Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 4:1
And the word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out against the Philistines to battle, and pitched beside Ebenezer: and the Philistines pitched in Aphek.
Ch. 1Sa 4:1-11. Defeat of Israel by the Philistines and Loss of the Ark
1. Now Israel went out ] The Sept. and Vulgate contain an additional clause, which softens the abruptness of the transition: “And it came to pass in those days, that the Philistines gathered together to fight against Israel.”
The abruptness of the narrative may be explained (1) because the historian only wishes to give an account of the war so far as it bears upon his main subject, the fulfilment of the prophecies against Eli’s house: (2) because probably the account of the battle with the Philistines is extracted from some other book, in which it came in naturally and consecutively.
The last mention of the Philistines was in Judges 13-16. In Jdg 13:1 we read that “the Lord delivered the children of Israel into the hand of the Philistines forty years,” and the best solution of the difficult question of the chronology of the Judges is to suppose that we are now at the middle of this period of Philistine oppression. The first twenty years of that oppression will then coincide with the last half of Eli’s judgeship, and probably with Samson’s judgeship of “twenty years in the days of the Philistines” (Jdg 15:20). There is no difficulty in supposing that Eli, who was a civil judge during this time and permanently resident at Shiloh, was contemporaneous with Samson, the military leader of a guerilla warfare on the frontiers of Philistia. The second half of the period of Philistine oppression coincides with the twenty years during which the Ark remained at Kirjath-jearim (ch. 1Sa 7:2).
Might we not conjecture that the present renewal of the war was connected with Samson’s death? Either the Israelites took the aggressive to avenge their champion, or the Philistines thought to profit by the opportunity and reduce them to more complete subjection.
the Philistines ] See Note IV. p. 238.
Eben-ezer ] = “ the stone of help.” The name is used by anticipation. It was not given till twenty years afterwards, on the occasion of the great defeat of the Philistines, ch. 1Sa 7:12.
Aphek ] = “ stronghold,” the name of several places in Palestine. This Aphek was close to Eben-ezer ( 1Sa 4:6), in the neighbourhood of Mizpeh of Benjamin, near the western entrance of the pass of Bethhoron, and probably distinct from the Aphek of ch. 1Sa 29:1.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Some attach the opening words to the close of 1 Sam. 3, as the complement of what is there said, The Lord revealed himself to Samuel … in Shiloh, and the word of Samuel went forth to all Israel. If placed at the commencement of 1 Sam. 4, and in connection with what follows, they are to be understood in the sense that Samuel called all Israel to battle against the Philistines. (Compare 1Sa 7:5.) But this is not the natural interpretation of the words, which seem clearly to belong to what went before.
The mention of the Philistines connects the narrative with Judg. 1316. Since the Philistine servitude lasted forty years Jdg 13:1, and seems to have terminated in the days of Samuel 1Sa 7:13-14 in about the 20th year of his judgeship 1Sa 7:2; and since it had already begun before the birth of Samson Jdg 13:5, and Samson judged Israel for 20 years in the days of the Philistines Jdg 15:20, it seems to follow that the latter part of the judgeship of Eli and the early part of that of Samuel must have been coincident with the lifetime of Samson.
Eben-ezer – (or, the stone of help) The place was afterward so named by Samuel. See the marginal references. Aphek, or the fortress, was probably the same as the Aphek of Jos 12:18. It would be toward the western frontier of Judah, not very far from Mizpeh of Benjamin, and near Shiloh 1Sa 4:4.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
CHAPTER IV
A battle between Israel and the Philistines, in which the former
are defeated, with the loss of four thousand men, 1, 2.
They resolve to give the Philistines battle once more, and bring
the ark of the Lord, with Hophni and Phinehas the priests, into
the camp, 3, 4.
They do so, and become vainly confident, 5.
At this the Philistines are dismayed, 6-9.
The battle commences; the Israelites are again defeated, with
the loss of thirty thousand men; Hophni and Phinehas are among
the slain; and the ark of the Lord is taken, 10, 11.
A Benjamite runs with the news to Eli; who, hearing of the
capture of the ark, falls from his seat, and breaks his neck,
12-18.
The wife of Phinehas, hearing of the death of her husband, and
father-in-law, and of the capture of the ark, is taken in
untimely travail, beings forth a son, calls him I-chabod, and
expires, 19-22.
NOTES ON CHAP. IV
Verse 1. The word of Samuel came to all Israel] This clause certainly belongs to the preceding chapter, and is so placed by the Vulgate, Septuagint, Syriac, and Arabic.
Pitched beside Eben-ezer] This name was not given to this place till more than twenty years after this battle, see 1Sa 7:12; for the monument called haeben haezer, the “Stone of Help,” was erected by Samuel in the place which was afterwards from this circumstance, called Eben-ezer, when the Lord had given the Israelites a signal victory over the Philistines. It was situated in the tribe of Judah, between Mizpeh and Shen, and not far from the Aphek here mentioned. This is another proof that this book was compiled after the times and transactions which it records, and probably from memoranda which had been made by a contemporary writer.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The word of Samuel, i.e. the word of the Lord revealed to Samuel, and by him to the people; either, first, The prophetical word mentioned before, 1Sa 3:11, &c., which is here said to come, or to come to pass, as it was foretold, to all Israel. But the subject of that prophecy was not all Israel, but Eli and his house, as is evident. Or rather, secondly, A word of command, that all Israel should go forth to fight with the Philistines, as the following words explain it, that so they might be first humbled and punished for their sins, and so prepared by degrees for their future deliverance.
Against the Philistines; or, to meet the Philistines, who having by this time recruited themselves after their great loss by Samson, Jdg 16:30, and perceiving an eminent prophet arising among them, by whom they were likely to be united, counselled, and assisted, thought fit to suppress them in the beginning of their hopes and designs of rescuing themselves from their power. Ebenezer; a place so called here (by anticipation) from a following event, 1Sa 7:12. Aphek; a city so called in the tribe of Judah, Jos 15:53, upon the borders of the Philistines country; not that Aphek in Asher, Jos 19:30; Jdg 1:31, which was very remote from them.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. the word of Samuel came to allIsraelThe character of Samuel as a prophet was now fullyestablished. The want of an “open vision” was supplied byhim, for “none of his words were let fall to the ground”(1Sa 3:19); and to his residencein Shiloh all the people of Israel repaired to consult him as anoracle, who, as the medium of receiving the divine command, or by hisgift of a prophet, could inform them what was the mind of God. It isnot improbable that the rising influence of the young prophet hadalarmed the jealous fears of the Philistines. They had kept theIsraelites in some degree of subjection ever since the death ofSamson and were determined, by further crushing, to prevent thepossibility of their being trained by the counsels, and under theleadership, of Samuel, to reassert their national independence. Atall events, the Philistines were the aggressors (1Sa4:2). But, on the other hand, the Israelites were rash andinconsiderate in rushing to the field without obtaining the sanctionof Samuel as to the war, or having consulted him as to the subsequentmeasures they took.
Israel went out against thePhilistines to battlethat is, to resist this new incursion.
Eben-ezer . . . AphekAphek,which means “strength,” is a name applied to any fort orfastness. There were several Apheks in Palestine; but the mention ofEben-ezer determines this “Aphek” to be in the south, amongthe mountains of Judah, near the western entrance of the pass ofBeth-horon, and consequently on the borders of the Philistineterritory. The first encounter at Aphek being unsuccessful, theIsraelites determined to renew the engagement in bettercircumstances.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And the word of Samuel came to all Israel,…. Or was “known”, as the Targum, the word of prophecy by him, which related to what befell Eli and his family; this was spread throughout the land, and everyone almost had knowledge of it, and which began to be fulfilled in the war between Israel and the Philistines, later related; or the doctrine, instructions, and exhortations of Samuel to the people of Israel, were by the means of others conveyed throughout the land; and yet they went into measures which proved fatal and ruinous to them; or the word of Samuel, which was from the Lord, came to Israel, to stir them up to go to war with the Philistines, whereby the punishment threatened to Eli’s family would begin to have its accomplishment:
now Israel went out against the Philistines to battle; according to the word of Samuel, or of the Lord by him; though Ben Gersom thinks they did this of themselves, which was their sin, and did not ask counsel of the Lord, nor of Samuel his prophet; but it seems as if the Philistines were the aggressors, and first came forth to war against them, and they went out to meet them a, as the word is, and defend themselves as it became them: this was forty years after the death of Samson, and at the end of Eli’s government, who judged Israel so many years, when they had recruited themselves, and recovered their losses they sustained by Samson; and when they perceived a new judge was raised up among the Israelites, who was likely to be of great service to them, and to prevent their authority over them, and therefore thought to begin with them as soon as possible:
and pitched beside Ebenezer; a place so called by anticipation, and had its name from an later victory obtained, when Samuel set up a stone between Mizpeh and Shen, and called it by this name, 1Sa 7:12, it signifies a stone of help:
and the Philistines pitched in Aphek; a city in the tribe of Judah, bordering on the Philistines, [See comments on Jos 12:18].
a “in occursum”, Pagninus, Montanus.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The two clauses, “ The word of Samuel came to all Israel,” and “ Israel went out,” etc., are to be logically connected together in the following sense: “At the word or instigation of Samuel, Israel went out against the Philistines to battle.” The Philistines were ruling over Israel at that time. This is evident, apart from our previous remarks concerning the connection between the commencement of this book and the close of the book of Judges, from the simple fact that the land of Israel was the scene of the war, and that nothing is said about an invasion on the part of the Philistines. The Israelites encamped at Ebenezer, and the Philistines were encamped at Aphek. The name Ebenezer (“the stone of help”) was not given to the place so designated till a later period, when Samuel set up a memorial stone there to commemorate a victory that was gained over the Philistines upon the same chosen battle-field after the lapse of twenty years (1Sa 7:12). According to this passage, the stone was set up between Mizpeh and Shen. The former was not the Mizpeh in the lowlands of Judah (Jos 15:38), but the Mizpeh of Benjamin ( Jos 18:26), i.e., according to Robinson, the present Neby Samwil, two hours to the north-west of Jerusalem, and half an hour to the south of Gibeon (see at Jos 18:26). The situation of Aphek has not been discovered. It cannot have been far from Mizpeh and Ebenezer, however, and was probably the same place as the Canaanitish capital mentioned in Jos 12:18, and is certainly different from the Aphekah upon the mountains of Judah (Jos 15:53); for this was on the south or south-west of Jerusalem, since, according to the book of Joshua, it belonged to the towns that were situated in the district of Gibeon.
1Sa 4:2 When the battle was fought, the Israelites were defeated by the Philistines, and in battle-array four thousand men were smitten upon the field. , sc., , as in Jdg 20:20, Jdg 20:22, etc. , in battle-array, i.e., upon the field of battle, not in flight. “ In the field,” i.e., the open field where the battle was fought.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| The War with the Philistines. | B. C. 1120. |
1 And the word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out against the Philistines to battle, and pitched beside Ebenezer: and the Philistines pitched in Aphek. 2 And the Philistines put themselves in array against Israel: and when they joined battle, Israel was smitten before the Philistines: and they slew of the army in the field about four thousand men. 3 And when the people were come into the camp, the elders of Israel said, Wherefore hath the LORD smitten us to day before the Philistines? Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the LORD out of Shiloh unto us, that, when it cometh among us, it may save us out of the hand of our enemies. 4 So the people sent to Shiloh, that they might bring from thence the ark of the covenant of the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth between the cherubims: and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there with the ark of the covenant of God. 5 And when the ark of the covenant of the LORD came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great shout, so that the earth rang again. 6 And when the Philistines heard the noise of the shout, they said, What meaneth the noise of this great shout in the camp of the Hebrews? And they understood that the ark of the LORD was come into the camp. 7 And the Philistines were afraid, for they said, God is come into the camp. And they said, Woe unto us! for there hath not been such a thing heretofore. 8 Woe unto us! who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty Gods? these are the Gods that smote the Egyptians with all the plagues in the wilderness. 9 Be strong, and quit yourselves like men, O ye Philistines, that ye be not servants unto the Hebrews, as they have been to you: quit yourselves like men, and fight.
The first words of this paragraph, which relate to Samuel, that his word came to all Israel, seem not to have any reference to the following story, as if it was by any direction of his that the Israelites went out against the Philistines. Had they consulted him, though but newly initiated as a prophet, his counsel might have stood them in more stead than the presence of the ark did; but perhaps the princes of Israel despised his youth, and would not have recourse to him as an oracle, and he did not as yet interpose in public affairs; nor do we find any mention of his name henceforward till some years after (ch. vii. 3), only his word came to all Israel, that is, people from all parts that were piously disposed had recourse to him as a prophet and consulted him. Perhaps it is meant of his prophecy against the house of Eli. This was generally known and talked of, and all that were serious and observing compared the events here related, when they came to pass, with the prophecy, and saw it accomplished in them. Here is,
I. A war entered into with the Philistines, v. 1. It was an attempt to throw off the yoke of their oppression, and would have succeeded better if they had first repented and reformed, and so begun their work at the right end. It is computed that this was about the middle of the forty years’ dominion that the Philistines had over Israel (Judg. xiii. 1) and soon after the death of Samson; so bishop Patrick, who thinks the slaughter he made at his death might encourage this attempt; but Dr. Lightfoot reckons it forty years after Samson’s death, for so long Eli judged, v. 18.
II. The defeat of Israel in that war, v. 2. Israel, who were the aggressors, were smitten, and had 4000 men killed upon the spot. God had promised that one of them should chase a thousand; but now, on the contrary, Israel is smitten before the Philistines. Sin, the accursed thing, was in the camp, and gave their enemies all the advantage against them they could wish for.
III. The measures they concerted for another engagement. A council of war was called, and, instead of resolving to fast and pray and amend their lives, so ill taught were they (and no wonder when they had such teachers) that, 1. They quarrelled with God for appearing against them (v. 3): Wherefore has the Lord smitten us? If they meant this as an enquiry into the cause of God’s displeasure, they needed not go far to find that out. It was plain enough; Israel had sinned, though they were not willing to see it and own it. But it rather seems that they expostulate boldly with God about it, are displeased at what God has done, and dispute the matter with him. They own the hand of God in their trouble (so far was right): “It is the Lord that has smitten us;” but, instead of submitting to it, they quarrel with it, and speak as those that are angry at him and his providence, and not aware of any just provocation they have given him: “Wherefore shall we, that are Israelites, be smitten before the Philistines? How absurd and unjust is it!” Note, The foolishness of man perverts his way, and then his heart frets against the Lord (Prov. xix. 3) and finds fault with him. 2. They imagined that they could oblige him to appear for them the next time by bringing the ark into their camp. The elders of Israel were so ignorant and foolish as to make the proposal (v. 3), and the people soon put it in execution, v. 4. They sent to Shiloh for the ark, and Eli had not courage enough to detain it, but sent his ungodly sons, Hophni and Phinehas, along with it, at least permitted them to go, though he knew that wherever they went the curse of God went along with them. Now see here, (1.) The profound veneration the people had for the ark. “O send for that, and it will do wonders for us.” The ark was, by institution, a visible token of God’s presence. God had said that he would dwell between the cherubim, which were over the ark and were carried along with it; now they thought that, by paying a great respect to this sacred chest, they should prove themselves to be Israelites indeed, and effectually engage God Almighty to appear in their favour. Note, It is common for those that have estranged themselves from the vitals of religion to discover a great fondness for the rituals and external observances of it, for those that even deny the power of godliness not only to have, but to have in admiration, the form of it. The temple of the Lord is cried up, and the ark of the Lord stickled for with a great deal of seeming zeal by multitudes that have no regard at all for the Lord of the temple and the God of the ark, as if a fiery concern for the name of Christianity would atone for a profane contempt of the thing. And yet indeed they did but make an idol of the ark, and looked upon it to be as much an image of the God of Israel as those idols which the heathen worshipped were of their gods. To worship the true God, and not to worship him as God, is in effect not to worship him at all. (2.) Their egregious folly in thinking that the ark, if they had it in their camp, would certainly save them out of the hand of their enemies, and bring victory back to their side. For, [1.] When the ark set forward Moses prayed, Rise up, Lord, and let thy enemies be scattered, well knowing that it was not the ark moving with them, but God appearing for them, that must give them success; and here were no proper means used to engage God to favour them with his presence; what good then would the ark do them, the shell without the kernel? [2.] They were so far from having God’s leave to remove his ark that he had plainly enough intimated to them in his law that when they were settled in Canaan his ark should be settled in the place that he should choose (Deu 12:5; Deu 12:11), and that they must come to it, not it to them. How then could they expect any advantage by it when they had not a just and legal possession of it, nor any warrant to remove it from its place? Instead of honouring God by what they did, they really affronted him. Nay, [3.] If there had been nothing else to invalidate their expectations from the ark, how could they expect it should bring a blessing when Hophni and Phinehas were the men that carried it? It would have given too much countenance to their villany if the ark had done any kindness to Israel while it was in the hands of those graceless priests.
IV. The great joy there was in the camp of Israel when the ark was brought into it (v. 5): They shouted, so that the earth rang again. Now they thought themselves sure of victory, and therefore gave a triumphant shout before the battle, as if the day was without fail their own, intending, by this mighty shout, to animate themselves and their own forces, and to intimidate their adversaries. Note, Carnal people triumph much in the external privileges and performances of religion, and build much upon them, as if these would infallibly save them, and as if the ark, God’s throne, in the camp, would bring them to heaven, though the world and the flesh should be upon the throne in the heart.
V. The consternation into which the bringing of the ark into the camp of Israel put the Philistines. The two armies lay so near encamped that the Philistines heard the shout the Israelites gave on this great occasion. They soon understood what it was they triumphed in (v. 6), and were afraid of the consequences. For, 1. It had never been done before in their days: God has come into their camp, and therefore woe unto us (v. 7), and again, woe unto us, v. 8. The name of the God of Israel was formidable even to those that worshipped other gods, and some apprehensions even the infidels had of the danger of contending with them. Natural conscience suggests this, that those are in a woeful condition who have God against them. Yet see what gross notions they had of the divine presence, as if the God of Israel were not as much in the camp before the ark came thither, which may very well be excused in them, since the notions the Israelites themselves had of that presence were no better. “O,” say they, “this is a new design upon us, more frightful than all their stratagems, for there has not been such a thing heretofore; this was the most effectual course they could take to dispirit our men and weaken their hands.” 2. When it had been done in the days of old, it had wrought wonders: These are the gods that smote the Egyptians with all the plagues in the wilderness, v. 8. Here they were as much out in their history as in their divinity: the plagues of Egypt were inflicted before the ark was made and before Israel came into the wilderness; but some confused traditions they had of wonders wrought by or for Israel when this ark was carried before them, which they attributed, not to Jehovah, but to the ark. Now, say they, Who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty gods? taking the ark for God, as well they might when the Israelites themselves idolized it. Yet, it should seem, they scarcely believed themselves when they spoke thus formidably of these mighty gods, but only bantered; for instead of retreating, or proposing conditions of peace, which they would have done had they been really convinced of the power of Israel’s God, they stirred up one another to fight so much the more stoutly; this surprising difficulty did but sharpen their resolution (v. 9): Be strong, and quit yourselves like men. The commanders inspired bold and generous thoughts into the minds of their soldiers when they bade them remember how they had lorded it over Israel, and what an intolerable grief and shame it would be if they flinched now, and suffered Israel to lord it over them.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
First Samuel – Chapter 4
Philistine War, vs.. 1-11
The judgment of the Lord on Eli and on Israel is about to fall. Perhaps many do not see the significance of the opening words, “the word of Samuel came to all Israel.” This certainly indicates that he had not neglected to preach to them God’s Word. Yet in the war which ensues with the Philistines it is also evident that many had not learned the real being of God and were not correctly worshipping Him. The judgment now about to befall the priest’s family is also on Israel, for they have not rejected the wicked religious leaders, and have no real understanding of, nor appreciation of, the power of their God.
The Philistines camped with their forces at Aphek which was on the Mediterranean slopes of western Ephraim. Israel camped at Ebenezer, a very short distance east of the Philistine camp.
This place did not get its name until a later rout of the Philistines here under Samuel, but had been so called, perhaps, for many years when the inspired writer recorded the battle (see 1Sa 7:12).
These opposing forces represented opposing religions. Israel was the people of the Lord, by the Philistines were pagans. It seems that Israel expected to win the first battle because they were the people of the Lord. Well they might, had they been obedient to the Lord (see De 20:1 ff).
However, they suffered a heavy defeat in the battle, losing four thousand men. Back in camp they raised the question as to why the Lord had allowed them to be beaten and consulted the elders about it.
Their question was timely, but the elders did not give them the proper answer. They instructed them to bring the ark of the covenant of the Lord from Shiloh, that the Lord might be with them. This showed they believed the presence of the Lord was in the ark of the covenant, and that to have it in their midst would be to have the Lord with them in the battle. That the majority of the people also believed this is apparent from the joyous shout which went up when the ark was brought into the camp, borne by the wicked priests, Hophni and Phinehas.
So loud was the shout of Israel that the ground seemed to quake and ring back with the mighty shout, and the Philistines were greatly alarmed. Now the two armies had the same opinion about the ark.
