or for the misappropriation of one’s property. Here the Philistines have misappropriated Yahweh’s ark; that is their sin.
[4] Then said they, What shall be the trespass offering which we shall return to him? They answered, Five golden emerods, and five golden mice, according to the number of the lords of the Philistines: for one plague was on you all, and on your lords.
The guilt offering consisted of five golden hemorrhoids and five golden mice, one each for every Philistine city ruled by one of the ‘lords’; the five cities are Ashdod, Gaza, Ashkelon, Gath, and Ekron (1 Sam. 6:17).
Five Emerods – (hemorrhoids), thank offerings were commonly made by the heathen in prayer for, or gratitude after, deliverance from lingering or dangerous disorders, in the form of metallic (generally silver) models or images of the diseased parts of the body. This is common still in Roman Catholic countries, as well as in the temples of the Hindus and other modern heathen.
Five golden mice - This animal is supposed by some to be the jerboa or jumping mouse of Syria and Egypt; by others, to be the short-tailed field mouse, which often swarms in unusual numbers and commits great ravages in the cultivated fields of Palestine.]
[5] Wherefore ye shall make images of your emerods, and images of your mice that mar the land; and ye shall give glory unto the God of Israel: peradventure he will lighten his hand from off you, and from off your gods, and from off your land.
It is the plague of mice that ravage the land, rather than the tumor mentioned in 5:6, that is implied. It is possible that originally two versions of the ark account, with the plague of tumors in one and the plague of mice in the other, were circulating and were later combined.
Glory unto the G-d of Israel - By these propitiatory presents, the Philistines would acknowledge His power and make reparation for the injury done to His ark.
Lighten his hand . . . from off your gods - Elohim for G-d.
[6] Wherefore then do ye harden your hearts, as the Egyptians and Pharoah hardened their hearts? when he had wrought wonderfully among them, did they not let the people go, and they departed?
The memory of the appalling judgments that had been inflicted on Egypt was not yet obliterated. Whether preserved in written records, or in floating tradition, they were still fresh in the minds of men, and being extensively spread, were doubtless the means of diffusing the knowledge and fear of the true G-d.
[7] Now therefore make a new cart, and take two milch kine, on which there hath come no yoke, and tie the kine to the cart, and bring their calves home from them:
Make a new cart - Their object in making a new one for the purpose seems to have been not only for cleanliness and neatness, but from an impression that there would have been an impropriety in using one that had been applied to meaner or more common services. It appears to have been a covered wagon.
Two milch kine - Such untrained heifers, wanton and vagrant, would pursue no certain and regular path, like those accustomed to the yoke, and therefore were most unlikely of their own spontaneous motion to indict the direct road to the land of Israel.
Bring their calves home from them - The strong natural affection of the dams might be supposed to stimulate their return homewards, rather than direct their steps in a foreign country.
The Philistines are required to prepare a new cart and two milch cows upon which there has never come a yoke (Num. 19:2; Deut. 21:3). When the ark is placed in the cart, the cart and the cows come into contact with is placed in the cart, the cart and the cows come into contact with the ark and thus become holy too; therefore they cannot be used for any other purpose. That is why the cows and the wood of the cart were later offered as burnt offerings to Yahweh (6:14).
The purpose of taking the calves’ home, away from them was to find out whether the cows were moved by their natural motherly instinct of following their own calves or whether they were animated by the spirit of Yahweh. The priest and diviners are not 100 percent sure if the plagues were caused by the spirit of the G-d of Israel. They use this trial-and-error method to determine whether the plagues were actually caused by the G-d of Israel or whether they happened by chance. If the cows were moved by their natural instinct and returned to their calves, then it was evident that the plagues happened by chance; but if the cows moved against the natural instinct and went towards Israel to Beth-shemesh, then it was a clear indication that they were animated by the spirit of Yahweh and that Yahweh was the cause of the plagues.
[8] And take the ark of the LORD, and lay it upon the cart; and put the jewels of gold, which ye return him for a trespass offering, in a coffer by the side thereof; and send it away, that it may go.