When the Philistines heard the reason for the shout they remembered all they had heard, how long ago this mighty God of Israel had overthrown the Egyptians and delivered the Hebrews. They feared the might of this great God, which they also thought was in the holy box, called the ark, which contained the tablets of the testimony of the Lord.
They felt they were doomed, but their hearts did not melt as had those of the Canaanites (Jos 5:1), for the Lord was not with Israel this time. Instead they challenged themselves to stand fast, to re-double their efforts lest they fall into servitude to the Hebrews as Israel had been to them. They determined to fight bravely, and that is what they did.
Israel was totally, and disastrously, and decisively beaten. Those who survived the battle fled away to their homes hoping to escape from the Philistine swords. But thirty thousand foot soldiers of Israel were left dead on the battlefield. The ark was captured, and Hophni and Phinehas both were slain, as was foretold (1Sa 2:32; 1Sa 2:34).
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
The Loss of the Ark and End of Elis House, 1Sa. 4:1-22.
The Loss of the Ark. 1Sa. 4:1-11
And the word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out against the Philistines to battle, and pitched beside Ezenezer: and the Philistines pitched in Aphek.
2 And the Philistines put themselves in array against Israel: and when they joined battle, Israel was smitten before the Philistines: and they slew of the army in the field about four thousand men.
3 And when the people were come into the camp, the elders of Israel said, Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us today before the Philistines? Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of Shiloh unto us, that, when it cometh among us, it may save us out of the hand of our enemies.
4 So the people sent to Shiloh, that they might bring from thence the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts, which dwelleth between the cherubim: and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there with the ark of the covenant of God.
5 And when the ark of the covenant of the Lord came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great shout, so that the earth rang again.
6 And when the Philistines heard the noise of the shout, they said, What meaneth the noise of this great shout in the camp of the Hebrews? And they understood the ark of the Lord was come into the camp.
7 And the Philistines were afraid, for they said, God is come into the camp. And they said, Woe unto us! for there hath not been such a thing heretofore.
8 Woe unto us! who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty Gods? these are the Gods that smote the Egyptians with all the plagues in the wilderness.
9 Be strong, and quit yourselves like men, O ye Philistines, that ye be not servants unto the Hebrews, as they have been to you: quit yourselves like men, and fight.
10 And the Philistines fought, and Israel was smitten, and they fled every man into his tent: and there was a very great slaughter; for there fell of Israel thirty thousand footmen.
11 And the ark of God was taken; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were slain.
1.
In what way did the word of Samuel come to all Israel? 1Sa. 4:1
The background of the verb translated came indicates that the words which Samuel spoke came to pass. If he predicted certain things would occur, they did occur. Certain judgments which he pronounced were judgments of truth. In this way it is known that Samuel was a prophet. All Israel saw that the things which he spoke were true. None of his prophecies failed. He was speaking as God spoke to him.
2.
Where is Eben-ezer? 1Sa. 4:2
From later history we learn that Eben-ezer was a spot named by Samuel. It was located between Mispah and Shen. It is quite near the old Roman road that runs northwest out of the city of Jerusalem and is located in the hill country of the tribe of Benjamin. Aphek is farther north and west and was a rallying place for the Philistines whenever they came up to attack Israel. Aphek would be found in the edge of the hill country as it began to slope down towards the Mediterranean sea.
3.
Why did the elders of Israel send for the Ark? 1Sa. 4:3
They were the old folk; they should have known better. This is an illustration of the old people leading the young people out of the right track. The older people were teaching them wrong. They were corrupt. They had come to trust in the Ark itself as a sort of graven image to deliver them. These elders were afraid of the enemy, the Philistines, and sent for the Ark, thinking that its presence would bring freedom and deliverance to them.
4.
What was this Ark? 1Sa. 4:3
This was the Ark that went before the people at the invasion of the country and the siege of Jericho. Jehovah and the Ark were very closely identified. It was a chest and it contained the two tables of the Covenant. It was covered with gold and named the Ark of the Testimony. When the command was given for its construction, the following dimensions were laid out: two cubits and a half shall be the length thereof, and a cubit and a half the height thereof (Exo. 25:10 b). The same word is used to describe the sacophagus of Joseph (Gen. 50:26) and of the box set by the side of the altar to receive the money contributions of the worshipers (2Ki. 12:10). The Ark of the Covenant was made of acacia wood.
5.
What were the cherubims? 1Sa. 4:4
The cherubims were angelic figures. It is not necessary to spell this word as it is spelled in the King James version. The form cherubim signifies the plurality of the word. We do often speak of a cherub and think of a cherub as being a little angel, Two of these cherubim were on the mercy seat which was placed over the Ark of the covenant. These cherubim spread out their wings and covered the mercy seat with their faces one to another (Exodus 37).
6.
Why were the Israelites called ?Heb. 4:6
The Hebrews were descendants of Eber. Eber was a descendant of Shem. Shem is described as the father of all the children of Eber (Gen. 10:21). After Lot was captured by the kings of the East, one of the Canaanites came and told Abram the Hebrew (Gen. 14:13). Thus the children of Israel had been known as Hebrews for centuries, and it may have been the favorite name of their enemies, although we find men speaking of the name without being ashamed of it.
7.
Why were the Philistines afraid? 1Sa. 4:7
The Philistines thought that there was an unusual appearance of God himself. They had heard of the mighty act which God had performed as they mentioned later. They must have remembered that it was the God of the Hebrews who had shaken down the walls of Jericho. It was He who had parted the water of the Jordan and enabled His people to cross over in dry land. Now they found themselves face to face with this God. It was their superstition which brought fear to them.
8.
Did the Philistines think the Israelites had many Gods? 1Sa. 4:8
They asked, Who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty Gods? They went on to say, These are the Gods that smote the Egyptians. Whether they thought that Israel had many Gods or only one, we cannot determine from the wording of the verse. The Hebrew word for God is plural in form. It may be that they were saying, Who shall deliver us out of the hand of this mighty God? This is the God that smote the Egyptians. The Israelites had given them no reason to believe that they had many Gods.
9.
When had the Israelites served the Philistines? 1Sa. 4:9
Israel had been beaten by the Philistines many times in their past history. These Philistines were the perennial enemies of Israel. Samson had brought some deliverance (Judges 13-16), but his deliverance had not been long lived. Sampson himself had died in the prison house in Gaza, one of the principal towns of Philistia.
10.
Were the expectations of the elders realized? 1Sa. 4:10
The Philistines smote the Israelites, and every man had to flee. 30,000 men of the Israelites fell there. This was 26,000 more than were slain in the first movement, which is described in verse two. Moreover, the Ark of God was taken; and the two sons of Eli were slain. All of this was accomplished by the unexpected resurgence of courage into the ranks of the Philistines. If the elders of Israel had expected something of courage to come to the men of Israel, they were disappointed. Instead, the courage of despair surged through the Philistines.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) And the word of Samuel.To which portion of the narrative does this statement belong? Is it part of that account of the Lords dealings with Samuel which closed the preceding chapter? Does it close that brief narrative which tells of the Divine voice which called to, and the vision seen by, the young chosen servant of the Highest, with a note simply relating how the word of the boy-prophet was received through the varied tribes of the people? Or does it tell us that at Samuels wordthat is, acting under his adviceIsrael commenced this new disastrous war with the Philistines? By adopting the first supposition, which understands the words as a general statement respecting Samuels influence in Israel, the grave difficulty of supposing that Samuel was mistaken in his first advice to the people is, of course, removed; but then we have to explain the separation of this clause from the preceding section in chapter 3, to which it would appear so naturally to belong; we have also to account for the exceeding abruptness with which the announcement of the war with the Philistines follows the clause respecting the word of Samuel. The Speakers Commentary attempts to solve the problem by suggesting as the cause of the abruptness that the account of the battle probably is extracted from some other book in which it came in naturally and consecutively, and that it was here introduced for the sake of exhibiting the fulfilment of Samuels prophecy concerning Elis family. Evidently, however, the Hebrew revisers of Samuel did not so understand the clause. They have placed the notice of Samuels words coming to all Israel as introducing the narrative of the battle.
The compiler of the book, in his relation of the young prophets error, touches upon an important feature of his great life. Anarchy and confusion had long prevailed throughout the tribes, and none of the hero Judges who had as yet been raised to power had succeeded in restoring the stern, rigid form of theocracy which had made the Israel of Moses and Joshua so great and powerful. The high qualities which in his prime had, no doubt, raised Eli to the first place in the nation, in his old age were almost totally obscured by a weak affection for his unworthy sons. A terrible picture of the corruption of the priesthood is presented to us during the last period of Elis reign. We can well imagine what the ordinary life of many among the people, with such an example from their religious guides and temporal governors, must have been. Individual instances of piety and loyalty to the God of their fathers, such as we see-in the house of Elkanah, even though such instances were not unfrequent of themselves, would have been totally insufficient to preserve the nation from the decay which always follows impiety and corruption. In this period of moral degradation the Philistines, part of the original inhabitants of the land, a warlike and enterprising race, taking advantage of the internal jealousies and the weaknesses of Israel, made themselves supreme in many portions of the land, treating the former conquerors often with harshness, and even with contempt.
Samuel grew up to manhood in the midst of this state of things. He was conscious that the invisible King, forgotten by so many of the nation, had chosen him to be the restorer of the chosen people. The boy-prophet, as he passed out of childhood into manhood, does not appear at first to have recognised the depth of moral degradation into which Israel had sunk, or to have seen that it was utterly hopeless to attempt to free the people from the yoke of their Philistine foes until something like a pure national religion was restored. Samuel and the nobler spirits in Israel, who thirsted to restore their nation to freedom and to purity, needed a sharp and bitter experience before they could successfully attempt the deliverance of the people; so the first call to arms resulted in utter disaster, and the defeat at Aphekthe result, we believe, of the summons of Samuelwas the prelude to the crushing blow to the pride of Israel which soon after deprived them of their leaders, their choicest warriors, and, above all, of their loved and cherished Ark of the Covenant, the earthly throne of their unseen King, the symbol of His ever-presence in their midst.
And pitched beside Eben-ezer.The stones of help. The name was not given to the place until later, when Samuel set up a stone to commemorate a victory he gained, some twenty years after, over the Philistines.
In Aphek.With the article, the fortress. Perhaps the same place as the old Canaauitish royal city Aphek.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
CAPTURE OF THE ARK, AND DEATH OF ELI’S SONS, 1Sa 4:1-11.
This section records the beginning of the downfall of Eli’s house, and that bitter affliction of the tabernacle the loss of the sacred ark. See note on 1Sa 2:32. Led by Jehovah’s word, as communicated through Samuel, Israel goes out to battle with the Philistines; but it is that it may be made to feel its utter weakness without Jehovah’s constant aid. The impiety of the nation demanded a signal chastisement, especially in the persons of its religious leaders, and Divine Wisdom saw fit to inflict it in the way here recorded. In the first engagement four thousand Hebrews are left dead upon the field. The survivors hasten to their camp, and whilst all hearts are quaking with terror, or quailing under a sense of bitter loss, the elders hold a speedy consultation. It was probably a midnight conference. They feel that Jehovah is not with them as he had been with their fathers, but they vainly imagine that to have the ark of the covenant among them will be to have a talisman against all possibility of failure. Delusive trust! They had yet to learn that in a wicked age, and under the ministry of a flagitious priesthood, Jehovah’s presence may forsake even the sacred symbols. The ark was brought, and with it Eli’s sons, but Jehovah came not.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1. The word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out against the Philistines Some have thought that the first sentence of this verse belongs to the narrative of the preceding chapter, and the English version gives countenance to this view. But let the words and and now (in the Hebrew the same word, ) be transposed, and the meaning of the sacred writer will be more readily seen. Now the word of Samuel came to all Israel, and Israel went, etc.; that is, Israel went out to battle in accordance with the word of Samuel, or by reason of his word. Perhaps they were encouraged by the appearance of the prophetic gift in Israel. Hence their wonder and surprise on being defeated. 1Sa 4:3. The Israelites had now for a long time been under the yoke of the Philistines, and it seems to have been the same subjection from which Samson began to deliver them, (Jdg 13:5,) but from which they were not entirely freed until the time of Samuel. 1Sa 7:13-14. The severe losses of this battle were doubtless providentially designed to teach Israel important lessons, and the captured ark, by its effect upon the Philistines and their gods, magnified the name of Jehovah among the heathen more than its remaining in the tabernacle could have done. Therefore we need not wonder that the word of God, through Samuel, counselled Israel to go forth even to this disastrous battle.
Eben-ezer This name was given to the place at a later day, after Jehovah had given Israel a signal victory over the Philistines. 1Sa 7:12. Its mention here, and in 1Sa 5:1, before the place had received the name, would naturally be made by an author writing at a later period, when this had become the common and well-known name of the place. Both Eben-ezer and Aphek must have been situated some few miles north or northwest of Jerusalem, but their exact locality has not been decided.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Sa 4:1 And the word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out against the Philistines to battle, and pitched beside Ebenezer: and the Philistines pitched in Aphek.
1Sa 4:3 1Sa 4:3
1Sa 4:3 “Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the LORD out of Shiloh unto us” – Comments – The practice of taking the ark into battle was a part of King David’s strategy as well (2Sa 11:11).
2Sa 11:11, “And Uriah said unto David, The ark, and Israel, and Judah, abide in tents ; and my lord Joab, and the servants of my lord, are encamped in the open fields; shall I then go into mine house, to eat and to drink, and to lie with my wife? as thou livest, and as thy soul liveth, I will not do this thing.”
1Sa 4:4 So the people sent to Shiloh, that they might bring from thence the ark of the covenant of the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth between the cherubims: and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there with the ark of the covenant of God.
1Sa 4:5 1Sa 4:4-5
Psa 78:60, “So that he forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh , the tent which he placed among men;”
Jer 7:12-14, “But go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh, where I set my name at the first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel. And now, because ye have done all these works, saith the LORD, and I spake unto you, rising up early and speaking, but ye heard not; and I called you, but ye answered not; Therefore will I do unto this house, which is called by my name, wherein ye trust , and unto the place which I gave to you and to your fathers, as I have done to Shiloh.”
1Sa 4:9 Be strong, and quit yourselves like men, O ye Philistines, that ye be not servants unto the Hebrews, as they have been to you: quit yourselves like men, and fight.
1Sa 4:9
Jdg 20:22, “And the people the men of Israel encouraged themselves, and set their battle again in array in the place where they put themselves in array the first day.”
The Philistines were able to encourage themselves and win the battle. See:
1Sa 4:7-9, “And the Philistines were afraid, for they said, God is come into the camp. And they said, Woe unto us! for there hath not been such a thing heretofore. Woe unto us! who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty Gods? these are the Gods that smote the Egyptians with all the plagues in the wilderness. Be strong, and quit yourselves like men , O ye Philistines, that ye be not servants unto the Hebrews, as they have been to you: quit yourselves like men, and fight.”
Note that there was another time when David encouraged himself in the Lord.
1Sa 30:6, “And David was greatly distressed; for the people spake of stoning him, because the soul of all the people was grieved, every man for his sons and for his daughters: but David encouraged himself in the LORD his God .”
King David told his son Solomon to be strong like a man should be.
1Ki 2:2, ”I go the way of all the earth: be thou strong therefore, and shew thyself a man;”
God told Job to gird up his loins like a man and interact with Him in dialogue.
Job 38:3, “Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.”
Paul exhorted the Corinthians to be strong like a man as they pursued a lifestyle of sanctification within their church members.
1Co 16:13, “Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong.”
1Sa 4:18 And it came to pass, when he made mention of the ark of God, that he fell from off the seat backward by the side of the gate, and his neck brake, and he died: for he was an old man, and heavy. And he had judged Israel forty years.
1Sa 4:18
1Sa 4:19-22 The Birth of Ichabod – Childbirth should be a time of much joy. However, for Phinehas’ wife, it was a time of utter despair, so much so that she did not even regard the birth of her child.
She died at children bearing. The Word of God promises that the godly women live through it. Note 1Ti 2:15.
1Ti 2:15, “Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”
1Sa 4:21 And she named the child Ichabod, saying, The glory is departed from Israel: because the ark of God was taken, and because of her father in law and her husband.
1Sa 4:21
1Sa 4:21 Comments Although Eli served as high priest to the children of Israel, he failed as a father in the home to train his children in the ways of the Lord. This lack of discipline in the home was soon reflected in his duties as priest as well. The lamp of the Lord went out in the holy place, and the sons defiled the sacrifices brought unto the Lord.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Ark of the Covenant in Camp
v. 1. And the word of Samuel came to all Israel, v. 2. And the Philistines put themselves in array against Israel; and when they joined battle, v. 3. And when the people were come into the camp, v. 4. So the people sent to Shiloh that they might bring from thence the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord of hosts, which dwelleth between the cherubims, v. 5. And when the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord came into the camp, v. 6. And when the Philistines heard the noise of the shout, v. 7. And the Philistines were afraid, for they said, God is come into the camp. v. 8. Woe unto us! Who shall deliver us out of the hands of these mighty Gods? These are the Gods that smote the Egyptians with all the plagues in the wilderness. v. 9. Be strong, and quit yourselves like men, O ye Philistines, that ye be not servants unto the Hebrews, as they have been to you; quit yourselves like men and fight! v. 10. And the Philistines fought, v. 11. And the ark of God was taken,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
1Sa 4:1
And the word of Samuel… all Israel. This clause is rightly connected with the foregoing verse of the previous chapter in the Syriac and Vulgate. Attached to the fourth chapter, it gives a wrong sense, namely, that Samuel gave the command for the assembling of all Israel for battle with the Philistines. This is so plainly erroneous that the A.V. dissents from it by translating the and in the next clause by now. Joined to the previous chapter, it gives the true meaning. Because Samuel spake by the word of Jehovah, therefore his word came to all Israel, that is, it was a binding and authoritative command throughout the whole land; or, in other words, when Samuel was acknowledged to be Jehovah’s prophet he also became the virtual judge of Israel, though probably he did not act with full authority until after Eli’s death.
DEFEAT OF ISRAEL AND CAPTURE OF THE ARK (1Sa 4:1-11).
Now Israelrather. And Israelwent out against the Philistines. During the declining years of Eli, the yoke of the Philistines, which apparently had been shaken off in his manhood, began once again to press heavily upon the neck of Israel. But Israel was still strong enough to make valiant resistance, provoked apparently by the Philistines invading the land, as we find that they had pitched, i.e. encamped, in Aphok. As Aphek means a fortress, many places bear the name; but the position of the Philistine camp is fixed by its being near both to Eben-ezer and to Mizpah, and probably, therefore, it was the Aphek in Judah (Jos 12:18). Eben-ezer, the stone of help, had not as yet received this name (see 1Sa 7:12); and apparently it was not a town, but a monument set up m an open plain fit for the purposes of war, and which up to this time had. no specific appellation.
1Sa 4:2
In the field means “in the open country.” By a gradual change of language it now signifies cultivated ground, and even an enclosure, whereas in the A.V. it retains its old meaning of unenclosed and uncultivated land (see 2Ki 4:39).
1Sa 4:3
When the people were come into the camp. Before the battle Israel had entrenched itself, so that upon its defeat it had a place capable of defence into which to retire. We find also that their communications were open, so that they could send to Shiloh. The army is called the people because battles were not fought in those days by men specially trained, but by all the inhabitants of the country of the proper age. The question, Wherefore hath Jehovah smitten us? expresses surprise. The elders had evidently expected victory, and therefore the domination of the Philistines could not have been so complete as it certainly was in the days of Samson. There must have been an intermediate period of successful warfare during which Eli had been their leader. Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of Jehovah. This, the remedy suggested by the elders, was to employ their God as a talisman or charm. The ark was the symbol of Jehovah’s presence among them, and of their being his especial people, and by exposing it to danger they supposed that they would compel their God to interfere in their behalf. They would have done right in appealing to their covenant relation to Jehovah; and had they repented of the sins which had grown up among them, fostered by the evil example of Eli’s sons, he would have shown them mercy. But for God to have given Israel the victory because of the presence of his ark in their camp would have been to overthrow all moral government, and would have insured their spiritual ruin as inevitably as would the granting to any order of men now the power of working miracles or of infallibly declaring the truth.
1Sa 4:4
Which dwelleth between the cherubims. Literally, “which sitteth, i.e. is enthroned, upon the cherubim.” The idea is not that of Jehovah’s habitation, but of his seat in state as Israel’s King. In bringing the ark they brought to the camp the throne of Jehovah, as their theocratic Ruler; but the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there with the ark, representing the immorality of the nation, whose very priests were abandoned men. We are not to suppose that there was any fault in the manner of bringing, because it is said that the people sent that they might bring the ark from Shiloh. Levites may have carried it, and priests with the Urim and Thummim have had the charge of every detail. But there was the ill-omened conjuncture of personal immorality with superstitious reverence for mere material symbols, and thereby the presence of the ark only insured, in the moral government of God, Israel’s defeat.
1Sa 4:6
But they, sure of its talismanic influence, shout for joy as they see its approach, and the Philistines ask the meaning of the great shout in the camp of the Hebrews. This name is constantly given to the Israelites by those not belonging to them, and probably has a certain amount of animosity in it, as showing that they were foreigners; literally, passers over, people who in the person of Abraham had come from the other side of the Euphrates, and having began as feeble immigrants, had ended in obtaining possession of the land, and ousting the rightful inhabitants.
1Sa 4:8
These mighty Gods. In Hebrew “Elohim, though plural, is used of the one true God, but in this sense has always the verb or adjective belonging to it in the singular. In 1Sa 4:7 the Philistines conform to this rule, and say, Elohim is come; but here the verb, pronoun, and adjective are all plural, i.e. they speak as heathen, to whom polytheism was natural. With all the plagues. Rather, “with every plague,” i.e. with every kind of plague. In the wilderness. God did not really smite the Egyptians in the wilderness. The plagues, including the destruction of Pharaoh and his host in the Red Sea, had all happened before the Israelites had entered it. But probably the Philistines confused together the plagues of Egypt and the miracles in the wilderness, and even the conquest of Canaan, in one grand but vague whole, and so were ready to give way to despair, as they called to mind the traditions they had heard of these mighty interpositions of God for his people.
1Sa 4:9
Be strong. But, as is often the case, despair served only to nerve them to bitter determination. The greatness of the dangerfor as heathen the Philistines fully believed that the ark would act as a charmand the fearful alternative of being servants, i.e. slaves to those who not so very long ago had been slaves to them, made them resolve to do their very utmost. The result was a complete victory.
1Sa 4:10
Israel fled every man intobetter tohis tent. Their camp stood them this time in no stead. It was stormed by the Philistines, and the whole army fled in confusion. In those days the Israelites dwelt in tents, and to flee “every man to his tent” means that they fled away in every direction, each to his own home. It is in this indiscriminate flight that an army suffers most. As long as men keep together the loss is comparatively slight. But now, thus utterly broken, there fell of Israel thirty thousand footmena terrible slaughter. They are called footmen because the Israelites had neither cavalry nor chariots.
1Sa 4:11
Moreover, the ark of God was taken, and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were slain, according to the prediction of the man of God. Probably the last resistance was made round the ark, and the sons of Eli at least died “as men” (1Sa 2:33).
THE OVERTHROW OF ELI‘S HOUSE (1Sa 4:12-22).
1Sa 4:12
There ran a man of Benjamin. The whole story is told with so much vividness, and is so full of exact particulars, that it must have come from an eyewitness, probably from Samuel himself. According to Jewish tradition, this Benjamite was no other than Saul, but the chronology is at variance with this supposition. The importance in old time, when even roads did not exist, of men capable of running long distances to carry news in war is evident, and many instances are recorded showing the high appreciation in which their services were held Thus the running of the Cushite and of Ahimaaz forms an interesting episode in the pathetic history of Absalom’s death (2Sa 18:19-31). So Herodotus mentions that Pheidippides, when sent to urge the people of Sparta to come to the help of the Athenians against the Persians, arrived there on the second day after his departure from Athens. Shiloh, apparently, was but a comparatively short distance from Eben-ezer, as the runner arrived there on the evening of the very day on which the battle was fought. The rent clothes and the earth upon the head were the usual signs in token that some great calamity had taken place (2Sa 1:2).
1Sa 4:13
Upon a seatliterally, “the throne”by the wayside, whither his official chair had been removed to some spot near the gate of the city (see 1Sa 4:18), and probably commanding a view of the pathway by which a messenger would arrive. There probably for hours he had sat, anxiously awaiting tidings of the ark, which, we may feel sure, he had very unwillingly allowed to be carried away into the camp. When the man came into the city. Literally the words are, “And the man came to tell it in the city, and all the city cried out.” We are not to suppose with some that Eli, being old and now blind, let the messenger slip by unobserved. A man of his high rank would not be alone, and the mention of his throne suggests that he was seated there in somewhat of official dignity. And so, as the runner drew near, with the symbols of disaster upon his person, the priests and Levites in attendance upon Eli would begin the cry of sorrow, and soon it would spread throughout all Shiloh.
1Sa 4:14
And when Eli heard the noise of the crying, he asked the meaning of this tumult. The word signifies any confused noise, as the splashing of rain (1Ki 18:41), but especially the din made by a multitude of people (Job 39:7). It exactly expresses here the Babel of voices, all asking news at once, which at the coming of the messenger surged around the high priest’s throne. He demands the reason, and the uproar is quelled, while “the man hasted, and came and told Eli.” Not came in, for Eli was without on the wayside, but simply came to Eli, being summoned thither by one of the Levites in attendance. Eli, as the chief ruler, was, of course, the person whom he sought, and immediately that he knew where he was, he hasted to him.
1Sa 4:15
Eli was ninety and eight years old. Until the invention by the Arabs of the present system of numerals, all ancient nations had a most cumbrous system of expressing numbers. The Hebrew method was to attach a value to each of the letters of the alphabet, and then add them together, and thus the eighth and nineteenth letters would between them make up ninety-eight. Such a system led to constant mistakes in copying, and thus the numerals in the earlier parts of the Old Testament are beset with uncertainty. Here the Septuagint has ninety, and the Syriac seventy-eight. But as Eli was described already as “very old” in 1Sa 2:22, the Hebrew text is the most probable. Instead of dim the Hebrew has set, i.e. Eli was now absolutely blind, as the word expresses the motionless state of the eye when obscured by cataract. In 1Sa 3:2 a different word is used, rightly there translated “dim,” as the disease is one which comes on gradually. In I Kings 1Sa 14:4 we read that Ahijah was blind from the same cause, and the word is there correctly rendered “set.”
1Sa 4:16, 1Sa 4:17
What is there done, my son? Literally, What is the thing? Or, as the phrase is translated in 2Sa 1:4, “How went the matter?” Eli must have gathered from the words of the messenger that Israel had been defeated; for he expressly says, I fled, and his haste, as testified by the added words today, showed that the defeat was a severe one. Eli, therefore, anxiously asks what has happened, and the answer piles misery upon misery, rapidly heaping together four crushing catastrophes. For Israel had fled before the Philistines; there had been a great slaughter; among the slain were Eli’s two sons; and, worst of all, the ark of God was taken.
1Sa 4:18
At this last sad news the old man’s spirit failed; and though it was his own want of a firm sense of duty that had prepared the way for this sad ruin of his country, yet we cannot but respect his deep attachment and reverent love for the symbol of his faith. The rest he could have borne; but that the ark of God, especially intrusted to his care, was now captive in heathen hands was a calamity that broke his heart. He had judged Israel forty years. The Septuagint reads twenty, but these differences in numbers occur constantly. In either case he would have been well advanced in years before he reached the judgeship, and probably he attained to it slowly; not by one great act, but by the qualities of a statesman, by which he lightened the yoke of the Philistines, and rendered the people for a long time a match for them in war. His character is not that of a hero, but of a wise, patient, and prudent ruler, but one whose good qualities were spoiled at last by his weak partiality for his unworthy sons.
1Sa 4:19-21
His daughter-in-law. The death of Eli’s daughter-in-law is equally tragic with his own. The news of the terrible calamity that had befallen the ark of God brought on a premature delivery; but when she had given birth to a son, the attendant women naturally hoped that the good tidings would cheer the mother’s heart. They haste, therefore, to tell her; but she answered not, neither did she regard it. This does not mean that she was already dead; if so, the women would not have told her. It means that no private joy could compensate her for the loss of the outward sign and proof that the covenant of Jehovah was with her and her people. The loss of the ark seemed to her to signify the overthrow of her national religion. But she heard, for immediately There is she named the child I-chabod. There is some doubt as to the exact meaning of the word. It may mean Alas! the glory; but more probably it signifies No glorythe glory of Israel is no more. In the reason given by the narrator for her sorrow, as summed up in the name given to her child, the deaths of Eli and of Phinehas are included, but her own words refer only to the ark. Literally they are, “The glory is gone into captivity from Israel.” There is possibly a reference to this in Psa 78:64, where, speaking of the fall of Shiloh, the Psalmist says, “Their priests fell by the sword, and their widows made no lamentation.” Others, it may be, like the wife of Phinehas, felt that there was no room for private grief at a time of so great national distress and humiliation.
HOMILETICS
1Sa 4:1-11
Moral causes of disaster.
Assuming that the first sentence properly belongs to the third chapter, and refers generally to the acceptance of Samuel as prophet by the whole nation, the section (1Sa 4:1-11) sets forth the following facts:
1. Israel, suffering from subjection to the Philistines, enters on war for the recovery of freedom and suffers defeat.
2. Ordinary means failing, recourse is had to the ark of God in order to insure success.
3. The visible presence of the ark at once raises the courage and hope of Israel and fills the Philistines with fear.
4. As a counter stimulus to conflict, the Philistines stir up their own love of freedom.
5. The battle issues in the heavy defeat of Israel, the death of Eli’s sons, and the capture by the Philistines of the ark of God. There can be no doubt but that the will of God is being wrought out in the triumphs and disasters of national life through all time. The laws by which men are governed are uniform. They are often slow and subtle in operation, and it requires that the whole life of a people be known before we can see the sure working out of the laws that determine success or ruin. It is an advantage to the world that in sacred history we have revealed to us, in concrete form, the principles on which God rules men. The disasters that fell upon Israel in the early years of Samuel’s life furnish us with much instruction. We learn that
I. There is for a PEOPLE A STATE OF PROSPERITY FOR WHICH THEY ARE ORIGINALLY DESIGNED, AND AFTER WHICH IT IS NATURAL FOR THEM TO ASPIRE. Israel, as a people, was constitutionally fitted to enjoy a high degree of national well being. There are material blessings proper to all nationalities, and especially were these included in the lot promised to Israel through Moses (Deu 28:1-13). It was quite natural, therefore, for the people in Samuel’s time to seek freedom from a foreign yoke, and to strive to regain political influence and internal prosperity. There stands, more or less clear, before the mind of nations and individuals, an ideal of what they ought to attain to. The vision of good, though remote, is a powerful influence in life. Before every State, Church, and home there lies a condition of freedom, peace, and influence for which it is designed by Providence, and which should ever be the goal of effort.
II. The DIVINE FAVOUR IS REQUISITE FOR TRUE SUCCESS IN THE EFFORT TO ATTAIN TO THE GOAL. Israel could not obtain the national blessings so eagerly sought unless the favour of God be secured. This is the record of their entire history. It is the “blessing of the Lord that maketh rich.” The life of a nation extends possibly over centuries; and as during the few years of a man’s life he may be allowed to strive on without God to the end before disaster is apparent, so the course of centuries alone may reveal whether it is possible for true, enduring success to be realised apart from the favour of God. The favour of God means a coworking of the Divine energy with his creatures, so as to secure a convergence of all physical, mental, and social forces towards their welfare. That he should do this without dislocations of nature is as reasonable as that our spirit should, in its measure and mode, strike in on the external forces of matter, and, without violating their laws, cause them to subserve its purposes.
III. The REVEALED CONDITION OF INSURING GOD‘S FAVOUR IS CONFORMITY TO HIS WILL. Israel could not expect that God would, as a matter of course, prosper their endeavours after the goal of life. The evils from which the nation suffered were the result of non-conformity to the will of God. It is clear that God discriminates between men, and although it may be that God’s energy works along lines fixed and uniform, yet, inasmuch as all the lines are his creation, and are coincident with his great law of blessing the good and chastising the bad, it turns out, in every case, that his favour, in specific acts and issues, goes with conformity to his will. Moreover, is there not a very true sense in which it may be said that the whole being of God is in immediate and constant contact with every subtle element in existence? They are all ministers that do his pleasure. God has not banished himself from all spheres of action, so as to be the only powerless Power in the universe.
IV. CONFORMITY TO THE WILL OF GOD LIES IN TWO THINGS:
1. EXERTION.
2. MORAL CHARACTER.
The natural craving of Israel for national prosperity could only be satisfied by making strenuous efforts to shake off the Philistines’ yoke and develop all the resources of the land, and, further, by the possession of a moral character such as God delights in. It is the will of God that if men will enjoy whatever enters into the conception of a well developed, prosperous life, they must work for it. But that is only one side of duty. We are not only bound to act, to work, but are bound to BE; and it depends on the kind of persons we are as to the direction and force of our acts. Israel in Samuel’s time had a moral character, but not according to the will of God. Every nation and every individual bears a moral character before the eye of God. It is only when our moral condition is a reflex of the righteousness of God that we can be said to have the conformity to his will which is essential to the favour that insures real success to life’s effort.
V. RELIANCE SOLELY ON PHYSICAL AND MENTAL EXERTION FOR THE ATTAINMENT OF A DESIRED GOOD IS SURE TO END IN FINAL DISASTER. Israel put forth physical and mental effort to attain to freedom and former prosperity. In this respect there was conformity to the will of God, and an observance, therefore, of the laws of success. But the radical defect in the case was that of an utter carelessness concerning the possession of the character which alone can be acceptable with God. The people lacked all the force which lies in being right with God. Those who strive for the masteries must, we are told (2Ti 2:5), strive lawfullyin harmony with all the moral as well as physical laws which govern the enterprise, whatever it be, public or private, relating to commerce, education, or religion. The great practical truth here exhibited is that it is possible for a people to set heart on the achievement of a purpose good in itself, to devise means, combine forces, and arouse enthusiasm likely to issue m the desired result; but yet there may be in the daily life some irreligious, unholy spirit, which, being known to God, has the effect of causing the hidden wheels of Providence so to move as to render useless efforts otherwise sufficient. Righteousness is the most important factor in life. Unrighteousness will in the end neutralise all exertion. The seeming prosperity of the wicked is short, and “shall destroy them.” Sin saps the foundations of public and private good. True godliness alone makes the most of men.
VI. DISTINGUISHED GOODNESS OF INDIVIDUALS AND REGARD FOR RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS ARE NO SUBSTITUTES FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS OF LIFE. Samuel had become known in Israel. The long lost “open vision” was restored. The people knew that he was a prophet. There was, therefore, so the people reasoned, an evident sign that the favour of God was returning. Their own character was bad enough; but had they not a holy man of God, a superior character, in the sanctuary at Shiloh? Encouraged by this trust and heedless of repentance and reformation, they sought freedom and prosperity by the exertion of their own physical powers. The moral element of conformity to the will of God was despised. Disaster came. In like manner it is in vain for a nation to leave goodness to officials in the Church, and for men of business to leave goodness to their wives and children. God will take no substitute for personal holiness. Not even is the perfect righteousness of the Redeemer of any avail to the man who will live in unrighteousness. He is “our righteousness” when our faith in him brings forth the fruits of the Spirit. But the ingenuity of the heart in evil is marvellous. Israel, finding that vicarious goodness is of no avail, has recourse to a new expedientoutward regard for the symbols of religion. Men remember historical facts, though they may have lost a perception of their spiritual significance. Had not the waters of Jordan and the walls of Jericho recognised the presence of the “ark of God”? Did it not go before the people to “search out a resting place” for them? If the presence of a Samuel in the land was not a guarantee of victory, surely all power must submit to this ancient and renowned worker of wonders? And thus the unholy heart imagines that an outward exhibition of the sacred things pertaining to Divine worship will be a practical substitute for the character not possessed. “History repeats itself.” Yes; men still trust in the symbols of the Churchcreeds more or less orthodox, outward forms of worship, and much elsein vain hope that these will prove a charm by which the crushing power of sin will be avoided and life end prosperously. The most sacred of forms and symbols are a poor refuge for a soul that loves unrighteousness (Psa 24:3-5).
Practical lessons:
1. Study well all the laws of permanent success in secular government, religious organizations, commercial transactions, domestic life, and spiritual culture.
2. Let personal conduct be influenced by the fact that even the salvation of the soul is according to law (cf. Mat 11:28, Mat 11:29; Act 4:12; Act 10:43; 1Co 9:25; 2Ti 2:5).
3. The comparative failure of religious efforts outwardly suitable may be remedied by a revival of the spiritual power.
4. In times of depression and religious weakness in the Church, look not so much to the adoption of new expedients for subduing the world to Christ, as to the spiritual condition of his professed servants.
Unexpected coincidences.
It was declared to Eli that a sign of coming judgment on him and his house should be found in the death of his two sons in one day (1Sa 2:34), and also that an event should occur at which “both the ears of every one that heareth it shall tingle” (1Sa 3:11). The fulfilment of this prediction was, to the mind of Eli, certain, but the means and occasion were uncertain. It was difficult for the old man to conjecture how God would keep his word. The narrative reveals the unlooked for coincidences which established the veracity of God.
I. MEN ARE INDUCED TO ADOPT A COURSE OF CONDUCT AT VARIANCE WITH THEIR USUAL PRACTICE. The recent history of Israel proved them to be utterly indifferent to religion. The vile conduct of the priests caused them to abhor the sacrifices of the Lord. In their conflicts with foes they had gone forth at first without the presence of symbols of religion; but now these same people, being left judicially to the blind guidance of their corrupt hearts, lead forth to war the “ark of God,” and the priests in charge of it. In like manner the ordinary course of the Philistines would be to yield to the force of their knowledge of what wonders had been achieved by the “ark of God” (1Sa 4:6-8), and either refrain from fighting or flee at the first onset. But instead of that, by, doubtless, the subtle, secret action of God on their spirits, the ordinary course was deviated from, and the strongest sentiments of religious superstition were overborne by an urgent appeal to weaker sentiments. The last thing men do is to go in face of religious fears and historic facts. History furnishes parallel instances. The Jews, in their desire to get rid of Christ, although disgusted with Roman supremacy, took the strange course of pleading their loyalty as against his treason. In ordinary affairs, also, men are often found acting on new lines which perplex their opponents.
II. GOD SOMETIMES DOES THINGS THAT ARE NOT ANTICIPATED. The Israelites little thought that God, whose symbols they paraded, would so act on the spirits of their foes as to counteract the natural effect of their own expedient. Man is a very imperfect judge of the ways of God. There are no doubt immutable laws of righteousness on which all his actions are based, and in many spheres we are enabled by a careful study of things to say what is sure to happen. But we see only “parts of his ways.” His “thoughts are not as our thoughts.” He sometimes does “a new thing.” Precedents are being created. An ordinary observer would not have thought that the eternal God would suffer his covenant people to endure serfdom. It was foolishness to the Greeks that a crucified One should be the Divinely appointed Saviour of the world.
III. By THE COINCIDENCE OF UNEXPECTED HUMAN AND DIVINE ACTIONS THE PURPOSES OF GOD ARE SOMETIMES ACCOMPLISHED. Had not Israel deviated from their usual course in demanding the ark, the sons of Eli would have remained in Shiloh. Had not the Philistines striven hard to overcome religious fears, no defeat would have fallen on Israel. Had God exercised his power as in former times, the ark would not have been captured. But the reverse of these events occurred, and therefore, in accordance with prediction, Eli’s sons were on the battle field, and perished in one day, and “both the ears” of all the people were made “to tingle” with the awful tidings that the “ark of God” was taken. So is it true in other instances that, by the concurrence of events not anticipated, and by the secret action of God along with the human events, his purposes are realised in judgment or in mercy.
General lessons:
1. God holds a complete mastery over the spirits of men, and can, when it pleases him, so act on them as to secure the realisation of his designs without destroying their freedom.
2. The Church may look on with confidence to the fulfilment of all that is said of Christ’s kingdom, since God can bring about the desired conjunction of events.
3. Wicked men, emboldened by deferred judgments, may well tremble at the thought that the “day of the Lord” may come as a “thief in the night.”
1Sa 4:12-18
Victory in defeat.
The facts given are
1. Eli, aware of the absence of the ark on the battle field, awaits with anxiety the earliest tidings of the issue of the conflict.
2. A fugitive relates to him and to the people of Shiloh the nature of the disaster that had befallen Israel.
3. The effect of the news on the city is a wailing cry of despair, and on Eli sudden death. By record and tradition the people were familiar with the disasters and sufferings occasionally experienced by ancestors. Influenced by the prediction of the “man of God” (1Sa 2:27), Eli, while sitting by the wayside, feared the worst. But even he was not prepared for such a climax of calamity. Defeat would bring sorrow, not surprise; for were not the people godless? Slaughter would be regarded with pain as retribution for national sins. Was it not his own fault that his sons had not suffered capital punishment long ago? All that was most sacred and revered in the history of the chosen race, the very glory of Godthis to be wrested from the hands of Israel and borne off in triumph by the heathen, who can hear it and live! There is nothing now to live for.
I. TO THE EYE OF MAN GOD SUFFERS DEFEAT. The men of Shiloh may be taken as a type of the worldly, unspiritual mind. They had been instructed to believe that Jehovah was engaged on their side in conflict with the wicked idolatrous nations. The ark had become with them almost synonymous with the Almighty himself. Hence the sudden wail of the city when they, hearing the sad tidings, leapt to the sudden conclusion that now at least the Vanquisher was vanquished. The disaster was a check to his purposes proceeding from his declared enemies. There are occasions when the surface of events suggests such a thought. The introduction of sin into the world by an evil power appeared to mar the work of God and defeat his purpose in creating a pure and beautiful world. In the days of Noah the power of evil seemed to triumph, inasmuch as the earth became utterly corrupt. The destruction of the holy hill of Zion, and desecration of the courts of the Lord by the declared enemies of Israel’s God, was regarded by the heathen as a proof of his inability to guard his own. To the terror stricken disciples of Christ it seemed for a while that the “gates of hell” were prevailing against him, and that the kingdom of which prophets wrote and poets sang was prematurely annihilated.