This mode of carrying the sacred symbol was forbidden; but the ignorance of the Philistines made the indignity excusable
Put the jewels . . . in a coffer by the side thereof - The way of securing treasure in the East is still in a chest, chained to the house wall or some solid part of the furniture.
[9] And see, if it goeth up by the way of his own coast to Beth-shemesh, then he hath done us this great evil: but if not, then we shall know that is not his hand that smote us; it was a chance that happened to us.
Beth-shemesh, according to Josh. 15:10, belonged to Judah as a border city, and according to 21:16 it contained the pasture land assigned to the descendants of Aaron by Judah; but according to Jug. 1:33, this was part of the area not yet conquered by Israel. When the Ephraimites were defeated by the Philistines, it is possible that the ark was brought to Beth-shemesh, the border town, and there it received cultic treatment. Due to the unfortunate events happening in Beth-shemesh, for which the ark was considered to be the cause, the ark was sent to Kiriath-jearim, a Canaanite city (1 Sam. 6:21). Beth-shemesh - "house of the sun," now Ain Shems, a city of priests in Judah, in the southeast border of Dan, lying in a beautiful and extensive valley. Josephus says they were set
a-going near a place where the road divided into two - the one leading back to Ekron, where were their calves, and the other to Beth-shemesh. Their frequent lowing attested their keen longing for their young, and at the same time the supernatural influence that controlled their movements in a contrary direction.
[10] And the men did so; and took two milch kine, and tied them to the cart, and shut up their calves at home:
Imagine this, they took two milk cows and shut up the calves to restrain them from following the cows, which would disturb them in drawing the cart. Can you hear the calves crying for their mother?
[11] And they laid the ark of the LORD upon the cart, and the coffer with the mice of gold and the images of their emerods.
They set the ark of the L-RD on the cart, and the chest with the gold rats and the images of their hemorrhoids. Can you imagine they put mice and hemorrhoids in G-d’s holy ark!
[12] And the kine took the straight way to the way of Beth-shemesh, and went along the highway, lowing as they went, and turned not aside to the right hand or to the left; and the lords of the Philistines went after them unto the border of Beth-shemesh.
Straight way - What a miracle! Two cows who had never pulled a cart before, either alone or together. No driver leads them, yet they leave home, and march the ten miles or so to a city they had never been to. They leave their own calves behind, and go straight on a certain road, with never a wrong turn, never a stop, never turning aside into the fields to feed themselves, never turning back to feed their own calves.
Lowing as they went - This means the cows were not especially happy. They were longing for their calves at home, yet they still did the will of G-d.
The lords of the Philistines went after them - to give their tribute of homage, to prevent imposture, and to obtain the most reliable evidence of the truth. The result of this journey tended to their own deeper humiliation, and the greater illustration of G-d's glory.
As the cows are on the road back to Israel, can you see the Israelites mourning over the loss of the ark? Perhaps at that very moment they were crying out to G-d, grieving because they thought the glory had departed. G-d's glory had left anywhere! The Israelites and the Philistines were both resisting Him, so the L-RD found a few cows to show His glory through! Israel had no reason to mourn, even though they thought all was lost and there was no hope, because they thought the glory had departed.
[13] And they of Beth-shemesh were reaping their wheat harvest in the valley: and they lifted up their eyes, and saw the ark, and rejoiced to see it.
Wheat harvest - reaping their wheat harvest (between May and June),
[14] And the cart came into the field of Joshua, a Beth-shemite, and stood there, where there was a great stone: and they clave the wood of the cart, and offered the kine a burnt offering unto the LORD.
Field of Joshua - After being guided for some ten miles from the Philistine city, without stopping or go to one side or the other, now the ark stops in Israelite land, at the exact field of one chosen man.
Great Stone – this was probably a cultic center, and the stone was the altar.
And they clave - that is, the Beth-shemites, in an irrepressible outburst of joy, they split the wood of the cart; nothing was left all to return.
Offered the kine - offered the cows as a burnt offering: They knew this was the right thing to do in honor to G-d, yet it really cost them something. Cows and carts were expensive property.
In a burnt offering everything is offered to G-d, noting is left for the use of the priest or the devotees.