II. The APPEARANCE OF DEFEAT IS OWING TO THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH GOD IS PLEASED TO CARRY OUT HIS DESIGNS. God does not govern in the moral world by hard mechanical laws, but realises his purposes under the conditions involved in the existence of creatures endowed with freedom and accountability. He adapted his exercise of power to the spiritual condition of Israel. Hence, what is defeat to the human eye may really be foreordained and reasonable restraint. Symbol and chastisement were suited to the imperfect state of the religious thought and feeling. If the surrender of the symbol shall issue in better results than its retention, then what seems defeat arises out of the peculiar conditions under which God works his will. The principle has wide application. It is a condition of the possible existence of free moral creatures that their life may or may not be marred by sin. If, then, sin mars the world, God’s purpose is not really defeated. The forces of evil in the antediluvian age might have been crushed out by the Spirit had God reversed the conditions under which he governed men, and forced them to be holy. The visible, transitory life of Christ and his liability to death were, from “the foundation of the world,” Divinely recognised conditions of accomplishing human redemption. The occasional obliteration of religious ordinances and of personal piety often results from the fact that the Church is amenable to the law, “From him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.” Finally, so far as we can see, the happiness of a world is reasonably made conditional on the free, responsible action of the world as an interrelated community, in which the good or evil of one is wisely made to affect all the rest.
III. WHAT SEEMS DEFEAT TURNS OUT TO RE A STEP TO FINAL VICTORY. It is the perfection of wisdom to snatch victory from defeat. This is seen in the first effect of the capture of the ark. The dormant conscience of the people was aroused. Righteousness, not charms and ceremonials, must be the antecedent of victory. It will be found that all other apparent defeats of God’s designs prove to be stages toward a higher good. The curse of sin was the occasion of the “seed of the woman” being promised to “bruise the serpent’s head.” The men of Noah’s time procured a sweeter earth and a most weighty warning and encouragement for the use of all future generations. The sighs and tears of desponding disciples yielded to the exultant joy and abounding hope of the kingdom won with his blood who now liveth evermore. And however much sin may now mar the life of the world, there is reason to believe that, under the control of him who is “able to subdue all things to himself,” the issue of all will be the vindication of right and the more glorious assertion of God’s majesty.
General lessons:
1. It is proper to avoid haste in expressing unfavourable judgment on events that seem adverse to the final success of Christianity.
2. When great calamities come on the Church, the first effect should be great searching of heart.
3. There is every encouragement, from the history of the past, for strongest confidence in the final triumph of Christ over every foe. Rejoice not against me, O mine enemy (Mic 7:8). Cast down, but not destroyed (2Co 4:9). Surely the wrath of man shall praise thee (Psa 76:10). He must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet (1Co 15:25).
Neutralised usefulness.
There is deep pathos and much instruction in the words of the sacred historian as he closes the references to Eli: “And he had judged Israel forty years.” A man eligible for so honourable a position, having rendered varied service to his people, dies in a state of blended consternation, grief, shame, and remorse. Not the calm, joyous end of the righteous; not the end cheered by views from Pisgah’s peak of a glorious inheritance; but an end amidst a horror of great darkness. “And he had judged Israel forty years!” Oh, the exquisite pathos of the Bible!
I. The POSITIVE GOOD OF A MAN‘S LIFE MAY BE LARGELY NEUTRALISED BY HIS WEAKNESSES. The tenor of the narrative suggests that as a whole Eli’s life was good. Forty years’ discharge of important functions indicates a long series of holy desires and beneficent acts. The natural effect of this would be only for the formation of a sound national character. For in those times, as seen in the instance of Moses and Joshua and others, the moral and material welfare of a people was more entirely dependent on force of individual character in the leader and ruler than on the manifold influences which prevail in modern times. But negative qualities hindered the effect of the good. Thus it is not enough for a manruler, pastor, or parentto be religious at heart, attentive to routine duties, and “harmless” in conduct. These may fail in their desired issue unless accompanied with the energy and resoluteness of a will that rests only in seeing right done, God feared, and life made holy. The good that some men do with one hand they undo with another. A little sin destroys much good.
II. It MAY BE A LONG TIME BEFORE THIS NEUTRALISATION OF POSITIVE GOOD IS FULLY DISCOVERED. Eli was not blind to the fact that for years past the condition of the people and priests had degenerated; but some men are slow in detecting their own part in a given result. As he gave more heed to causes outside his own conduct and bearing, so do men still overlook their own contributions of a negative character to the formation of opinion and habit in their too exclusive thought of what proceeds from others. A weak ruler wonders how it is the people are dissatisfied, and perhaps rebellious. A weak parent deplores that his words and deeds are so little heeded at home. Each of these is conscious of sincere motive, upright purpose, and actual toil; but it is only by slow degrees that he comes to see the neutralising process.
III. The ISSUE THAT REVEALS THE NEUTRALISATION MAY BE OF THE NATURE OF A JUDGMENT. In Eli’s case the catastrophe which fell upon the nation and himself was the means of revealing to him, in unmistakable terms, the truth that the element of indecision and moral cowardice in his character had rendered comparatively useless his “forty years” of office. The death of sons and desolation of the Church of God tell of years of honourable care and toil spoiled by irresolution to visit the guilty with punishment and purge the sanctuary of the vile. There are crises in the lives of communities and individuals. The effect of these is to bring into clearer light the causes of failure. “The day shall declare” “every man’s work,” “because it shall be revealed by fire.” The ruin which comes to a business, a Church organisation, a home, or a reputation, exposes the weak parts of an elaborate superstructure. Although the catastrophe may come about in a natural way, it nevertheless is under Divinely ordained law, and therefore is the judgment of God.
IV. The POSITIVE GOOD IN PERSONAL CHARACTER MAY SURVIVE DISASTER TO LIFE‘S WORK. The last act of Eli’s life was one of homage to religion. The better side of his character asserted itself in his dying moments. His horror and shame and grief on the mention of the capture of the ark of God revealed his loyalty of heart to spiritual religion. The poor old man reaped in pain and death the reward of his sinful weakness; but while gathering the bitter fruit, he showed his profound interest in the honour and glory of Jehovah by being so sensitive to the reproach brought on the sacred name. We must distinguish between the ruin of a man’s work and the ruin of his soul. In the former there is a grievous chastisement for carelessness and avoidable ignorance; in the latter there is an abandonment to the essential and preferred wickedness of the heart. Eli’s heart was right with God, but his will was weak to work as he ought. Those who by faith are on the one Foundation are safe. They may build up a superstructure in personal qualities and in deeds for others, much of which may perish in the fire which tries every man’s work, while they may be “saved yet so as by fire” (1Co 3:11-15).
Practical lessons:
1. We should seek self-knowledge if we would avoid errors in conduct and make the best use of a Christian life.
2. When the results of effort are not satisfactory, strict attention should be given to causes within self.
3. When constitutional or acquired weakness is discovered, it may be counteracted by a care to exercise as much as possible the opposite positive virtue.
1Sa 4:19-22
Ichabod.
The facts given are
1. The wife of Phinehas, hearing the sad tidings of Israel’s disaster and of the death of her husband and of Eli, suffers premature labour.
2. The loss of the ark of God contributes more to her anguish of spirit than does the sudden death of her nearest relatives.
3. She deliberately refuses the most natural of all consolations.
4. When dying she gives a name to her child that shall express her sense of the calamity fallen on Israel.
The record furnishes us with three typical references to persons greatly affected by the tidings brought from the field of battle.
1. The superstitious populace of the city, who utter a cry of consternation and despair.
2. The public functionary, good but blameworthy, who sees in the event a just judgment, and, being sensible of his personal offence, pays dying homage to the sacred cause with which his life had been identified.
3. A very spiritually minded individual in private life, whose dying words manifest her extraordinary piety. In the brief reference to the wife of Phinehas we see
I. The NATURE OF SUPREME CALAMITY. Opinions of men differ with respect to what it is that constitutes the greatest calamity that can fall to the lot of nations, Churches, and individuals. The dying experience of the pious Hebrew mother throws useful light on this question. The ark of God was gone; and also, as its moral cause, the righteousness of the people. Hence, as a people’s “glory” lies in the enjoyment of the highest distinction God confers, and the happiness resulting therefrom, it follows that the greatest calamity falls on a people when that distinction and consequent happiness are taken away. The nature of the supreme distinction enjoyed depends on the capacities and vocations of those concerned.
1. Israel. The supreme distinction of Israel was the enjoyment of all that was suggested by the presence of the ark of God. By virtue of its structure, its contents, and uses, the ark was the outward sign of an inestimable good. It meant that Israel was chosen above all people for a holy and far reaching purpose, in which all nations should be blessed, and that great covenanted blessings were theirs. To them the ark was favour, noble destiny, protection and enrichment, knowledge, holy influence, fellowship with the Eternal. And, in so far as its continued presence was connected with their possession of a character conformable in some degree to its purpose and their own destiny, its abode among them would suggest that they had not become utterly corrupt and unfit for the end for which they were chosen. When, then, the ark of God was allowed to be taken away, there happened, so far as the outward sign was still a correct index to its original and ordinary intent, the direst calamity conceivable. The evidence of being the people of Jehovah was gone! The tables of covenant were lost! The mercy seat was inaccessible by the appointed means! And, also, the righteousness of life appropriate to the continuance of such blessings and honours was lacking! Marvel not that a wail of woe arose from at least one true heart”Ichabod!” Loss of men, of commerce, of political influence, of home, of health, of all, was not to be compared with this. For what is Israel worth, what Israel’s function in the world, without Divine favour and blessing?
2. Nations. Taking nations generally in their relation to God and one another, their crowning distinction lies in righteousness of spirit and conduct. Population, trade, armies, fleets, science, art, have no permanence, no real value, apart from a healthy national conscience and right doing. If by any means this righteousness disappears, then the greatest calamity has come; and it is only a question of time with respect to the passing away of greatness. God never allows an unrighteous people to attain to the best a nation is capable of.
3. Churches. The Christian Church is the body of Christ. It exists as a body to exhibit the spirit and do the work of Christ, the Head. Its highest honour is in doing what Christ would have done in the world. But if a Church, professing to be part of the One Body, so far loses love for Christ and true holiness of life as to fail to answer the practical ends for which it exists, then it suffers a calamity far more serious than depletion of numbers, loss of social status, the pains of poverty, and the fiercest persecution. “Ichabod” was once appropriate to Laodicea (Rev 3:15-18).
4. Individuals. The highest distinction and bliss of a human being is to be conformed in nature to the holy nature of Christ. This is the permanent crown of life. It could be shown that a soul so blessed wilt find the most perfect development. This is that for which Christ came, lived, died, and rose again. And it is obvious that not thus to be saved is to suffer the greatest loss ever possible to a human being. “What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?” Then, indeed, “Ichabod” is fearfully true.
5. The ministry of the gospel. A true ministry must embrace all the teaching requisite for the “perfecting of the saints.” A full and perfect gospel means all that Christ and his apostles have left us. An examination of the apostolic ministry will show that the great theme on which the inspired preachers chiefly dwelt was the cross of Christ. This is the peculiar distinction of the New Testament teaching, and it is a truth which enters directly or indirectly into everything pertaining to Christian life. A ministry is good in proportion as it gives due place to this dominating truth. An aversion to the cross as the apostles preached it is an unhappy sign, as, also, is a mere parade of the term or the symbol. History proves that a Christless ministry is always a failure. “Ichabod” may be affirmed of it. Generally, then, “Ichabod” is true whenever the crowning characteristic has departed; in that lies a supreme calamity.
II. HOW A JUST APPRECIATION OF A SUPREME CALAMITY REVEALS ITSELF. The wife of Phinehas was a study to her attendants. They, in common with the mass of Israel, felt that a sad disaster had befallen them, but her extreme anguish and singular conduct were perplexing. The fact was, she formed a just appreciation of what had occurred, and her feelings, words, and conduct were the natural expression of it. The appreciation appears in
1. All absorbing concern. A more striking instance of this is perhaps not to be found in the entire range of sacred history. This unnamed person was passing through the most momentous personal crisis possible to woman; the anguish of nature was enough to absorb every thought and power. Birth of a son was a new demand on attention and care, and the death of a husband was, at such a season, a special occasion of sorrow. Yet all these most important and pressing matters were entirely test sight of in her soul’s utter absorption in the interests of that Divine kingdom which lay so near to her heart. We have read of widows dying under the shock caused by a husband’s death, and with his name on the tongue as the last sign of affection and interest; but here the one word is “Ichabod.” The cause of God was the one thought. In like manner will a just appreciation of calamity show itself when nations have lost the righteousness which exalts, when Churches have failed in their holy design and have become a reproach, when souls cared and watched for are lost, when a ministry professedly of the gospel leaves out the cross. The whole soul will be filled with anguish and care.
2. Refusal to accept any substitute. The highest and most welcome comfort nature can afford to a sorrowing widowed mother is to give her a son. In the love of offspring the heart finds some healing and solace. But, marvel of devotion to the Spiritual and Eternal, this mother refuses to derive compensation from the new-born child! “She answered not, neither did she regard it.” The mother’s conduct was right and natural; for the cause of God is first and highest. Nature sanctified will not accept a lower transitory good in the place of the higher eternal good. Jerusalem is to be preferred above our” chief joy.” No wealth and fame will comfort the statesman who mourns the departure of national righteousness. Eloquence, logic, and elevation of taste are as nothing to one who glories in preaching Christ crucified, if he be not preached.
3. Tremendous effort to awaken regard for the spiritual. The dying woman made a great effort to think and speak. She loved the dear child, but loved the holy kingdom more; and therefore, to do the utmost in her power to arouse regard for what was too little regarded, she even imposed on her child a name associated with sorrow, shame, and trouble. Thus by this dying exertion did she
(1) impress her attendants with her sense of what calamity is, and what should be sought first and chief;
(2) direct her countrymen, through her son, to the great need of a radical reformation; and
(3) leave him a reminder of what was dearest to his mother’s heart. Noble woman! “She hath done what she could.” Love of God stronger than love of husband, child, national fame, and even of personal comfort. In times of spiritual calamity the faithful, in proportion to faithfulness, put forth extraordinary efforts. Moses could wish himself blotted out of the book of God (Exo 32:32).
General lessons.
1. In darkest times God has in reserve a “holy remnant” (cf. 1Ki 19:10, 1Ki 19:18; Joh 10:14).
2. The deepest piety may exist where least expected. The wife of the vilest of men (cf. Mat 8:10).
3. Adverse circumstances, when met with a determined spirit, may even conduce to exalted piety. The vile husband became the occasion of a more entire and constant trust in God (cf. Psa 9:9, Psa 9:10; Psa 27:10).
4. How truly the requirements of Christ to love him and his cause above all finds response in the most devoted souls (cf. Mat 10:37; Php 3:8).
5. The piety must be very profound, and wide in its spiritual vision, that can bring all the claims of nature into subordination to the kingdom of God, and feel assured of the essentially rational character of the subordination.
6. The Saviour is a unique instance of absorption in the spiritual, and exertion to realise it; and the experience of his people is a fellowship with his sufferings (cf. Mat 4:9; Mat 16:21, Mat 16:22; Mat 20:28; Mat 23:37; Mat 26:38, Mat 26:39; Luk 24:21-26; Joh 4:32; Joh 6:15; Joh 10:11; Php 3:10). “The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.”
HOMILIES BY B. DALE
1Sa 4:1-11. (EBEN-EZER and APHEK.)
Judgment inflicted on Israel.
“Israel was smitten, and the ark of God was taken; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were slain” (1Sa 4:10, 1Sa 4:11). The law of retribution which prevails in the world is, more especially in the outward life, often slow in its operation, inexplicable, and sometimes apparently partial and imperfect. But in many instances it is manifested in a sudden, clear, and most equitable manner. One of these instances is here described. Hophni and Phinehas were warned in vain, and pursued their evil way. The influence which they exerted on others was pernicious, and their sin was largely shared in by the people. At length the hour of judgment struck. “Israel went out against the Philistines to battle”not, probably, according to the counsel of Samuel, but according to their own will, and to repel a fresh attack of their most powerful foes and oppressors (1Sa 4:9). They were defeated with a loss of about 4000 men; but instead of humbling themselves before God, the elders expressed their surprise and disappointment at the result. They were blinded by sin, and assumed (as others have often done) that because they were the acknowledged people of Jehovah they would necessarily receive his help according to his covenant, whether they fulfilled their part of the covenant and obeyed his commandments or not. To insure his help more effectually, they sent to Shiloh for “the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts, which dwelleth between (is enthroned upon) the cherubim.” They looked for deliverance from the ark of the Lord rather than from the Lord of the ark. Hophni and Phinehas, its appointed guardians, readily consented to go with it, not knowing that they were going to their doom; and the aged high priest was too weak to oppose the presumptuous enterprise. The exultation of Israel was speedily turned into humiliation, and the fear of their enemies into triumph; and one of the greatest calamities Israel ever experienced occurred. These events suggest the following reflections:
I. How OFTEN ARE THE UNGODLY EMPLOYED BY GOD FOR THE CHASTISEMENT OF HIS PEOPLE (1Sa 4:1, 1Sa 4:2).
1. When those who have been chosen to be separate from and superior to the ungodly have learnt their ways, it is just and appropriate that they should be given up to chastisement at their hands.
2. The chastisement which is thus inflicted upon them is the most severe they can experience. “Let us not fall into the hand of man” (2Sa 24:14). “The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel” (Pro 12:10).
3. In fulfilling their own purposes the wicked are subject to the control of God; they can go no further than he pleases, their designs are overruled for good, and when they have done their work they are broken and cast aside like useless saws and axes (Isa 27:7, Isa 27:8; Act 5:28). This is the case with Satan himself. “Satan is a very important element in the Divine economy. God needs him, and he therefore keeps him until he shall have no more use for him. Then will he be banished to his own place. The Scriptures call the wicked heathen tyrant Nebuchadnezzar a servant of God. They might give Satan the same name” (Hengstenberg).
II. How VAIN IS THE POSSESSION OF THE FORM OF RELIGION WITHOUT ITS SPIRIT (1Sa 4:3, 1Sa 4:4). Israel had a great though superstitious reverence for the ark, and expected that it would “save them out of the hand of their enemies.”
1. Excessive devotion to the outward forms and ceremonies, and dependence upon them, is commonly associated with the absence of spiritual life (Mat 5:20; 2Ti 3:5).
2. Reliance upon such forms arises from the delusion that they insure the presence and working of God apart from the spirit in which they are employed. They are, however, neither the necessary, nor the exclusive channels of Divine grace (Joh 6:63), and no benefit formerly received through them (Num 10:35) is to be expected, unless there be a right relation to him who has appointed them.
3. The vanity of it is clearly shown in the day of trial. “If progress to perfection is placed only in external observances, our religion, having no Divine life, will quickly perish, with the things on which it subsists; but the axe must be laid at the root of the tree, that, being separated and freed from the restless desires of nature and self, we may possess our souls in the peace of God” (A Kempis).
III. How NEAR ARE THOSE WHO ARE ELATED IN FALSE CONFIDENCE TO THEIR SIGNAL DOWNFALL (1Sa 4:5). There was a shout in the camp at the arrival of the ark. It struck consternation into the Philistines, who had heard of the wonders wrought by Jehovah in former times (1Sa 6:6), and who, like Israel, supposed that his presence was inseparably connected with the symbol thereof (1Sa 4:6-8). But they speedily regained courage, and obtained a second and greater victory (1Sa 4:9).
1. False confidence is blind to its own weakness and danger.
2. It is generally associated with neglect of the proper means of safety.
3. Nothing is more displeasing to God than pride and presumption; nothing more frequently condemned or more severely punished (1Sa 2:3; Pro 16:18; Isa 2:11). “By that sin fell the angels.” “We must therefore bear this in mind throughout our whole life, every day, every hour, and every moment, that we never indulge so much as a thought of confidence in self” (Scupoli).
IV. How SURE IS THE FULFILMENT OF THE DIVINE THREATENINGS AGAINST THE IMPENITENT (1Sa 4:10, 1Sa 4:11; 1Sa 2:30, 1Sa 2:34). In mercy it may be long delayed; but mercy has its limits, and judgment comes at last (Pro 29:1; Rom 2:5).
1. The priests, who had so grossly abused their power in many ways, and now exposed the ark of the Lord in battle, were struck down by the sword of his enemies.
“Wisdom supreme! how wonderful the art
Which thou dost manifest in heaven, in earth,
And in the evil world, how just a meed
Allotting by thy virtue unto all”
(Dante, ‘Inferno ‘).
2. The elders and people, who “asked not counsel at the mouth of the Lord,” were abandoned to their own devices, and 30,000 of them were slain.
3. The whole nation, which had forsaken the Lord, was deprived of the sign of his presence (1Sa 4:11); the place of the sanctuary, which had been defiled, was made a perpetual desolation (Psa 78:59-64; Jer 7:11, Jer 7:12, Jer 7:14; Jer 26:6); and they who would not serve the Lord with gladness were compelled to wear the heavy yoke of their oppressors (Deu 28:47, Deu 28:48; 1Sa 7:2, 1Sa 7:14).
“The mills of God grind slowly, but they grind exceeding small;
Though he stands and waits with patience, with exactness grinds he all.”
“God’s judgments are the expressions of his opinion about our guilt …. But there is this difference between man and God in this matter:A human judge gives his opinion in words; God gives his in events. And God always pays sinners back in kind, that he may not merely punish them, but correct them; so that by the kind of their punishment they may know the kind of their sin” (C. Kingsley).D.
The inquiry of the afflicted.
“Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us?” (1Sa 4:3). Men are accustomed to meet affliction in various ways.
1. Some meet it lightly, and endeavour to laugh at it. But this is possible only when it is not very severe.
2. Others exaggerate it, lose their self-possession, and sink under it into despondency and despair.
3. Others quarrel with it as with an enemy, become embittered and cynical.
4. Others, still, endure it with philosophical (stoical) fortitude, accounting it not an evil, and resolving not to feel it. But this method breaks down in actual experience, and leaves the character unimproved. The truly wise, whilst fully sensitive to its natural influence, and confessing it to be an evil, seek to understand its meaning and purpose, and act in accordance therewith. They adopt this inquiry of the elders of Israel, though in a somewhat different spirit. The inquiry pertains to
I. THE HAND FROM WHICH IT COMES. “Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us?”
1. His dominion is supreme and universal.
2. His operations are often indirect, and to our view intricate and perplexing. Adversity is not the less under his direction and control because it comes by the hand of man.
3. All he does is done in perfect wisdom, justice, and benevolence. It must be so, even when it appears otherwise (Psa 77:19, Psa 77:20). The mystery which beclouds his ways is itself adapted to beget in us proper feelings toward him. The first necessity in affliction is to settle it in our hearts that “it is the Lord.”
II. THE CAUSE TO WHICH IT IS DUE. Whence? Suffering is the result and penalty of violating the natural or moral order which God has established in the world.
1. It may be often traced to the transgression of the sufferer, but not always. Those who are greater sufferers than others are not necessarily greater sinners (Luk 13:1-5).
2. It is often due to the transgressions of others with whom we are intimately associated, and in the effects of whose conduct we necessarily have part.
3. It is connected with the sinfulness of the heart, and implies participation in the fallen and corrupt nature of humanity. “This is the key both to the sufferings of the righteous and to many other secrets.” Human suffering points, as with the finger of God, to human sin, and should ever lead to self-examination and profound humiliation.
III. THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH IT IS SENT. Herein the fatherly love of God appears; and to those who love him punishment is transformed into chastisement and a means of blessing (Heb 12:11). It is designed
1. To manifest the presence and evil of sin, which would not be otherwise properly felt. The consequences of transgression often quicken the conscience to its “exceeding sinfulness,” and lead to godly sorrow (Isa 27:9).
2. To restrain, and prevent future disobedience (Psa 119:67).
3. To educate and improve the characterby instructing the soul in spiritual truth, working in it submission and patience, disposing it to sympathy, etc. (Psa 94:12; Rom 5:3; 2Co 1:4). “All things work together for good,” i.e. for the perfecting of the character in conformity to “the image of his Son” (Rom 8:29).
4. To prepare for the experience of higher joy, here and hereafter (2Co 4:17).
5. To promote the holiness and happiness of others in many ways.
6. To bring glory to God (Joh 9:3; Joh 11:4). What is naturally a curse has thus hidden within it a priceless blessing; which, however, is not attained without human cooperation and Divine grace. Affliction has not in itself the power to purify, strengthen, and save.
IV. THE MEANS BY WHICH THESE PURPOSES ARE ACCOMPLISHED.
1. Humility and penitence (Job 40:4; Job 42:6).
2. Filial trust; entering into fellowship with Christ in his sufferings, and receiving his Spirit according to his promise.
3. The hope of heaven, where there shall be “no more pain” (Rom 8:18).
“Whatever thou Host hate,
Whatever thou wouldst cast away and scorn
As profitlessAffliction never lose;
Affliction never cease to venerate.
For sorrow sanctified bears fruit to God,
Which, in his heavenly garner treasured up,
Shall feed his own to all eternity.”
D.
1Sa 4:11
Symbol and spiritual truth.
“And the ark of God was taken.” The ark was a Divinely appointed symbol or material sign of spiritual truth, and especially of the presence and majesty, the holiness, mercy, and protection, of the invisible King of Israel. It was a part of a system of symbolical worship which was adapted to an early stage of human culture, and formed an important element in a dispensation introductory and preparatory to “the ministration of the Spirit” (2Co 3:8). But even under the new dispensation symbolism is not absolutely done away, for Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are both symbolic. With special, though not exclusive, reference to the ancient symbol, notice that
I. THE SYMBOL SERVES IMPORTANT PURPOSES IN RELATION TO THE TRUTH OR SPIRITUAL REALITY WHICH IT REPRESENTS. Its need arises from our being constituted of body and soul, the dependence of thought and feeling on sensible impressions, and the necessary influence of imagination in religion; and it serves
1. To make its nature more conceivable. “In the symbol proper, what we can call a symbol, there is ever, more or less distinctly and directly, some embodiment and revelation of the infinite; the infinite is made to blend itself with the finite, to stand visible and, as it were, attainable there” (Sartor Resartus).
2. To make its presence more certain; not, indeed, in itself, but in the convictions of the soul.
3. To make its influence more powerful, constant, and universal. It should, however, be observed that only the symbols which have been appointed by God may be authoritatively used in his worship; that these should be regarded with due reverence; not improperly exalted, not altered, not despised, not handled by unworthy hands; and that no others should be introduced, or only such as do not inculcate error, and do not conduce to superstition or formalism.
II. THE SYMBOL MAY BE POSSESSED WHILST THE TRUTH IS PARTIALLY OR WHOLLY LOST. This comes to pass
1. When the symbol receives an undue share of attention in comparison with the truth, which is distinct from it and incomparably more important; when it centres thought upon itself, and hinders rather than helps the soul in its spiritual aspirations.
2. When there is a moral indisposition and dislike, on the part of those who possess the symbol, toward the truth.
3. When, in consequence of such dislike, and the lowering of the idea of the truth, the sign is confounded with the thing signified, identified with it, and substituted for it. This is ever the chief danger attending the use of symbols in Divine worship.
III. THE RETENTION OF THE SYMBOL WITHOUT THE TRUTH IS WORTHLESS AND INJURIOUS.
1. It fails of its purpose; is a means of grace no more; an empty cistern; a meaningless, unreal, and hollow form. Nehushtan (a piece of brass2Ki 18:4).
2. It fills men with false confidence, and increases their error, formality, and corruption.
3. It woefully disappoints the trust which is reposed in it, and often leaves them to despair (Gal 5:1, Gal 5:2).
IV. THE REMOVAL OF THE SYMBOL IS SOMETIMES NECESSARY TO THE RECOVERY OF THE TRUTH. And this effect is accomplished by
1. Its correction of fatal error. In the case of Israel, teaching that the ark was not the same as the Divine presence, and did not necessarily insure it.
2. Causing deep humiliation.
3. Leading to earnest inquiry and prayer. “They lamented after the Lord” (1Sa 7:2), not after the ark, which had long been restored, and lay in a private dwelling without public honour, and appears to have exerted no influence whatever in the revival of spiritual truth and life that followed.
Conclusion:
1. Symbols are useful when rightly used and held in subordination to spiritual truth.
2. The course of the Divine dealings with men (like that of men with children) is less and less symbolical, more and more spiritual. “They shall say no more, The ark of the covenant,” etc. (Jer 3:16; Col 2:17 : Heb 9:23).
3. Symbols will completely vanish away in the light of perfect knowledge (1Co 13:10-12).D.
HOMILIES BY D. FRASER
1Sa 4:11
The ark misplaced and lost.
The elders of Israel were chagrined at the defeat suffered by the national army in its attempt to throw off the yoke of the Philistines. But, instead of seeking the Lord by repentance, they fell on a device to compel him, as they supposed, to give them a victory. Had not the ark been carried round the walls of Jericho, when Israel had no engines of siege to bring against a fortified city; and had not the walls fallen flat to the ground? Why not try its power again? “Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of Jehovah unto us, that, when it cometh among us, it may save us out of the hand of our enemies.”
I. A SACRED SYMBOL MISUSED. Forthwith the ark was brought into the camp, and the people in their foolish confidence shouted till the earth rang again. A superstitious fear ran through the ranks of the Philistines, but it did not unnerve them for the battle. They gained a signal victory, “and the ark of God was taken.” At such a cost had Israel to learn that the ark ought not to be used as a charm or talisman, and that, if so regarded and employed, it could not save them, could not save itself, while the face of God was turned away from the wicked priests and the degenerate nation. It is a lesson for all times. Men are often tempted to rely on religious symbols and appointments, not so much to glorify God therewith as to protect themselves. It is much easier to shout over these than to break off sins by righteousness. So the cross has been worn in many an evil enterprise, and carried into many battles, to defend cruel and rapacious men. So, also, men shout over their Church, their English Bible, their prayer book, or their sabbath, in a vain confidence that their relation to one of them, or to all of them, will secure the Divine favour, or, at all events, Divine defence, though in character and life they be no better than others who boast of none of these things. But it is all delusion, and they who go into some hard battle of life with no better security are destined to a thorough defeat. The ark of God itself could do nothing for men who by their sins had driven away the God of the ark. What a selfish man wants in religion is to have God bound to take his part and fight on his side, instead of his studying to be on God’s side, which is the side of righteousness. Such was the thought of the heathen nations of the East. Each of them had its guardian deity or deities, who were worshipped and propitiated at any cost, in order that they might befriend that particular nation or tribe, and injure its enemies. The gods were expected to give strength and victory to their own people, taking their part whether their cause were just or unjust. The Hebrews sometimes fell into the same way of thinking of Jehovah. He was their national God, and bound as such to fight for them. He was to be praised if they succeeded, to be reproached if they failed in whatever enterprise they undertook. Have not many Christians similar thoughts of God? Almost every great act of rapine has been perpetrated, and every war, however unjust, has been waged, with grave appeal to heaven, and gross usurpers and tyrants have had “Te Deum” sung for their infamous victories. But in vain do unrighteous men claim religious sanctions. God defends the right, and his face is against the wrong doer. The ark of his covenant, brought into the din and dust of battle by those who were full of sin unrepented of, went into the enemy’s hand, and the priests who stood beside it were slain.
II. FOREBODING OF EVIL. The aged Eli sat in his chair of office by the gate of Shiloh, watching the road, eager for early tidings from the army, his heart trembling for the ark of God. The natural fearfulness of old age was aggravated in this case by a reproaching conscience, which told Eli that he ought not to have permitted the ark to be taken without any warrant from the Lord into the turmoil of battle. So he sat foreboding calamity; and when the heavy tidings came to him of the discomfiture of Israel, the death of his sons, and the capture of the ark by the Philistines, Eli fell to the earth without a word, and died. We do not present the pathetic figure of the old priest trembling for the ark as a model for servants of God. The right and noble thing for Eli to have done would have been to resist the desecration of the sacred ark, and to call the people to repentance, that so they might be strong in God before they encountered the Philistines. But he had governed so weakly that he had no moral influence or authority; and his great age, which ought to have brought him reverence, only brought him feebleness; so Eli could but tremble and die. We have seen such feeble saints in our own time; they are always foreboding evil; they are in great alarm about the dangers which beset Christian truth; they sit trembling for the ark. Popery is about to swallow us up! Or, Infidelity is carrying all before it! Alas for the ark of God! So they wail and lament, and spread misgivings among all who listen to them. But they do little else; they have no vigour in counsel or action to prevent or to remedy spiritual disaster. It is a poor spirited, ineffective style of Christian character. We want something much firmer and bolder for the defence and propagation of the gospel. We want repentance insisted on, righteousness preached and practised, wrongs redressed, abuses cast out of the Church, and then we need not fear the Philistines. Granted that the times are perilous; there is cause of anxiety, and there is need of prayer. But prayer itself will not gain any victory for those whose hearts and lives are not right with God. Hophni and Phinehas went to the battle field reeking from their sins. How could God fight by or for them? And the people of Israel, following the bad example in high places, were quite demoralised. Why should they have a victory? Let repentance begin at the house of God. Let iniquity be abhorred and forsaken. So God will be with us, and we need not fear the foe. We shall tremble at his word, but we shall not tremble because of the Philistines. “Though an host should encamp against me, my heart shall not fear.”F.
1Sa 4:12-18. (SHILOH.)
The judgment of God on the judge of Israel.
“And he had judged Israel forty years” (1Sa 4:18). The life of Eli was lengthened out to ninety-eight years, during the last forty of which he judged Israel. In him we see that
1. The highest official position may be held by one who is destitute of the qualities which it demands.
2. Much excellence is sometimes associated with grave defects.
3. Sins of omission have a ruinous effect on othersthe family, the Church, the nation.
4. A good man is not spared when he is guilty of disobedience. The judgment of Heaven is impartial. The last hour of his long life has now come, and in it we see the old man
I. WATCHING WITH ANXIETY FOR THE ARK (1Sa 4:13). Why does his heart tremble? He has truly an affectionate regard for it. But
1. He has been accessory to its exposure in the battle field.
2. He is doubtful about its safety.
3. He dreads the consequences of its loss. Already he experiences the evil effects of his sin.
II. RECEIVING THE TIDINGS OF DISASTER (1Sa 4:12, 1Sa 4:14-17). “Woe upon woe.”
1. The defeat of Israel with a great slaughter.
2. The death of his two sons.
3. The capture of the ark. “With the surrender of the earthly throne of his glory the Lord appeared to have abolished his covenant of grace with Israel; for the ark, with the tables of the law and the Capporeth, was the visible pledge of the covenant of grace which Jehovah had made with Israel” (Keil).
III. SMITTEN WITH THE STROKE or DEATH (1Sa 4:18).
1. After long and merciful delay.
2. Directly connected with his sin.
3. “Suddenly, and without remedy.” Nevertheless, it was his dismay at the loss of the ark that caused his trembling heart to cease to beat; and his love for the sacred symbol lightens up the gloom of his melancholy end.D.
1Sa 4:19-22. (SHILO.)
Ichabod.
“The glory is departed’ (1Sa 4:22). Ichabod =
(1) Where is thy glory? (It is departed);
(2) The Inglorious; or,
(3) Alas! the glory. The last words of the wife of Phinehas. Her piety was
1. Genuine. She called the ark “the glory,” and, doubtless, had regard not merely to the symbol, but also and chiefly to the Divine presence which it represented.
2. Peculiar. Living in corrupt times, the wife of an ungodly man, yet truly devout; a pearl among pebbles, a rose among thorns, a grain of wheat in a heap of chaff.
3. Eminent. Her grief at the loss of the ark surpassed her sorrow at the death of her husband and her father-in-law, and swallowed up her joy at the birth of a son.
4. Early perfected by death amidst the righteous judgments of Heaven. From her dying utterance learn that
I. THE PRESENCE OF GOD IS THE TRUE GLORY OF A PEOPLE. It is the source of
1. Their real dignity.
2. Their internal prosperity.
3. Their external influence.
In vain do we look elsewhere for these things. “Thy God” (shall be) “thy glory” (Isa 60:19; Isa 62:2).
II. THE TRUE GLORY OF A PEOPLE MAY DEPART. This takes place when the presence (i.e. the favour and protection) of God is withdrawn.
1. It is caused by human sin of various kinds. He is not desirous of leaving men, but they are unwilling to fulfil the conditions according to which alone he can dwell among them.
2. It is often held out as a warning.
3. It has actually occurred (Eze 10:18). “Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that in the first place they felt a quaking and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, ‘Let us depart hence.'” (Joseph; ‘Wars,’ 1Sa 6:5, 1Sa 6:3). The warnings given to the seven Churches of Asia (Rev 2:1-29; Rev 3:1-22.) were neglected, and the evils predicted came to pass. The candlestick was removed out of its place (Rev 2:5), and darkness and desolation succeeded. “But though particular Churches may fall, our Lord’s promise will never fail the Catholic Church: ‘Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world'” (‘Sp. Com.’).
Conclusion:
1. The presence of God should be accounted by us the greatest blessing, and his departure dreaded as the greatest calamity.
2. Whatever contributes to his departure must be zealously renounced or corrected (Lam 3:40).
3. No condition is altogether hopeless. “If from thence thou shalt seek the Lord thy God, thou shalt find him,” etc. (Deu 4:29). The glory of Israel, which, it was thought, had gone forever, was restored; and out of the night of sorrow a new day was born.D.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
1Sa 4:1. Now Israel went out, &c. Probably the Israelites were encouraged to this undertaking, by the confusion into which the Philistines must have been thrown by the slaughter of their great men which Samson made at his death. The name Ebenezer was not given to this place till some time after; ch. 1Sa 7:12 but it was so called at the time that the historian wrote this book.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
SECOND SECTION
Samuels Call
1Sa 3:1 to 1Sa 4:1 a
1And the child Samuel ministered unto the Lord [Jehovah] before Eli. And the word of the Lord [Jehovah] was precious1 in those days; there was no open 2vision [vision spread abroad2]. And it came to pass at that time, when [that3]. Eli was laid down [lying down4] in his place, and his eyes began to wax dim that he could 3not see. And ere [om. ere5] the lamp of God went out [was not yet gone out] in the temple of the Lord, where the ark of God was [om. in the templewas6] and Samuel was laid down [lying down4] to sleep [om. to sleep, ins. in 4the temple of Jehovah where the ark of God7 was], That [And] the Lord [Jehovah] 5called [ins. to] Samuel, and he answered [said], Here am I. And he ran unto Eli, and said, Here am I, for thou calledst me. And he said, I called not; 6[ins. go back and] lie down again [om. again]. And he went and lay down. And the Lord [Jehovah] called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I, for thou didst call [calledst] me. And he answered [said], I 7called not, my son, [ins. go back and] lie down again [om. again]. Now Samuel did not yet know8 the Lord [Jehovah], neither was the word of the Lord yet [and 8the word of Jehovah was not yet] revealed unto him. And the Lord [Jehovah] called Samuel again the third time. And he arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I, for thou didst9 call [calledst] me. And Eli perceived that the Lord [Jehovah] 9had called [was calling] the child. Therefore, [And] Eli said unto Samuel, Go, lie down, and it shall be, if he [one10] call thee, that thou shalt say, Speak, Lord [Jehovah], for thy servant heareth. So [And] Samuel went and lay down 10in his place. And the Lord [Jehovah] came, and stood,11 and called as at other times [as before], Samuel, Samuel. Then [And] Samuel answered [said], Speak, 11for thy servant heareth. And the Lord [Jehovah] said to Samuel, Behold, I will [om, will] do a thing in Israel, at which both the ears of every one that heareth it 12shall tingle [the which whosoever heareth, both his ears shall tingle]. In that day I will perform against Eli all things [om. things] which [that] I have spoken concerning his house, when I begin, I will also make an end [from beginning to end]. 13For [And] I have told [I announced to] him that I will [would] judge his house for ever for the iniquity12 [sin] which he knoweth, because [that he knew that] his sons made themselves vile [brought a curse on themselves13], and he restrained them 14not. And therefore I have sworn unto the house of Eli, that the iniquity of Elis house shall not be purged [expiated] with sacrifice [ins. of blood] nor [ins. unbloody14] 15offering forever. And Samuel lay until the morning,15 and opened the doors of the house of the Lord [Jehovah]. And Samuel feared to show Eli the 16vision. Then [And] Eli called Samuel, and said, Samuel, my son. And he answered 17[said], Here am I. And he said, What is the thing that the Lord [om. the Lord, ins. he] hath [om. hath] said unto thee? I pray thee [om. I pray thee16] hide it not from me. God do so to thee and more also, if thou hide anything from 18me of all the things [om. the things] that he said unto thee. And Samuel told him every whit, and hid nothing from him. And he said, It is the Lord [He is Jehovah]; let him do what seemeth him good.
19And Samuel grew; And the Lord [Jehovah] was with him, and did let none of 20his words fall to the ground. And all Israel from Dan even to Beersheba knew 21that Samuel was established to be a prophet of the Lord [Jehovah]. And the Lord [Jehovah] appeared again [continued to appear] in Shiloh; for the Lord [Jehovah] revealed himself to Samuel in Shiloh by [in] the word of the Lord [Jehovah].17
1Sa 4:1 a And the word of Samuel came to all Israel.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1Sa 3:1. The history of Samuels call to be prophet is introduced (1Sa 3:1) by a brief statement of what it presupposed, and what led to it in Samuel himself and in the condition of the Israelitish theocratic life. As to the first point, the connection shows that the boy Samuel had grown to be a youth, and was therefore intellectually capable of receiving the revelation of the Lord; his character as servant of the Lord in the Sanctuary is again stated (comp. 1Sa 2:11; 1Sa 2:18), and his relation to Eli as his guardian and guide is anew affirmed by the words before Eli. (1Sa 2:11). The call which Samuel receives supposes the fact that he belongs to the Lord as a gift from his parents, and, as servant in the Sanctuary, is, in this priestly life under the guidance of the High-priest, prepared to be a special instrument of Gods for His people.As to the second point, the condition of the theocratical life, the religious character of the times is marked by a twofold expression: 1) the word of the Lord was precious (), that is, the word was rare that came directly from the Lord by prophetic announcement to the people; the proper organs were lacking, persons who were filled with the Spirit of the Lord, that they might be witnesses of His word; there was lacking also in the people the living desire for the direct revelations of God in His word, and receptivity in religious feeling for the living declaration,and this was true even in the highest planes of theocratical life; 2) There was no vision spread abroad. break through, thence spread out from within, become known outwards, become public, Ps. 3:10; 2Ch 31:5.Hazon () [vision] is the feeling or perception which corresponds to a direct real divine revelation made to the imagination of the prophet.18 This vision is the means of the reception of the word to be announced. Little was heard of such revelations of the Lord by visions, they were not spread abroad. Therefore the word of the Lord was precious. The second fact had its ground in the first. In the theocratical life there was lacking both a truly God-fearing, living priesthood, and a proclamation of Gods word that should extricate the people from their religious-moral depravation, the vitalizing power of the divine Spirit through prophetic organs.