In a strict sense, their offering was against the Mosaic Law. First, they offered female animals to G-d, which was forbidden (Leviticus 1:3; 22:19). Second, they made a burnt offering to G-d away from the Tabernacle, which violated the command in Deuteronomy 12:5-6 (though, since the Ark of the Covenant was there, it might be said that the holy place was "there"). Yet, G-d knew both their hearts and the remarkable circumstances and was no doubt honored.
[15] And the Levites took down the ark of the LORD, and the coffer that was with it, wherein the jewels of gold were, and put them on the great stone: and the men of Beth-shemesh offered burnt offerings and sacrificed sacrifices the same day unto the LORD.
The Holy Ark was not touched by ordinary people, but by the sanctified Levites. They along could touch the sacred ark and the box which contained the guilt offerings. They took up the ark and the box and set them down, not on any common place but on the great stone, which as a cultic stone was obviously holy.
[16] And when the five lords of the Philistines had seen it, they returned to Ekron the same day.
When the five lords of the Philistines had seen it - They had wondered if all what had happened to them while they had the ark was an accident. So, they set up an elaborate and difficult test for G-d to fulfill, and the personally observed, to see if G-d would indeed meet the test. Their reaction isn't recorded, but they must have been persuaded! The L-RD G-d of Israel had glorified Himself before the Philistines!
[17] And these are the golden emerods which the Philistines returned for a trespass offering unto the LORD; for Ashdod one, for Gaza one, for Askelon one, for Gath one, for Ekron one;
And these are the golden emerods . . . and the mice - There were five representative images of the hemorrhoids, corresponding to the five principal cities of the Philistines. But the number of the golden mice must have been greater, for they were sent from the walled towns as well as the country villages.
[18] And the golden mice, according to the number of all the cities of the Philistines belonging to the five lords, both of fenced cities, and of country villages, even unto the great stone of Abel, whereon they set down the ark of the LORD: which stone remaineth unto this day in the field of Joshua, the Beth-shemite.
17-18 seem to be another late addition, which tries to explain why five golden tumors and five golden mice were sent, whereas only three cities are mentioned in the preceding account (Ashdod, Gath, and Ekron). Gaza and Ashkelon are added here.
Unto the great stone of Abel - Abel, or Aben, means "stone," so that without resorting to italics, the reading should be, "the great stone."
[19] And he smote the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the LORD, even he smote of the people fifty thousand and threescore and ten men: and the people lamented, because the LORD had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter.
In the ecstasy of delight at seeing the return of the ark, the Beth-shemesh reapers pried into it beneath the wagon cover; and instead of covering it up again, as a sacred utensil, they let it remain exposed to common inspection, wishing it to be seen, in order that all might enjoy the triumph of seeing the votive offerings presented to it, and gratify curiosity with the sight of the sacred shrine. This was the offense of those Israelites (Levites, as well as common people), who had treated the ark with less reverence than the Philistines themselves.
Because some people of Beth-shemesh looked into the ark of the L-rd, it is said that Yahweh slew seventy men of them. The Hebrew text reads of the people seventy men, fifty thousand men. Fifty thousand men is an exaggeration, and it is probably a gloss. This section stand in contrast to the proceeding section, which speaks of the good natured people of Beth-shemiesh who rejoiced at the coming of the ark. A reason for the death : ‘now the sons of Jeconiah rejoiced not with the other men when they beheld the ark of Yahweh, and he slew them seventy men.’ There were two traditions. According to one, seventy men were killed, and according to the other the whole village of fifty thousand men were killed. G-d, instead of decimating, according to an ancient usage, slew only a twentieth part; that is, according to Josephus, seventy out of fourteen hundred (see Numbers 4:18-22).
[20] And the men of Beth-shemesh said, Who is able to stand before this holy LORD God?
and to whom shall he go up from us?
Holiness of G-d is to set apart; it refers to setting apart things or persons for the use of service of G-d, and is employed for cultic purposes. Thus, the animals or objects that are to be presented as guilt offerings should be those which have not hitherto been taken for any common use.