1Sa 3:2-10. The circumstances and individual elements of the calling. In 1Sa 3:2 the and it came to pass and the statement of time are so connected with 1Sa 3:4 that all the intermediate from and Eli to the end of 1Sa 3:3 is explanatory parenthesis.19
Samuel might have supposed, when he was awaked by hearing his name called, that he had to render some service to the half-blind Eli; and so it is expressly mentioned at the beginning of these descriptive sentences that Eli was growing blind. The word began shows that the statement afterwards made, he could not see, is by no means to be understood as meaning complete blindness.20To the chronological datum in the beginning of 1Sa 3:2 is added in 1Sa 3:3 an exacter and more definite statement in the words: And the lamp of God was not yet gone out;no doubt this indicates night-time, near the morning, since the seven-lamped candelabrum in the Sanctuary before the curtain, which (Exo 27:20-21; Exo 30:7-8) was furnished with oil every morning and evening, after having burnt throughout the night and consumed its oil, usually, no doubt, got feebler or went out towards morning (comp. Lev 24:2-3). The words and S. was sleeping are not to be regarded, as the Athnach under the last requires, as a parenthesis separated from in the temple (as is usually done), if the latter expression is understood to mean sanctuary in distinction from the most holy place; for we cannot suppose that Samuel slept in this Sanctuary. But hekal () is here, as in 1Sa 1:9; Psa 11:4, the whole sanctuary, the entire space of the tabernacle, as the palace of God, the King of His people, who has His throne there. This throne is the ark of God, for above the ark was the symbol of the presence, yea, of the royal dwelling and enthronement of God in the midst of His people (1Sa 4:4). Samuels sleeping-place was in one of the rooms, which were built in the court for the priests and Levites on service (Keil). The name Jehovah stands after temple, because it is the Covenant-God, who descends to His people and dwells with them, that is brought before us. On the other hand, in connection with the lamp and the ark Elohim is used in the sense of the divine in general, (Then.), that is, God is viewed in His loftiness and power over the whole world, as He who is to be feared and venerated, as lofty majesty (which conception is made clear by the plural).
In 1Sa 3:2-3, is described the situation in which Samuel received the call of the Lord,it is night, the High-priest lies in his place in the sanctuary, the lamps of the candelabrum are still burning,21 the morning is near, it is the time when dream-life rises to its height; near Samuel was the ark of God, whence the revelations of God came.
1Sa 3:4-10 give the whole history of the call, with the attendant circumstances, in its individual elements.Samuel hears the call of a voice, which has awakened him from sleep, but takes it to be not the call of a divine voice, as it was, but a call from Eli. Eli, to whom he hastens, sends him back to his couch with the answer: I did not call thee. This is repeated in 1Sa 3:6.
1Sa 3:7 gives the reason why Samuel thought he heard not Gods voice, but Elis.22 Knowing God means here not the general knowledge of God which every Israelite of necessity had, but the special knowledge of God, which was given by extraordinary revelation of God. The experience which now comes to Samuel is marked as the first of the sort. The word of God had not yet been revealed to him. He had not yet received such a special revelation of God through His word; therefore he did not yet know the God who revealed Himself in this way.It was a gloomy time, poor in revelation, as in exemplary religious life. For Eli, the High-priest, was weak, his sons defiled the sanctuary, the people served idols (1Sa 7:3 sq.), and the Philistines ruled oppressively. Hence it came that Samuel did not yet know how the Lord was used to reveal Himself to the prophets, the announcer of His word to men (1Sa 3:1; 1Sa 3:7) (Ngelsbach, Herz. R.-E. XIII. 395 sq.). After the third repetition of the call (1Sa 3:8), Eli observed the divine origin of the call, and showed Samuel (1Sa 3:9) how he should deport himself towards the divine voice. His answer was to be: Speak, Lord, for thy servant heareth.Up to this point the medium of the divine revelation was the thrice repeated call of a voice, which so strongly impressed Samuels hearing, that he was awakened out of sleep. This is the meaning of the narrative; it does not mean a voice, which he thought he heard in a dream merely. In 1Sa 3:10 a new factor is introduced: the divine revelation by means of a voice becomes a vision: Jehovah came and stood, that is, before Samuel. That an objective real appearance is here meant is clear from 1Sa 3:15, the vision (). Three factors are to be combined: the dream-state of Samuels soul (the internal sense), the hearing a voice on awakening, the seeing an appearance.
1Sa 3:11-14. Here follows the divine announcement of the judgment on Israel and the house of Eli. The Pres. ( partcp.) brings the act, though still in the future, before us as near, immediately and surely impending.23 The tingling of both ears is the mark of dread and horror, which comes suddenly on a man, so that he well nigh loses his senses. Clericus reference to the Lat. attonitus is excellent, comp. Jer 19:3. The unheard of horror which was to make both ears tingle was (chap. 4) the frightful defeat of Israel in battle with the Philistines, and the loss of the ark to this heathen people.As in 1Sa 3:11 the horror, which is to come upon Israel, is announced, so in 1Sa 3:12-14 is declared the judgment of the house of Eli. In 1Sa 3:12 the Infs. Abs. ( ) serve to explain and define the verb fin., beginning and ending, that is, from beginning to end, fully, entirely. Not one word of the minatory prophecy (1Sa 2:27 sq.) is to remain unfulfilled. (See Ew. 280, 3 a).In 1Sa 3:13 this announcement is recapitulated. The declaration was a threat, no longer a warning. Judging is in sense (comp. Gen 15:14) identical with punishing. This punishment will be inflicted on Elis house for ever; the judgment will never again be removed from it. In what did Elis sin consist? In the neglect of the duty which he ought to have performed to his sons as father, high-priest and judge, by the employment of severe chastisement and punishment.He knew their crimes, but let them go unpunished. cursed themselves is very hard to explain, unless with Sept. and Then., we read for , and translate they brought God into contempt, the Pi. being taken as causative, and Qal=to come into contempt. Certainly this rendering would agree with 1Sa 2:17; butaside from the untrustworthiness of the Sept. in relation to the Heb. text, which also may here have been arbitrarily treated on account of this difficultyagainst this reading is the fact that God Himself here speaks. The conjecture adduced by Grotius, (the Hebrews wrote that for themselves formerly stood me,) must be rejected on account of the difference in the letters. There remains no other course than to translate cursing, bringing a curse on, themselves, according to the usual explanation.24 Luther gives the correct sense: that his sons behaved shamefully. [So Eng. A. V. made themselves vile, but this is not exactly correct. See translation and textual note.Tr.]
1Sa 3:14. The announcement that the punishment is imposed for ever (1Sa 3:13) is here marked by the divine oath as irrevocable. (, in view of the ellipsis, with negative force, Ges. 155, 2 sq.). The transgression of Elis house is here spoken of because not only did Elis sins of omission and his sons sins of commission prove them personally worthy of punishment before God, but the religious depravation that issued from them affected the whole family, even their posterity. ( Pass. for the usual ). Because the guilt can never be expiated, therefore the sentence will never be recalled, but, agreeably to the Lords true word, will be carried out on Elis house. The double for ever at the end of the two declarations (1Sa 3:13-14) expresses the terrible earnestness of the divine justice. [As to the relation between this announcement (1Sa 3:11-14) and the other (1Sa 2:27-36), the latter is founded on and supposes the earlier, but does not exactly repeat it. The first message seems (strangely enough) not to have produced the desired effect, namely to rouse Eli and save his house; for, though it is expressed absolutely, we have to suppose that the doom might be averted by repentance and obedience, as in the case of Nineveh. But the old man was too weak, and his sons (who must have heard of the prophets threatened punishment) too far gone in sin. No moral change occurs to remove the implied moral condition of the doom, and the sentence is to be executed. Still God will not leave His old servant without another appeal; He sends another message by Samuel. The first prophecy (chap. 2) reviewed, the history of the sacerdotal house of Eli, exposed its unfaithfulness, announced its deposition, and looked beyond to the glory of a new and faithful priestly house. The second prophecy, given through Samuel, reaffirms the punishment, emphasizes Elis personal guilt, and declares the sentence on the priestly house to be irrevocable. Its object, then, would seem to be two-fold: 1) to rouse Eli and his sons to repentance and quickening into spiritual life, (see Elis response in verse 18, whereas no answer of his to the first threat is recorded); 2) to accredit Samuel as a prophet by making him the bearer of a message that the whole nation would hear of, and to develop his spiritual-prophetic earnestness and faithfulness by bringing him into personal contact with the most serious events. It is hardly to be supposed that the conduct of Eli and his sons had been unobserved by Samuel. Rather they must have occasioned him (in connection with the man of Gods announcement) much serious thought, so that his message to Eli was not something apart from his own intellectual and spiritual life. We must notice, also, the difference in breadth and maturity between the declaration committed to the (doubtless) full-grown man of God, and that delivered through the youth Samuel.Tr.].
1Sa 3:15-18. Samuel before Eli as called prophet of the Lord in his first prophetic function. Although Eli had already received from the man of God (1Sa 2:27) the prediction of punishment, yet his conduct gives occasion to the repetition (through Samuel who had a direct call from the Lord) of the prophetic announcement of judgment on his house as a word of immediate revelation from the Lord.
1Sa 3:15 sq. describe with such psychological and historical minuteness, such clearness and truth to life Samuels external situation and tone of mind after the revelation and appearance, and the conduct of Eli who was roused to earnest interest25 by the thrice-occurring call to Samuel, that neither here nor in the preceding description (1Sa 3:1-14) is there any ground for Ewalds opinion that this is not an original tradition. After this revelation Samuel sleeps in his bed till morning. Opening the doors of Gods house was a part of his duty in the sanctuary. By the doors we are not to understand the curtains, but real doors, which belonged, however, not to the cells which were perhaps built around, but to the house of God itself. Originally, indeed, the Tabernacle, being a tent, had no doors, but, after it was fixed in Shiloh with a solid enclosure, it might somehow have been provided with them. Perhaps it stood within a larger frame, or a solid temple-space of stone built for its protection” (Leyrer in Herzogs R.-E. XV. 116.)Samuel is afraid to tell Eli the vision, the appearance () which had presented itself to his internal sense, in which Gods revelation concerning the house of Eli had been set forth before himpartly from awe at the divine word which formed the content of the revelation, partly on account of the dreadful significance it had for Eli, partly by reason of the sorrow of which, in his reverence and filial piety towards Eli, he could not rid himself. But Eli compels him to tell what he had so wondrously learned.On my son, 1Sa 3:16, Thenius admirably remarks: How much is expressed by this one word! In 1Sa 3:17 observe the climax in the words with which, in three sentences, Eli demands information from Samuel; it expresses the excitement of Elis soul. He asks for the word of the Lord; he demands an exact and complete statement; he adjures Samuel to conceal nothing from him. God do so to thee and more also, if, etc., is a frequent form of adjuration,26 which threatens punishment from God, if the request is not complied with, comp. 1Sa 14:44; 1Sa 20:18.
1Sa 3:18. And Samuel told him every whit. His fear was overpowered by Elis demand. In obeying Eli he was at the same time obeying the Lord, whose command to enter on his prophetic calling before Eli he must have recognized in the latters demand. And he (Eli) said. Two things Eli says: It is the Lord! This is the utterance of submission to the Lord. He sees confirmed what the man of God announced to him, and recognizes the indubitable revelation of the Lord. Let Him do what seemeth Him good. This is the expression of resignation to the unchangeable will of the Lord. To the overwhelming declaration of God Eli shows a complete resignation, giving himself and his house into Gods hands, without trying to excuse or justify himself, but also, it is true, without exhibiting thorough penitence.
1Sa 3:19-21. The result of Samuels call to the prophetic office, and, at the same time, transition to the description of his prophetical work in Israel. 1) In 1Sa 3:19 a the divine principle in his development into a man of God in his prophetic office is expressly emphasized, his growth from youth to manhood () being set forth under the highest theocratic point of view, which is marked by the words: And the Lord was with him.To him were imparted Gods revelations for Israel, because he was a man after Gods heart, who, amid the temptations to evil that surrounded him in Shiloh, was now as a youth mature and tried in true fear of God and sincere fellowship with God; and his growth rested on a childhood consecrated to the Lord. The Lord was with him. This refers not merely to the general proofs of Gods goodness and mercy, to the blessing which he received from the Lord throughout his life, but also to the special revelations and gifts of the Spirit which the Lord imparted to him as His chosen instrument. For 2) in 1Sa 3:19 b in the words And he let none of his words fall to the ground is emphasized the divine demonstration of Samuels prophetic character by Gods fulfilment of what he prophetically announced as the word revealed to him. The expression did not let fall indicates that the word was not spoken in vain, but was fulfilled,27 comp. Jos 21:45; Jos 23:14; 1Ki 8:56; 2Ki 10:10. 3) 1Sa 3:20 exhibits his general recognition in Israel as a tried instrument for the Lord in the prophetic office. The geographical indication of the extent of this recognition supposes that Samuel was made known to the whole people from Dan on the north to Beersheba on the south (Jdg 20:1) as a prophet of the Lord by his declaration of the word of God. (, found trustworthy, tried, Num 12:7). From this it is evident that the people of Israel, in spite of their disruption, yet formed religiously a unit. In spite of the general lack of the declaration of Gods word, there was still altogether a receptivity for it; notwithstanding the decline of the religious-moral life there was not lacking a sense for the self-revelation of the living God through His chosen instrument, the prophet Samuel. It is no doubt intimated in 1Sa 3:20 that Samuel, in contrast with the hitherto isolated appearances of prophets, was known as a man called to a permanent prophetic work (Ngelsbach, Herz. R.-E. XIII. 26). For the factual ground of 1Sa 3:20 is given in the closely connected v. 21, where 4) are stated the continued direct revelations of God to Samuel in Shiloh. Jehovah continued to appear in Shiloh. This points to visions as the form of revelation for the internal sense, and as the continuation of the mode of appearance which is set forth in 1Sa 3:10; 1Sa 3:15 as vision. The words for the Lord revealed Himself to Samuel in Shiloh by the word of the Lord leave no doubt that that revelation in visions also was made to Samuel, and that the word was the heart and the guiding star of these revelations of the Lord made to him that they might be imparted to the people. As the people had hitherto had its centre in Shiloh in the Tabernacle with the ark as the symbol of Gods indwelling and presence, so now it found in the same place a new centre in the continued revelations of the Lord to Samuel through His word. From now on God made known His will to the people by the revelation of His word to Samuel, the first representative of the permanent prophetic order.28 Thus, then, the beginning of the fourth chapter: And the word of Samuel came to all Israelis closely connected with the preceding. The word of Samuel is in content, the word of the Lord, which was directly revealed to him, he being from now on favored with this revelation (1Sa 3:21) in the form of the vision (); thus the declaration God revealed Himself to Samuel is by no means superfluous (Then.); for it is not the revelation mentioned above” which is here meant, but that which was constantly repeated in vision, by virtue of which Samuel was the Roeh (), seer. In form the word of Samuel was prophetic announcement, as organ of which he was Nabi (), Gods spokesman, interpreter.29 His word came to all Israel. In these words is comprised 5) his prophetic work in all Israel, and the permanent effect of his call to the prophetic office (made by the first revelation) is indicated. The word which came to him from God went by him to the whole people. This close connection of these words with the preceding context, and their closing and comprehensive character shows plainly how incorrect is the ordinary view which connects them with the following, and regards them as a call by Samuel to battle with the Philistines. They are the summary description of his prophetic work, on which his judicial labors rested, the transition to these latter being made in the following narration of Israels public national calamity.
HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL
1. Samuels person and labors as prophet. So the Lords training had borne its fruits. Samuel had been preserved amid the temptations of Shiloh. He had grown up to be a consecrated man and faithful prophet of the Lorda man of God in the midst of an apostate racea light in the darkness, and much was gained when Gods word was once more to be found in the land. (Schlier, Die Knige in Isr., 1865, 2 ed., p. 5.)
The vigorous and connected ministry of the prophets begins with Samuel, who is therefore to be regarded as the true founder of the Old Testament prophetic order (comp. Act 3:24). It was that extraordinary time when, with the removal of the ark, the Tabernacle had lost its significance as centre, the high-priests functions were suspended, and now the mediatorship between God and the people rested altogether in the inspired prophet. While the limits of the old ordinances of worship are broken through, Israel learns that Jehovah has not restricted His saving presence to the ancient symbol of His indwelling among the people, rather is to be found everywhere, where He is earnestly sought, as God of salvation. Oehler in Herz. R.-E. s. v. Prophet-enthum des A. T. XII. 214.
2. The time of Samuels appearance in Israel as prophet was the time of an internal judgment of God, which consisted in the preciousness of Gods word, that is, in the lack of intercourse of God with His people by revelation. It was a theocratic interdict30 incurred by the continued apostasy of the people from their God, and inflicted by Gods justice. It had the disciplinary aim to lead their hearts back to the Lord, who had long kept silence, had long suspended His revelations. Such a judgment of the cessation of all revelation-intercourse of God with man came upon Saul, 1Sa 28:6; 1Sa 28:15; comp. the complaint in Psa 74:9, there is no longer any prophet, and the wail in Amo 7:11 sq. over the famine of Gods word. The same law presents itself in all periods of the kingdom of God; men lose the source of life, Gods revealed word, by a divine judgment, when they withdraw from intercourse with the living God, and will not accept His holy word as the truth which controls their whole life.
3. The form of Gods revelation in prophecy is, as we see in Samuel, internal sight, the vision, to which the original appellation Roeh ( or )31 (according to 1Sa 9:9, the earlier usual designation of the prophet) points. Vision and word of God are in 1Sa 3:1 parallel expressions for prophecy. The vision is nothing but the inner incorporation, and therefore also symbolizatioii of what is felt in the mindwhether it be in visible shape for the inner eye, or vocally for the inner ear. (Tholuck, Die Propheten und ihre Weissa-gungen, 1861, p. 54.) The internal sight, by means of which the prophet knows that the content of the prophecy, the matter of the announcement to be made, has been imparted to him by God directly, altogether independently of his own activity, is the vision in the wider sense. For this reason Samuel, like all other prophets, is called a Seer. After his soul, detached from the outer world of sense through the medium of the dream, has thus been brought into a state of more concentrated receptivity for the revelation of God, he sees with the internal sense the matter of the prophetic declaration directly imparted to him by God. But when the revelation presents its content in visible shape before the prophets soul, there results the vision in the stricter sense. (Oehler, Herz. R.-E. XVII. 637.)
4. In the history of Samuels call to the prophetic office are united prototypically all essential momenta32 of theocratic prophecy: 1) the ethical condition of the absolute consecration of the person and the whole life to Gods service on the basis of sincere life-communion with Him, and of mutual intercourse between God and the prophet(Speak, Lord, thy servant heareth; comp. Jer 33:2 sq.: call unto me, and I will answer thee, and show thee great and mighty things, which thou knowest not); 2) the definite, direct, clearly recognized and irresistible call of God to be the instrument of His revelation, the declarer of His word which is to be imparted to him, connected with the gift of inspiration and capacity therefor by the controlling power of the Spirit of God; 3) the reception of Gods special revelation by word independently of human teaching and instruction and his own investigation and meditation, together with the consciousness of having been favored with a disclosure of Gods objective thoughts; 4) the internal sight as the subjective medium of the reception of the revelation of God, the psychical form of prophecy; 5) the declaration of the revelation received, with the certainty and confidence (produced by the Spirit) that the announced word will be confirmed by the corresponding divine deed. Comp. Oehler, Weissagung, Herz. R.-E. XVII. 627 sqq.33
5. The triple repetition of the divine call to Samuel betokens Gods holy arrangement for preparing His inner life, that he might become an exclusive organ of divine revelation (comp. 1Sa 3:7-8), freed from human authority, his soul open only to the utterances of the living God, as is shown by Samuels answer to the divine voice: Speak, Lord, thy servant heareth (1Sa 3:9-10); for by this answer Samuel assumes the position of one who has direct converse with the Lord, that he may, as his servant, hear what the Lord will say to him by His revelations, and thereby the end of the threefold preparative call is fulfilled.
6. That the light of the divine word may illuminate the inner life, the latter must be open to this light, as it is given by divine revelation. The humble readiness to hear and accept Gods counsels with the ear of faith is called forth by the awakening call of Gods voice, and leads to the clear knowledge of His word. The way to fellowship with the living God and service in His kingdom is opened and prepared only by Gods act of grace in calling men by the voice of His word; and so living and abiding continually in fellowship with the Lord is conditioned on the word of revelation, in which the Lord speaks to the soul that stands fast in the obedience of faith. Thus the individual elements of this history of Samuels call present a picture of the grace of God that calls us, as all they learn or experience, who, like Samuel, occupy such a position towards Gods word, that to Gods call they answer with him: Speak, Lord, thy servant heareth.