A typical lamentation. The reference to this holy G-d is the key to the understanding of this whole account regarding the ark.
[21] And they sent messengers to the inhabitants of Kirjath-jearim, saying, The Philistines have brought again the ark of the LORD; come ye down, and fetch it up to you.
Kirjath-jearim – it was a punishment for Israel that the ark went to a non-Israelite city, which is why all the house of Israel lamented after the L-rd. The name means the city of thickets, usually identified as Tell el-‘Azhar, 9 miles west of Jerusalem and about the same distance north-east of Beth-shemesh. It was a Canaanite city, one of the four cities which formed the Gibeonite league (Josh. 9:17). This was also known as Baalah or Baale-judah (2 Sam. 6:2). Kirjath-jearim - "the city of woods," also called Kirjath-baal (Joshua 15:60, 18:14, 1 Chronicles 13:6, 7). This was the nearest town to Beth-shemesh; and being a place of strength, it was a more fitting place for the residence of the ark. Beth-shemesh being in a low plain, and Kirjath-jearim on a hill, explains the message, "Come ye down, and fetch it up to you."
The people of Kiriath-jearim sanctified Eleazer, the son of Abinadab, to be in charge of the ark of the L-rd. The hill on which the house of Abinadab was located was probably a cultic place (2 Sam. 6:3). Introduce Zadok as the son of Eleazer, coming from the ark-priesthood immediately succeeding the Eli-priesthood.
Seven months (1 Sam. 6:1). Seven is a mystical number indicating wholeness or completeness. In seven months, the Philistines received punishment in full for all their iniquities. Relief comes when the punishment for sin is over (Isa. 40:2). Notwithstanding the calamities which its presence had brought on the country and the people, the Philistine lords were unwilling to relinquish such a prize, and tried every means to retain it with peace and safety, but in vain.
[2] And the Philistines called for the priests and the diviners, saying, What shall we do to the ark of the LORD? tell us wherewith we shall send it to his place.
Diviners were later forbidden in Israel; 28:3, ‘medium’. The designed restoration of the ark was not, it seems, universally approved of, and many doubts were expressed whether the prevailing pestilence was really a judgment of Heaven. The priests and diviners united all parties by recommending a course which would enable them easily to discriminate the true character of the calamities and at the same time to prophecy the incensed Deity for any acts of disrespect which might have been shown to His ark.
[3] And they said, If ye send away the ark of the God of Israel, send it not empty; but in any wise return him a trespass offering: then ye shall be healed, and it shall be known to you why his hand is not removed from you.
Trespass offering – guilt offering. Outside the Priestly writings the word occurs only here and in 2 Kgs. 12:16. It denotes primarily compensation or reparation for the infringement of the rights of another or for the misappropriation of one’s property. Here the Philistines have misappropriated Yahweh’s ark; that is their sin.
[4] Then said they, What shall be the trespass offering which we shall return to him? They answered, Five golden emerods, and five golden mice, according to the number of the lords of the Philistines: for one plague was on you all, and on your lords.
The guilt offering consisted of five golden hemorrhoids and five golden mice, one each for every Philistine city ruled by one of the ‘lords’; the five cities are Ashdod, Gaza, Ashkelon, Gath, and Ekron (1 Sam. 6:17).
Five Emerods – (hemorrhoids), thank offerings were commonly made by the heathen in prayer for, or gratitude after, deliverance from lingering or dangerous disorders, in the form of metallic (generally silver) models or images of the diseased parts of the body. This is common still in Roman Catholic countries, as well as in the temples of the Hindus and other modern heathen.
Five golden mice - This animal is supposed by some to be the jerboa or jumping mouse of Syria and Egypt; by others, to be the short-tailed field mouse, which often swarms in unusual numbers and commits great ravages in the cultivated fields of Palestine.]
[5] Wherefore ye shall make images of your emerods, and images of your mice that mar the land; and ye shall give glory unto the God of Israel: peradventure he will lighten his hand from off you, and from off your gods, and from off your land.
It is the plague of mice that ravage the land, rather than the tumor mentioned in 5:6, that is implied. It is possible that originally two versions of the ark account, with the plague of tumors in one and the plague of mice in the other, were circulating and were later combined.
Glory unto the G-d of Israel - By these propitiatory presents, the Philistines would acknowledge His power and make reparation for the injury done to His ark.
Lighten his hand . . . from off your gods - Elohim for G-d.
[6] Wherefore then do ye harden your hearts, as the Egyptians and Pharoah hardened their hearts? when he had wrought wonderfully among them, did they not let the people go, and they departed?
The memory of the appalling judgments that had been inflicted on Egypt was not yet obliterated. Whether preserved in written records, or in floating tradition, they were still fresh in the minds of men, and being extensively spread, were doubtless the means of diffusing the knowledge and fear of the true G-d.
[7] Now therefore make a new cart, and take two milch kine, on which there hath come no yoke, and tie the kine to the cart, and bring their calves home from them:
Make a new cart - Their object in making a new one for the purpose seems to have been not only for cleanliness and neatness, but from an impression that there would have been an impropriety in using one that had been applied to meaner or more common services. It appears to have been a covered wagon.
Two milch kine - Such untrained heifers, wanton and vagrant, would pursue no certain and regular path, like those accustomed to the yoke, and therefore were most unlikely of their own spontaneous motion to indict the direct road to the land of Israel.
Bring their calves home from them - The strong natural affection of the dams might be supposed to stimulate their return homewards, rather than direct their steps in a foreign country.
The Philistines are required to prepare a new cart and two milch cows upon which there has never come a yoke (Num. 19:2; Deut. 21:3). When the ark is placed in the cart, the cart and the cows come into contact with is placed in the cart, the cart and the cows come into contact with the ark and thus become holy too; therefore they cannot be used for any other purpose. That is why the cows and the wood of the cart were later offered as burnt offerings to Yahweh (6:14).
The purpose of taking the calves’ home, away from them was to find out whether the cows were moved by their natural motherly instinct of following their own calves or whether they were animated by the spirit of Yahweh. The priest and diviners are not 100 percent sure if the plagues were caused by the spirit of the G-d of Israel. They use this trial-and-error method to determine whether the plagues were actually caused by the G-d of Israel or whether they happened by chance. If the cows were moved by their natural instinct and returned to their calves, then it was evident that the plagues happened by chance; but if the cows moved against the natural instinct and went towards Israel to Beth-shemesh, then it was a clear indication that they were animated by the spirit of Yahweh and that Yahweh was the cause of the plagues.
[8] And take the ark of the LORD, and lay it upon the cart; and put the jewels of gold, which ye return him for a trespass offering, in a coffer by the side thereof; and send it away, that it may go.
This mode of carrying the sacred symbol was forbidden; but the ignorance of the Philistines made the indignity excusable
Put the jewels . . . in a coffer by the side thereof - The way of securing treasure in the East is still in a chest, chained to the house wall or some solid part of the furniture.
[9] And see, if it goeth up by the way of his own coast to Beth-shemesh, then he hath done us this great evil: but if not, then we shall know that is not his hand that smote us; it was a chance that happened to us.
Beth-shemesh, according to Josh. 15:10, belonged to Judah as a border city, and according to 21:16 it contained the pasture land assigned to the descendants of Aaron by Judah; but according to Jug. 1:33, this was part of the area not yet conquered by Israel. When the Ephraimites were defeated by the Philistines, it is possible that the ark was brought to Beth-shemesh, the border town, and there it received cultic treatment. Due to the unfortunate events happening in Beth-shemesh, for which the ark was considered to be the cause, the ark was sent to Kiriath-jearim, a Canaanite city (1 Sam. 6:21). Beth-shemesh - "house of the sun," now Ain Shems, a city of priests in Judah, in the southeast border of Dan, lying in a beautiful and extensive valley. Josephus says they were set
a-going near a place where the road divided into two - the one leading back to Ekron, where were their calves, and the other to Beth-shemesh. Their frequent lowing attested their keen longing for their young, and at the same time the supernatural influence that controlled their movements in a contrary direction.