7. Pardoning grace34 (1Sa 3:14) is open to every sinner, and is denied by God for no sin, if there be, on the mans part, honest, hearty repentance for sin as enmity against God and violation of His holy will, and confident trust in His grace and mercy, that is, if there be a thorough conversion to the Lord. In Elis house, in spite of the preceding divine warnings and threatenings, there was continued, persistent sin, and Eli did not summon the resolution to make an energetic cleansing of his house and thoroughly to remove his sons wickedness, which he ought to have felt especially bound to do as high-priest; such sin makes it impossible that Gods grace should be shown in the forgiveness of sin, puts a limit to Gods patience and long-suffering, and draws down on itself His punitive judgments as necessary proofs of His holiness and justice. [The Mosaic Law had no offering for presumptuous sins; but underneath the Law (which was civil-political in its outward form) lay the fundamental principle of the forgiveness of the penitent sinner, developed, for example, in Psalms 51 and others. This principle, however, though doubtless part of the spiritual thought of ancient Israel, did not find full expression till it was announced that the blood of Christ cleanses from all sin. But in the New Testament, as in the Old Testament, there is no pardon without repentance.Tr.]
8. The true permanent unity of Israel, dismembered, as the nation was, during the Period of the Judges, was established by Samuel by means of the word of God which, in his prophetic proclamation, embraced all Israel. Even in times when the national, political and religious-ecclesiastical life is most sadly shattered and disrupted, the divine word, if it is only preached lovingly by preachers that live in it, shows its purifying and unifying power, the receptivity for it being present, and only needing to be called forth.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1Sa 3:1. Cramer: That is the greatest and most perilous scarcity, when God causes a dearth, not of bread but of His word.Wuert. Bible: God does not give His holy word to every one and at every time in great abundance, but causes at certain times also a scarcity therein to be suffered, Eze 3:26; Amo 8:11-12.
[1Sa 3:3-14. Stanley: The stillness of the nightthe sudden voicethe childlike misconceptionthe venerable Elithe contrast between the terrible doom and the gentle creature who has to announce itgive to this portion of the narrative a universal interest. It is this side of Samuels career that has been so well caught in the well-known pictures by Sir Joshua Reynolds.Tr.]
1Sa 3:3-10. Steinmeyer (Testimonies to the glory of Christ, Berlin, 1847): The call of Samuel the Prophet, as an image of our entering into communion with the Lord; 1) How the occasion for this communion is given on the part of God, 2) How the condition of it is fulfilled on the part of Samuel, and 3) How this communion itself was begun.Awaking from sleep! What a striking designation of the turning point between the old and the new in our life also. We were like them that sleep, them that dream, before we entered into communion with God. It is, however, certainly no arbitrary pre-supposition, that this pure, simple, upright nature had definite presentiments that he must be in what was his Gods, and that he was moved by a longing, even though not understood, after the hour which now struck; and even this position of heart appears to find in the image of sleep its beautiful, exactly-corresponding expression. More or less, however, the comparison will also be applicable to us all. If the grace of the Lord caused us to grow up in the temple of His church, as Samuel in the sanctuary at Shiloh, if we were, like him, from childhood nourished with the sincere milk of the word, then there will always in our awaking be a definite recollection that already long before we found ourselves unawares in this sphere, only that hitherto our eyes were holden, while now we are allowed to look freely and without hindrance into the riches of His grace and His truth.
[How far this sort of analogical preaching may be carried, is a question of opinion. There are many who will think it has been carried quite too far in this paragraph.Tr.]
1Sa 3:8-9. The fact that Samuel, notwithstanding the old mans assurance that he had not called him, appeared again, and came the third time, without consulting with flesh and blood, was a proof of his simplicity and uprightness. This is indeed the same uprightness which the Redeemer commends in Nathaniel, and here we have certainly a striking example of the Scripture saying: The Lord makes the upright prosper.That the youth was ready without fretting to present himself three times for the service of his fatherly teacherwhat else is it than his obedience towards him to whose discipline and service he had now devoted himself, so firmly grounded in obedience that he did not allow himself to be turned away from his simple, quiet path, not even by the most wonderful testimonies, by perfectly incomprehensible directions. And so with us too, if in any relation whatever we have only learned true obedience, if the position and state of our heart has become that of full and humble subjection, then we are no longer far from the Kingdom of God, which demands blind, unshakable obedience, within which one cannot maintain himself without giving himself up unconditionally to the one authority of Christ in faith as well as in life, and which utterly excludes all selfishness, in whatever form it may come up, all self-will, all entering upon a self-chosen path. [The analogy here and in what follows is extremely remote, and such a use of the passage would seem injudicious.Tr.]If we too have only first reached in general the point of being able to believe without seeingfor faith too must be learnedable to believe in the first place the human teaching, rebuking, consoling word,well, then we are on the way, since the voice of the divine word is believingly received by us.
[Henry: There was a special Providence in it, that Samuel should go thus often to Eli; for hereby, at length, Eli perceived that the Lord had called the child, 1Sa 3:8. (1) This would be a mortification to him, and he would apprehend it to be a step toward his familys being degraded, that when God had something to say he should choose to say it to the child Samuel, his servant that waited on him, and not to him. (2) This would put him upon inquiring what it was that God said to Samuel, and would abundantly satisfy him of the truth and certainty of what should be delivered, and no room would be left for him to suggest that it was but a fancy of Samuels.Tr.]
1Sa 3:10. So then for the first time Samuel stands with consciousness in the presence of the majesty of Godand immediately all the riddles of life begin to be solved for him, and the meaning of his own life to become clear. What he says bears the clearest stamp of a really begun communion with the Lord. Is it not the resolve to say and to do all that the Lord might show him of his lofty thoughts and waysis it not this, and nothing but this, that is expressed in Samuels words: Speak, Lord, for Thy servant heareth? Has he not thereby once for all renounced self-knowing and self-will? That was the faithfulness as a prophet, which all Israel from Dan even to Beersheba recognized in him (1Sa 3:20). And that which thus first established a true communion with the Lord could also alone be the power that maintained it. The constant prayer, Speak, Lord, and the constant vow, Thy servant heareth,that is the hand which takes hold of Gods right hand, to be held fast by it with everlasting life.
1Sa 3:10. Speak, Lord, thy servant heareth, a testimony of unconditional devotion to the Lord: 1) How such a testimony is reached, (a) through the Lords awakening call, (b) through receptivity of heart for Gods word, and (c) through the deed of self-denial in the renunciation of all self-knowing and self-will; 2) What is therein testified and praised before the Lord: (a) humble subjection (Speak, Lord), (b) steadfast dependence on the Lord in free love (thy servant), (c) unconditional, joyful obedience to His will (thy servant heareth.)Conditions of a blessed fulfillment of ones calling for the Kingdom of God: 1) The experience of the power of the divine word: I have called thee by thy name; 2) The repeated call in prayer, Speak, Lord! and 3) The fulfillment of the vow: thy servant heareth.
1Sa 3:11. Lange: It is Gods design that when He causes great judgments to occur, men shall with holy terror accept them as a warning. God begins in good time to bring into holy fear the hearts of those whom he wishes to make special and great instruments of advancing His honor. 1Sa 3:12. Starke : The Lords word is true; Psa 33:4 [in German; Eng. Ver. correctly: right.Tr.] Let men therefore not mock at Gods word and threatenings.Calvin: The guilt becomes so much the greater, when God warns sinners of their transgressions, and they notwithstanding persevere in them. 1Sa 3:13. Elis guilt becomes so much the greater from the fact that it was known to him how shamefully his sons behaved, and he did nothing to remove this abomination from his house and from the sanctuary. Calvin: Those who are set for the purpose of chastising the wicked make themselves partakers of a like guilt with them, and go quite over to their side, when at most they express censure with words, and so give themselves the appearance of strictness and earnestness, but do not use the power conferred on them to interfere with the godlessness by deeds.
1Sa 3:14. If the sons of Eli had earnestly repented, they would have obtained grace. But as they were given up to their godless disposition, they must of necessity be hardened in their sins, and in spite of the offerings they presented, which were an abomination in the sight of the Lord, must suffer judgment.
[1Sa 3:11-14. Compare this warning with that previously sent to Eli (1Sa 2:27-36). 1) It is simpler, as was appropriate when given through a youth. 2) It is mainly a repetition of what he had been told before, as are so many of Gods messages to men;the sin mentioned is the iniquity which he knoweth (1Sa 3:13), and the punishment is all, that I have spoken (1Sa 3:12). 3) It contains a still more severe threatening, as the former had not led to repentance; (a) an unknown horror is predicted, (b) a punishment of his family that shall never cease. 4) It arouses Eli to enough of spiritual life for submission (1Sa 3:18), but not enough for amendment. (Comp. addition by Tr. to Exegetical on 1Sa 3:14).Tr.]
1Sa 3:18. We should never venture to dispute with God nor wish to speak against and oppose His purpose, but must, even when we do not recognize the ground of His judgments, yea, when we think we are suffering unjustly, adore the righteousness and holiness of His judgments. Eli bowed himself, it is true, in humility and reverence before the Divine Majesty, but we do not see that he stirred himself up to fulfil his duty towards his godless sons, whereby he would have made known by action the earnestness of his own conversion from the slackness and yielding compliance, which made him the sharer of his sons guilt. We should therefore lay it earnestly to heart, not merely with the mouth to give God the honor for His wisdom and righteousness, but upon His call to repentance to subject our own life to an earnest self-examination, in order that then we may beseech God to forgive our sins, and may with our whole heart avoid and flee from evil.
1Sa 3:19. The word of God does not return void, whether it promises or threatens, and preachers of the word of God learn with Samuel that none of their words fall to the ground, and this just in proportion as they are diligent to preach nothing else than Gods word.
[1Sa 3:15-18. Evil Tidings. 1) Samuel shrinks from telling them, as a painful duty. 2) Eli is anxious to be told, (a) He apprehends ill news for himselfaccusing consciencereminded of the warning given through the prophet (1Sa 2:27 sqq.) (b) But he desires to know the worstearnestly conjures Samuel to tell him all. 3) Eli hears evil tidings with submission, (a) He is Jehovahthe sovereign Godthe covenant Godtoo wise to err, too good to be unkind. (b) Let him do, etc. He submits humbly, trustfully, lovingly. Hall: If Eli have been an ill father to his sons, yet he is a good son to God, and is ready to kiss the very rod he shall smart withal.)Tr.]
1Sa 3:20. Samuel a true prophet of the Lord; 1) Whereby he was such. 2) How he proved himself such before the whole people. 3) How he was recognized as such by them. 4) How he is an example for the faithful in the ministry of Gods word.
Cramer: Not only of the whole church in general, but of every Christian hearer in particular is it demanded, that with reference to the doctrine taught he shall perceive whether it is right and true or not, and stand his ground. In the case of Samuel the word did not hold good: The prophet has no honor in his own country. He comes before us here as a prophet who has much honor in his own country, 1) Because he was a faithful prophet of God, 2) Because he was counted worthy by God of continual revelations through his word, and 3) God confirmed his proclamations by the publicly manifested fulfillment of them as a fulfillment of his word.
[1Sa 3:19-21. Henry: The honor done Samuel as a prophet: 1) God did him honor (a) By further manifestations of Himself to him. (b) By fulfilling what He spake by him. 2) Israel did him honor. (a) He grew famous. (b) He grew useful and very serviceable to his generation. He that began betimes to be good, soon came to do good.Tr.]
Footnotes
[1][1Sa 3:1. = rare, see Isa 13:12; Chald. renders hidden.Tr.]
[2][1Sa 3:1. This word () is variously rendered: Sept. , distinguishing, explaining, whence some would (without ground) change the text to (which perhaps the Alex. translator read, the Nun omitted from preceding Nun); Chald. revealed = broken open; Syr. as Heb.; Arab., the Lord had deprived the children of Israel of revelation in those days, and there was no revelation, to any one of them, and nothing appeared to him; Vulg. manifesta; others, broken, diffused, multiplied; the Jewish interpreters (Rashi, Kimchi, Ralbag) follow the Targ.: Luther, wenig weissagung, little prophecy; Erdmann, verbreitet, spread abroad; Cahen, repandu. This last is probably the correct sense, see 1Ch 13:2; 2Ch 31:5.Tr.]
[3][1Sa 3:2. Erdmann renders when (as Eng. A. V.) in order to show that the description from this point is introductory to 1Sa 3:4; but the literal translation, given above, clearly indicates the connection of thought, and avoids the interpretation of a construction into the text.Tr.]
[4][1Sa 3:2 and 1Sa 3:4, Or, was sleeping.Tr.]
[5][1Sa 3:3. with Impf. following the subject = not yet.Tr.]
[6][1Sa 3:3. The Eng. A. V. in making this unwarranted inversion of clauses, was probably controlled by the same motive which led the Masorites to separate (was lying) from (in the temple) by the Athnach, namely, to avoid the seeming assertion that Samuel was sleeping in the sacred building. The Targum accordingly renders was sleeping in the Court of the Levites, borrowing this term apparently from Herods temple. For explanation see Exeg. Notes, in loco.Tr.]
[7][1Sa 3:3. This is the only place where (God) in the phrase (the ark of God) occurs without the Art.; often occurs with the force of a proper name, but no reason is apparent why the Art. is omitted here in this standing phrase. For discussion of the difference between and see Quarrys Genesis and its authorship, pp. 270 sqq.Tr.]
[8][1Sa 3:7. Erdmann: had not yet learned to know, which is substantially the same as Eng. A. V. On pointing of see Exeg Notes, in loco.Tr.]
[9][1Sa 3:8. The didst might now suggest an emphasis not given by the Heb.Tr.]
[10][1Sa 3:9. The impersonal subject is proper, as Samuel did not know who the caller was.Tr.]
[11][1Sa 3:10. Chald. softens this anthropomorphism into revealed himself, and the Rabbis add, by a voice from the Holy of Holies.Tr.]
[12][1Sa 3:13. is difficult. It can be understood here only as in stat. const. with the following clause: Elis sin was that he knew, etc. So the Vulg. The Targ. and Syr. render as Eng. A. V.; Sept. gives the iniquities of his sons, and omits that he knew; Wellhausen omits .Tr.]
[13][1Sa 3:13. is here taken as reflexive. The true reading here is not clear; the old translators and critics treated it variously. Sept. has as if it read , which Geiger (Urschrift, p. 271) and others adopt. See Erdmanns remark on this in Exeg. Notes, in loco. Chald. reads as the Heb. (Targ. renders by here and elsewhere); Syr. has his sons brought ignominy on the people, reading apparently . This is one of the eighteen cases of the correction of the Scribes (see Buxtorfs Lex. s. v. ), who are said to have changed the original reading me to themselves, to avoid the blasphemy, for which reason also Geiger holds that God was changed. Others suggest that the stood for Jehovah. But it is hard to say how much reliance is to be put on these alleged corrections of the old Jewish critics, and here (as Wellhausen remarks) we expect the Acc. not after . The external critical evidence is in favor of the reading God, but, the objection to this urged by Erdmann being strong, we can only, with him, retain the present text.Tr.]
[14][1Sa 3:14. It seems desirable to express in an Eng. translation the difference between and .Tr.]
[15][1Sa 3:15. Sept. here adds and rose in the morning, which Thenius and Wellhausen think stood originally in the text, and fell out by similar ending. On the other hand, it is a natural filling out of a terse account, quite in the manner of the Sept.Tr.]
[16][1Sa 3:17. The Eng. I pray thee is too strong for the Heb. , for which we have no good equivalent.Tr.]
[17][1Sa 3:21. On the addition of the Sept. here see Thenius and Wellhausen.Tr.]
[18][Hazon, which is used chiefly in the later books of O. T., Isaiah 1) the picture presented to the mind in the ecstatic prophetic state; 2) the body of truth thus given to the prophet. It is the technical word for divine revelation (so contrasted with ).Tr.]
[19][See the remark of Tr. under Textual and Grammatical.Tr.]
[20] is either verbal adj. , which forms a single conception with the preceding fin. verb (they began dim, i.e., began to become dim)as in Gen 9:20 the same verb is connected with a subst., Ges., 142, 4, Rem.or Inf. Qal (comp., Isa 3:7; Gen 27:1; Deu 34:7 : Job 16:8; Zec 11:17), which the punctuators avoided only because they had not elsewhere met with it (Bttch.). [This whole note, quoted by Erdmann and Thenius from Bttcher, is somewhat unclear. The passages cited for the Inf. hardly bear on the question. Wellhausen declares the Inf. here without impossible; but see Deu 2:25; Deu 2:31. Winer makes it Piel. Inf.Tr.]
[21][The Sept. has before the lamp was prepared, which may point to the custom of keeping one light burning during the day, and thus indicate the late night or early morning.Tr.].
[22] is seldom used, as here, with the Perf. of past time; comp. Psa 90:2; Ew. 337, 3, c. We might however point also with Bttcher, and thus read, in accordance with the following , a Fiens [Impf.] with , as is usual.
[23]On the intrans. see Ew. 196 d [comp. Greens Heb. Gr. 141, 2.Tr.].
[24] Pi. here trans. to make faint, weak, frighten by threatening, terrifying conduct, as elsewhere with , increpare aliquem.
[25][The words Eli who was roused to earnest interest have been supplied by the translator, something amounting to this having fallen out of the text, probably by typographical error.Tr.]
[26][This means not, may God do to you as you do to me, but may God visit your refusal with appropriate punishment.Tr.]
[27][The origin of the figure has been sought for in various occurrences, as the spilling of water, the fall of an arrow, or any weapon of war, or of a house, but it is better understood in a general way as signifying failures, in contrast with a firm, upright position.Tr.]
[28][It is an old opinion that there is here a reference to the personal Word, the second Person of the Trinity. The Targ. has the word of Jehovah was his help, and so some modern commentators, as Gill. But plainly there is no ground for this.Tr.]
[29][On Roeh and Nabi see on 1Sa 9:9.Tr.]
[30][The Papal Interdict forbids the celebration of divine service, the administration of the sacraments, ecclesiastical burial and marriage (by Romish ministers), and enjoins fasting and prayer.Tr.]
[31][On the relation between and see below, 1Sa 9:9.Tr.]
[32][Momentum, translation of Germ. moment, essential or important element.Tr.]
[33][See also Fairbairn on Prophecy, Chap. 1, and Lee on Inspiration.Tr.]
[34][In the Germ. vershnungs-gnadegrace of expiation.Tr.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
This Chapter folds within its bosom heavy tidings for Israel in general, and Eli’s house in particular. In a battle between the Philistines and Israel, the Israelites presumptuously, and without taking counsel of the Lord, bring the ark of God into the camp. The Philistines are again conquerors; they take the ark of God: the two sons of Eli, according to the Lord’s declaration, are both slain. Tidings coming to Eli of those events, the old man falls from his seat, and dies; and his daughter-in-law, Phinehas’s wife, in the premature labor of child-bed, dies also. Such are the woeful contents of this chapter.
1Sa 4:1
(1) And the word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out against the Philistines to battle, and pitched beside Ebenezer: and the Philistines pitched in Aphek.
By the word of Samuel coming to all Israel, is meant, no doubt, to show that the Lord had commissioned him, as his servant, that whether the people would hear, or whether they would forbear, they should know that there was a prophet of the Lord among them. Eze 2:5 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
The Ark of God
1Sa 4:3
IN order to understand the full import of these words, we must carefully study the idea which the ark of the Lord was intended to represent. The twenty-fifth chapter of the Book of Exodus gives a most minutely detailed account of the making of the tabernacle. God gave Moses a special description of the proposed sanctuary. He did not consult Moses, nor did he make suggestions which Moses was to submit to the consideration of the people of Israel. God laid down the whole plan, and no more left anything to be settled by the taste of Moses than he left Noah to determine the colours of the rainbow. As he said to Job, “Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?” so he might have said to Moses, “Where wast thou when I designed the tabernacle?” There was not a ring, a knop, a socket, a coupling, or a pin which God himself did not specially design. Was it not like him? Is there anywhere one sprig of moss which owes its humble beauty to any hand but his own? As the tabernacle was built for the sake of the ark, and not the ark for the sake of the tabernacle, it becomes most important to know what the ark was, and what spiritual meaning the symbol was intended by Almighty God to signify. We read in the holy word: “Thou shalt make an ark; thou shalt overlay it with pure gold; thou shalt make upon it a crown of gold round about; thou shalt put into the ark the testimony which I shall give thee; thou shalt make a mercy seat of pure gold; thou shalt put the mercy seat above the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee. And there will I meet thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel.”
The ark is called by various names. In Exodus it is called the ark of the testimony; in Deuteronomy it is called the ark of the covenant; in the first of Samuel it is called the ark of the Lord; and in the same book it is called the ark of God. What was this ark? Looked at materially, the ark of the covenant was a box or chest, fifty-four inches long, about thirty inches broad, and about thirty inches high. The box was overlaid with pure gold. The lid or cover of the ark was called the mercy seat. Upon the mercy seat were two golden cherubim, one at either end, facing each other, and covering the mercy seat with expanded wings. At the mercy seat the lid of this box God promised to meet Moses and commune with him. Hence, God was said to dwell between the cherubim. The ark contained the two tables of stone on which God had written the ten commandments. “I will write on the tables the words that were written on the first tables which thou brakest, and thou shalt put them in the ark.” In the first of Kings we read there was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone which Moses put there at Horeb. The ark was placed in the holy of holies; indeed it is called in the first book of Chronicles, “the house of the mercy seat.”