[10] And the men did so; and took two milch kine, and tied them to the cart, and shut up their calves at home:
Imagine this, they took two milk cows and shut up the calves to restrain them from following the cows, which would disturb them in drawing the cart. Can you hear the calves crying for their mother?
[11] And they laid the ark of the LORD upon the cart, and the coffer with the mice of gold and the images of their emerods.
They set the ark of the L-RD on the cart, and the chest with the gold rats and the images of their hemorrhoids. Can you imagine they put mice and hemorrhoids in G-d’s holy ark!
[12] And the kine took the straight way to the way of Beth-shemesh, and went along the highway, lowing as they went, and turned not aside to the right hand or to the left; and the lords of the Philistines went after them unto the border of Beth-shemesh.
Straight way - What a miracle! Two cows who had never pulled a cart before, either alone or together. No driver leads them, yet they leave home, and march the ten miles or so to a city they had never been to. They leave their own calves behind, and go straight on a certain road, with never a wrong turn, never a stop, never turning aside into the fields to feed themselves, never turning back to feed their own calves.
Lowing as they went - This means the cows were not especially happy. They were longing for their calves at home, yet they still did the will of G-d.
The lords of the Philistines went after them - to give their tribute of homage, to prevent imposture, and to obtain the most reliable evidence of the truth. The result of this journey tended to their own deeper humiliation, and the greater illustration of G-d's glory.
As the cows are on the road back to Israel, can you see the Israelites mourning over the loss of the ark? Perhaps at that very moment they were crying out to G-d, grieving because they thought the glory had departed. G-d's glory had left anywhere! The Israelites and the Philistines were both resisting Him, so the L-RD found a few cows to show His glory through! Israel had no reason to mourn, even though they thought all was lost and there was no hope, because they thought the glory had departed.
[13] And they of Beth-shemesh were reaping their wheat harvest in the valley: and they lifted up their eyes, and saw the ark, and rejoiced to see it.
Wheat harvest - reaping their wheat harvest (between May and June),
[14] And the cart came into the field of Joshua, a Beth-shemite, and stood there, where there was a great stone: and they clave the wood of the cart, and offered the kine a burnt offering unto the LORD.
Field of Joshua - After being guided for some ten miles from the Philistine city, without stopping or go to one side or the other, now the ark stops in Israelite land, at the exact field of one chosen man.
Great Stone – this was probably a cultic center, and the stone was the altar.
And they clave - that is, the Beth-shemites, in an irrepressible outburst of joy, they split the wood of the cart; nothing was left all to return.
Offered the kine - offered the cows as a burnt offering: They knew this was the right thing to do in honor to G-d, yet it really cost them something. Cows and carts were expensive property.
In a burnt offering everything is offered to G-d, noting is left for the use of the priest or the devotees.
In a strict sense, their offering was against the Mosaic Law. First, they offered female animals to G-d, which was forbidden (Leviticus 1:3; 22:19). Second, they made a burnt offering to G-d away from the Tabernacle, which violated the command in Deuteronomy 12:5-6 (though, since the Ark of the Covenant was there, it might be said that the holy place was "there"). Yet, G-d knew both their hearts and the remarkable circumstances and was no doubt honored.
[15] And the Levites took down the ark of the LORD, and the coffer that was with it, wherein the jewels of gold were, and put them on the great stone: and the men of Beth-shemesh offered burnt offerings and sacrificed sacrifices the same day unto the LORD.
The Holy Ark was not touched by ordinary people, but by the sanctified Levites. They along could touch the sacred ark and the box which contained the guilt offerings. They took up the ark and the box and set them down, not on any common place but on the great stone, which as a cultic stone was obviously holy.
[16] And when the five lords of the Philistines had seen it, they returned to Ekron the same day.
When the five lords of the Philistines had seen it - They had wondered if all what had happened to them while they had the ark was an accident. So, they set up an elaborate and difficult test for G-d to fulfill, and the personally observed, to see if G-d would indeed meet the test. Their reaction isn't recorded, but they must have been persuaded! The L-RD G-d of Israel had glorified Himself before the Philistines!
[17] And these are the golden emerods which the Philistines returned for a trespass offering unto the LORD; for Ashdod one, for Gaza one, for Askelon one, for Gath one, for Ekron one;
And these are the golden emerods . . . and the mice - There were five representative images of the hemorrhoids, corresponding to the five principal cities of the Philistines. But the number of the golden mice must have been greater, for they were sent from the walled towns as well as the country villages.
[18] And the golden mice, according to the number of all the cities of the Philistines belonging to the five lords, both of fenced cities, and of country villages, even unto the great stone of Abel, whereon they set down the ark of the LORD: which stone remaineth unto this day in the field of Joshua, the Beth-shemite.
17-18 seem to be another late addition, which tries to explain why five golden tumors and five golden mice were sent, whereas only three cities are mentioned in the preceding account (Ashdod, Gath, and Ekron). Gaza and Ashkelon are added here.
Unto the great stone of Abel - Abel, or Aben, means "stone," so that without resorting to italics, the reading should be, "the great stone."
[19] And he smote the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the LORD, even he smote of the people fifty thousand and threescore and ten men: and the people lamented, because the LORD had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter.
In the ecstasy of delight at seeing the return of the ark, the Beth-shemesh reapers pried into it beneath the wagon cover; and instead of covering it up again, as a sacred utensil, they let it remain exposed to common inspection, wishing it to be seen, in order that all might enjoy the triumph of seeing the votive offerings presented to it, and gratify curiosity with the sight of the sacred shrine. This was the offense of those Israelites (Levites, as well as common people), who had treated the ark with less reverence than the Philistines themselves.
Because some people of Beth-shemesh looked into the ark of the L-rd, it is said that Yahweh slew seventy men of them. The Hebrew text reads of the people seventy men, fifty thousand men. Fifty thousand men is an exaggeration, and it is probably a gloss. This section stand in contrast to the proceeding section, which speaks of the good natured people of Beth-shemiesh who rejoiced at the coming of the ark. A reason for the death : ‘now the sons of Jeconiah rejoiced not with the other men when they beheld the ark of Yahweh, and he slew them seventy men.’ There were two traditions. According to one, seventy men were killed, and according to the other the whole village of fifty thousand men were killed. G-d, instead of decimating, according to an ancient usage, slew only a twentieth part; that is, according to Josephus, seventy out of fourteen hundred (see Numbers 4:18-22).
[20] And the men of Beth-shemesh said, Who is able to stand before this holy LORD God?
and to whom shall he go up from us?
Holiness of G-d is to set apart; it refers to setting apart things or persons for the use of service of G-d, and is employed for cultic purposes. Thus, the animals or objects that are to be presented as guilt offerings should be those which have not hitherto been taken for any common use.
A typical lamentation. The reference to this holy G-d is the key to the understanding of this whole account regarding the ark.
[21] And they sent messengers to the inhabitants of Kirjath-jearim, saying, The Philistines have brought again the ark of the LORD; come ye down, and fetch it up to you.
Kirjath-jearim – it was a punishment for Israel that the ark went to a non-Israelite city, which is why all the house of Israel lamented after the L-rd. The name means the city of thickets, usually identified as Tell el-‘Azhar, 9 miles west of Jerusalem and about the same distance north-east of Beth-shemesh. It was a Canaanite city, one of the four cities which formed the Gibeonite league (Josh. 9:17). This was also known as Baalah or Baale-judah (2 Sam. 6:2). Kirjath-jearim - "the city of woods," also called Kirjath-baal (Joshua 15:60, 18:14, 1 Chronicles 13:6, 7). This was the nearest town to Beth-shemesh; and being a place of strength, it was a more fitting place for the residence of the ark. Beth-shemesh being in a low plain, and Kirjath-jearim on a hill, explains the message, "Come ye down, and fetch it up to you."
The people of Kiriath-jearim sanctified Eleazer, the son of Abinadab, to be in charge of the ark of the L-rd. The hill on which the house of Abinadab was located was probably a cultic place (2 Sam. 6:3). Introduce Zadok as the son of Eleazer, coming from the ark-priesthood immediately succeeding the Eli-priesthood.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