Let us now stand beside that box and consider its meaning, that we may be prepared to consider the text. In the box you find the commandments of God. The box is not merely in the holy house, it is in the holiest place of the holy house. In the very midst of that box you find only the written law of the Most High. Keep that picture before you, if you would understand the spiritual significance of the symbol. As with the box in the tabernacle in the holy of holies, containing the written law of God, so with creation today. The great moral idea never changes. The chest is destroyed, the golden cherubim may no longer be found; but the moral purpose, the moral intent, is the same now and for ever. Penetrate into the highest place in the universe go higher than the clouds, higher than the sun, higher than the farthest star pass, if you may, into the secret solitudes of God, where human strife and din are never heard and there, at the very centre, in the great solemn heart of all systems and powers, you find, What? The law of God! This is at once a terror and a security. The spirit of judgment quickens all creation. Out of everything there comes a fire which scorches the bad man’s hand. Wherever a good man goes a blessing approves and confirms his steps. For a moment the bad man may seem to bend things according to his own will: but “the Lord shall laugh at him: for he seeth that his day is coming,” when “he shall fly away as a dream, and shall not be found: yea, he shall be chased away as a vision of the night.” Some men could not live but for this reflection. Life would be a constant temptation to them, unmingled with any element of mercy. It is something to know, and deeply to feel, that all things are bound together by law, that at the heart of the universe there is a written statute and covenant. It gives steadiness to life; it defines relations, rights, consequences; it enables a man to view with composure all the flutter and dust of the little day, and to draw himself forward by the power of an endless life. This, then, is part of the teaching of the symbolic ark. In the holy of holies we find the sacred chest covered with gold, watched by the cherubim, and in that hallowed chest is hidden the law written by the finger of God. That law is subtle as life. You are assured of its presence; you are encompassed by a mystery which is never withdrawn for a moment; you cannot explain it; you are punished when you resent it; you are at rest when you obey it, your very liberty is but a phase of restraint!
Happily, this is but part of the teaching of the ark. Over the ark there is a lid. Very special were the instructions given to Moses respecting it. The lid was the mercy seat, the propitiatory. It was there not on the tables of stone graven with the law of God but on the lid, the covering of the ark, that God promised to meet Moses. Now see how the case stands when you put both sides of it together. There you have the sovereign, unchangeable, inexorable law of God; and over it you have the covering of God’s tender mercy. When we look at the law, we look at it through the mercy, because the mercy covers it. When the law comes to us, it comes up through the mercy, because the mercy overlies it. All law now comes to us through the mediation of mercy. “The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.” What then? At the very centre of the human system we have law and mercy, righteousness and love, sovereignty and sacrifice. Creation says, “My song shall be of mercy and judgment.” Society is not a chaos; creation is not an aggregate of unrelated fragments. Amid all the din, confusion, stress, and upset of life, there is, at the heart of things, a law unchanging as God, a mercy ever enduring, ever pitiful.
This brief sketch of the ark of the covenant, and its spiritual significance, will enable us to follow with intelligence the varying fortunes of Israel, which have ever been associated, more or less directly, with this ark. We want a book written upon the ark of the Lord. Seek out its history; see what becomes of the people according to their treatment of this ark; see how one little thing rules all things, how the heart-beat palpitates to the extremities of the universe! We give this counsel to youthful students: Make this your subject, the ark of the covenant; its structure, its typified doctrine, its relation to the history of a nation, and the eternal principles which come out of this symbolical representation of God.
In the case before us, the Philistines had slain of the men of Israel about four thousand. When the people came into the camp, the elders of Israel said, “Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us today before the Philistines?” This is an inquiry which men should always put to themselves in times of disaster and failure. “Why has God withdrawn me from the crowd and made an invalid of me, and shut me up in this shaded chamber? Why has God sent a blight upon my wheat-fields and oliveyards, so that there should be no produce? Why hath God barked my fig tree and taken away from me my one ewe lamb spoiled the idol of my love? Is there not a cause?” So far, Israel was acting upon a principle of common sense. Every effect has its cause. Four thousand dead men of Israel are lying upon the field, slaughtered by the sword of the Philistines. Why? Admire sagacity, common sense, wherever you find it.
But observe what a mixture is presented by the text. “Let us,” said the elders of Israel, “fetch the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of Shiloh unto us, that, when it cometh among us, it may save us out of the hands of our enemies.” The ark had been at Shiloh from the days of Joshua, during the ministry of all the Judges. And now suddenly the leaders of Israel, with four thousand dead men lying about them, say, “Let us fetch the ark.” They brought the ark, and when the ark of the covenant came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great shout, so that the earth rang again! The Philistines said, “What is this? they are bringing their god into the field!” and the Philistines trembled. Nothwithstanding this, the Philistines gathered together their courage, came against Israel, and Israel was smitten, and the ark of God was taken.
There must be some lessons here. Learn that the formal is useless without the spiritual. There is the ark, made as God dictated, a sacred thing: the law is there; the mercy seat is there. Yet Israel falls by the arms of the Philistines, and the sacred shrine is taken by the hands of the idolaters. There is nothing strange in this. The formal never can save men; the institutional never can redeem society. A mere observance, a ceremony, a form, can never touch the dead heart of the world. This is, emphatically, the day of bringing in arks, societies, formalities, ceremonies. You have in your house an altar; that altar will be nothing influential in your life if you have it there merely for the sake of formality. A man who cannot altogether throw away the traditions of his lifetime, who hears, it may be, a parent’s voice, saying to him in secret, again and again, “You promised me to do so and so,” and in fulfilment of that promise he may snatch up the ark of the covenant, the law of God, hastily read through a few verses, shut up the book, and run away, has he read the Word of God? He has insulted the divine testimony! True, he opened the book, he uttered to himself the words. Yet the service was no use in his life, it was a mere formality. God will not be trifled with. Holy words will have no holy effect, if read in that manner.
Learn that religion is not to be a mere convenience. The ark is not to be used as a magical spell. Holy things are not to be run to in extremity, and set up in order that men who are in peril may be saved. The reasoning of the Israelites was subtle, but intensely selfish. “That it may save us.” That sounds like a modern expression! To be personally saved, to be delivered out of a pressing emergency or strait that seems to be the one object which many people have in view when identifying themselves with religious institutions, Christian observances and fellowships. We shall never have a robust, imperial piety till we get out of all these little, personal, narrow considerations, and identify ourselves with the very life of God the infinite love of his eternal heart. We are, verily, more or less all guilty of this very thing. We have done as long as possible without the ark. We have gone a-warfare at our own charges; we have defied the hosts of the alien in our own strength; and when we have been worsted, overthrown, and brought to the very brink of ruin, a lucky idea has seized us, we have said, “Fetch the ark!” When the ark was brought, it was nothing but a wooden box: fetched by unworthy hands, its inspiration and glory ceased from it. “If the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness.” Men have lived lives of practical atheism year after year; and when there has been a panic in the market, they have bethought themselves of old memories, early vows, first Christian oaths; and they have turned pious because there was a panic barking at them like a mad wolf, they have begun to pray, and Heaven sent back their voice unanswered, unblessed! We must not play with our religion. We might guarantee that every place of worship would be filled at five o’clock in the morning and at twelve o’clock at night under given circumstances. Let there be a plague in the city let men’s hearts fail them for fear let them feel that all that is material is insecure that nothing is real but the invisible and the spiritual and they will instantly flock to churches and chapels by the thousand, and be very humble in the presence of God. That will not do! God is not to be moved by incantations, by decent formalities, and external reverence. He will answer the continuous cry of the life. The man who prays without ceasing may ever count upon the interposition of God.
We learn that the Philistines took the ark of the covenant But though they had captured the ark, that sacred shrine made itself terribly felt. The Philistines took the ark to Ashdod, and put it into the house of their god Dagon. You see there was a good deal of religiousness in these men. They took away the box out of the battlefield; they unlocked the door where they kept their pagan god, and put the box in beside him. They set the Right beside the Wrong. What a night’s work there was! “When they of Ashdod rose on the morrow, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to the earth before the ark of the Lord!” That might have been an accident. Perhaps in going into the house and moving the ark carelessly, they might have injured Dagon’s position, and so he might have come down, as it were, by haphazard. So they set Dagon up again, made his position secure and respectable, and left him in his solitude. Next morning they came, and Dagon was fallen upon his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord; and the head of Dagon, and both the palms of his hands, were cut off upon the threshold. A terrible night’s work there was in this case! What communion hath light with darkness? What fellowship hath Christ with Belial? When Right and Wrong come face to face, there must always be a sharp collision. When the Right goes down, as it does occasionally, it will be only as the ark of the Lord went down in the case before us, to plague its very captors and throw down the idol of their hearts. Would to God we could learn this doctrine, that in some cases success is defeat! We need to learn this lesson, that in some cases victory is loss, and that gain stings the winner night and day.
Here let us ask young readers to consider this part of the story diligently. We know of nothing equal to it in modern writing for excitement, for that singular romantic element which always spell-binds young readers. Read the history of the ark again. The Philistines took the ark, but they wanted to get clear of it, if anybody would take it away. What! you have won the ark, keep it. They took it from place to place, and could make nothing of it; it was a torment to them. Last of all they said, “Let us send a present along with it, and by all means get clear of it!” Aye, it will even be so with ill-gotten results; with undeserved, unrighteously attained gain, be it wealth or influence, or what it may. It will not rest with the individual; it will say, “Send me away!” Judas took the thirty pieces of silver, but they had become so hot in his hand as to boil his blood, and he said to those who had bought him: “Take them away!” But the buyers said, “No!” The bad man has a hard lot of it; when he wants to get clear of his gain, he cries and begs that somebody will relieve him of his very victories. The Lord’s sword is two-edged; touch it where you like, it cuts clear away to the bone!
Learn that the false relation of things always brings torment. Be it in the family: if the heads of the house are disagreed concerning great spiritual truths and realities, there cannot be peace in the house. Be it in business: one partner is a righteous man, and another is careless about moral obligations. There cannot be peace; there may be success, sharp practice, keen fencing, and methods of doing things that look very successful; but there will be a stinging process, after all, a sting that will pierce the heart and fill it with pain and anguish. You cannot rub right and wrong together, and make them cohere. It is so in a man’s own heart. If half of the man is going one way and the other half wants to go the other way, the man’s life is a most agonising, distressing struggle. Everywhere this great law is written. If it had never been spoken by Jesus, it might have been spelled out by scholars in the world’s school, “Ye cannot serve God and Mammon.”
The great spiritual application and the significance of the ark is undoubtedly Jesus Christ. We have no sacred chest; we have no box covered with pure gold; no tables of stone; no manufactured seat of mercy. All the great spiritual significance and application of these things we find in Christ. What the ark was to Israel, Jesus Christ is to the Church. In Jesus Christ we find law. Some Christians find that a difficult lesson to learn. They speak of Jesus as being all love, gentleness, and compassion, tenderness exceeding, and pity infinite. He was more than that. Whenever he spoke of law, he spoke of it as the Lawgiver. “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but this law must be fulfilled.” Jesus never trifled with equity, with righteousness, with probity, with moral obligation. Jesus Christ was not all mere sensibility. His was the sensibility that comes out of justice, righteousness, truth, purity, as well as tenderness, mercy, compassion. In Jesus Christ we find all the mercy of God! Observe that form of expression. By it we intend to signify that nowhere else can you find an element of mercy that is wanting in the character and spirit of Jesus Christ. He is at the head of all things. As the ark was in the tabernacle, in the holy of holies, so he is the Head over all things. He is highly exalted. All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. He was not made for creation; creation was made for him. The ark was not built for the tabernacle, but the tabernacle was built for the ark. All things are in Christ and for Christ. One day this will be seen. He must reign until he hath put all enemies under his feet The last enemy that shall be destroyed is Death; and in the resplendent universe there shall be everywhere life, immortality. “He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied.” When he is satisfied, who shall be discontented? When he says, “It is enough,” who shall require any addition? When he who came up from unbeginning time God the Son, lived and died, and rose again suffered all Bethlehem, Gethsemane, Golgotha when he shall say, “I am satisfied,” who shall be able to suggest that one thing is wanting to complete the happiness of his redeemed family?
Selected Note
” Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of Shiloh ” ( 1Sa 4:3 ). We cannot attempt to define the object of the ark. It was the depositary of the Tables, and thus of the great document of the covenant. It seems also to have been a protest against idolatry and materialism. The mercy-seat was the place where God promised his presence, and he was, therefore, addressed as dwelling between the cherubim. On this account the ark was of the utmost sanctity, and was placed in the Holy of Holies, both of the tabernacle and of the temple. When the Israelites were moving from one encampment to another, the ark was to be covered by Aaron and his sons with three coverings, and carried by the sons of Kohath (Num 4:4-6 , Num 4:16 ). Joshua placed the tabernacle at Shiloh, and the ark does not seem to have been removed thence until the judgeship of Eli, when the people sent for it to the army, that they might gain success in the war with the Philistines. Yet the Israelites were routed and the ark was taken ( 1Sa 4:3-11 ). After seven months, during which the majesty of God was shown by the plaguing of the inhabitants of each town to which it was brought, and the breaking of the image of Dagon, the Philistines hastened, on the advice of their priests and diviners, to restore the ark to the Israelites. These incidents and those of the coming of the ark to Beth-shemesh, where the people were smitten for looking into it, show its extremely sacred character, no less than does the death of Uzzah, when he attempted to steady it, on the journey to Jerusalem, an event which caused David to delay bringing it in. It is noticeable that it was carried in a cart both when sent from Ekron, and, at first, when David brought it to Jerusalem, though after the delay on the latter occasion, it was borne by the Levites in the ordained manner (1Ch 15:11-15 ; 2Sa 6:13 ). It was then placed on Mount Zion, until Solomon removed it to the temple. From the statement that Josiah commanded the Levites to place the ark in the temple, and to bear it no longer on their shoulders ( 2Ch 35:3 ), it seems probable that Amon had taken it out of the sanctuary, or else that the Levites had withdrawn it from the temple then or in Manasseh’s time, and the finding of the book of the Law under Josiah favours this idea (2Ki 22:8 ; 2Ch 34:14 ). A copy of the Law was deposited with, or, as some suppose in the ark, and it seems that this was the copy from which the king was required to write his own ( Deu 17:18-20 ). But perhaps the ark was only removed while the temple was repaired. It is generally believed that it was destroyed when the temple was burnt by the Babylonians, and it is certain that it was not contained in the second temple.
Prayer
Almighty God, thou settest up and thou bringest down, as servants of thy Church and ministers of thy will, whom thou pleasest, according to a counsel we cannot understand. Thou hast made the stone which the builders refused the head stone of the corner; thou hast passed over the wise and the mighty, the noble and the great, and thou hast revealed thy secret unto babes. Who can resist the call of the Lord? Who shall answer, but with all his love, the appeal and challenge of the Most High? Impress each of us with a deep sense of personal responsibility, which can be measured only by the gifts which thou hast bestowed upon us and the opportunities with which thou hast blessed us. May the servant entrusted with five talents, and the servant entrusted with but one, each do his Lord’s will with simplicity, diligence, and all the homage of the soul! Save us from all uncharitableness in regard to one another; from all envy and malice; from all censoriousness and unfriendliness. May each esteem other better than himself; may the strong bear the infirmities of the weak; may the aged prophets be gentle and tender towards thy young servants; and may those who are youthful in the Church of Christ have within them sense of veneration, confidence, and respect in regard to those who have borne the burden and heat of the day. Establish us all in the counsel and service of Christ. May we love the Saviour with all our heart and soul and mind and strength. May the supreme joy of our life be to uphold the rights of his crown and to explain the mystery of his cross. Let thy blessing now descend upon us, that we may have life more abundantly, that our peace may pass understanding, that our joy may be unspeakable and full of glory. Shed light where there is darkness. Send the delivering word to souls held in the captivity of the enemy. Turn those whose faces are turned away from the living God and the eternal light. Now may our hearts lift themselves up towards their Father in praise, in thankfulness, in hope! Amen.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
II
THE EARLY LIFE OF SAMUEL
1Sa 1:1-4:1
We omit Part I of the textbook, since that first part is devoted to genealogical tables taken from 1 Chronicles. That part of Chronicles is not an introduction to Samuel or Kings, but an introduction to the Old Testament books written after the Babylonian captivity. To put that in now would be out of place.
We need to emphasize the supplemental character of Chronicles. Our Harmony indeed will show from time to time in successive details the very important contributions of that nature in Chronicles not found in any form in the histories of Samuel and Kings, nor elsewhere in the Old Testament; but to appreciate the magnitude of this new matter we need to glance at it in bulk, not in detail, as its parts will come up later.
There are twenty whole chapters and parts of twenty-four other chapters in Chronicles occupied with matter not found in other books of the Bible. This is a considerable amount of new material, and is valuable on that account but it is still more valuable because it presents a new aspect of Hebrew history after the captivity. The following passages in Chronicles contain new matter: 1Ch 2:18-55 ; 1Ch 3:19-24 ; 1Ch 4:9 ; 1Ch 11:41-47 ; 1Ch 11:12 ; 1Ch 15:1-26 ; 2Ch 6:40-42 ; 2Ch 11:5-23 ; 2Ch 12:4-8 ; 2Ch 13:3-21 ; 2Ch 14:3-15 ; Ch_15:1-15; 2Ch 16:7-10 ; 2Ch 2 Chronicles 17-19; 2Ch 20:1-30 ; 2Ch 21:2-4 ; 2Ch 21:11-19 ; 2Ch 24:15-22 ; 2Ch 25:5-10 ; 2Ch 25:12-16 ; 2Ch 26:5-20 ; 2Ch 27:4-6 ; 2Ch 28:5-25 ; 2Ch 29:3-36 ; 2Ch 29:30-31 ; 2Ch 32:22-23 ; 2Ch 32:26-31 ; 2Ch 33:11-19 ; 2Ch 34:3-7 ; 2Ch 35:2-17 ; 2Ch 35:25 ; 2Ch 36:11-23 .
Whoever supposed that there was that much material in the book of Chronicles that could not be found anywhere else? One can study Chronicles as a part of a Harmony with Samuel and Kings, but if that were the only way it could be studied he would never get the true significance of it, as it is an introduction to all of the later Old Testament books. In the light of these important new additions, we not only see the introduction of all subsequent Old Testament books and also inter-Biblical books by Jews, but must note the transition in thought from a secular Jewish kingdom to an approaching spiritual messianic kingdom.
We thus learn that Old Testament prophecy is not limited to distinct utterances foretelling future events, but that the whole history of the Jewish people is prophetic; not merely in its narrative, but in its legislation, in its types, feasts, sabbaths, sacrifices, offerings; in its tabernacle and Temple, with all of their divinely appointed worship and ritual, and this explains why the historical books are classed as prophetic, not merely because prophets wrote them, which is true, but also because the history is prophetic.
In this fact lies one of the strongest proofs of the inspiration of the Old Testament books in all of their parts. The things selected for record, and the things not recorded, are equally forcible. The silence equals the utterance. This is characteristic of no other literature, and shows divine supervision which not only makes necessary every part recorded, but so correlates and adapts the parts as to make perfect literary and spiritual structure which demands a New Testament as a culmination.
Moreover, we are blind if we cannot see a special Providence preparing a leader for every transition in Jewish history. Just as Moses was prepared for deliverance from Egypt, and for the disposition of the law, so Samuel is prepared, not only to guide from a government by judges to a government by kings, but, what is very much more important, to establish a School of the Prophets a theological seminary.
These prophets were to be the mouthpieces of God in speaking to kingly and national conscience, and for 500 years afterward, become the orators, poets, historians, and reformers of the nation, and so, for centuries, avert, postpone, or remedy, national disasters provoked by public corruption of morals and religion.
Counting great men as peaks of a mountain range, and sighting backward from Samuel to Abraham, only one peak, Moses, comes into the line of vision.
There are other peaks, but they don’t come up high enough to rank with Abraham, Moses, and Samuel. A list of the twelve best and greatest men in the world’s history must include the name of Samuel. When we come, at his death, to analyze his character and posit him among the great, other things will be said. Just now we are to find in his early life that such a man did not merely happen; that neither heredity, environment, nor chance produced him.
Samuel was born at Ramah, lived at Ramah, died at Ramah, and was buried at Ramah. Ramah is a little village in the mountains of Ephraim, somewhat north of the city of Jerusalem. It is right hard to locate Ramah on any present map of the Holy Land. Some would put it south, some north. It is not easy to locate like Bethlehem and Shiloh.
Samuel belonged to the tribe of Levi, but was not a descendant of Aaron. If he had been he would have been either a high priest or a priest. Only Aaron’s descendants could be high priests, or priests, but Samuel belonged to the tribe of Levi, and from 1Ch 6 we may trace his descent. The tribe of Levi had no continuous landed territory like the other tribes, but was distributed among the other tribes. That tribe belonged to God, and they had no land assigned them except the villages in which they lived and the cities of the refuge, of which they had charge, and so Samuel’s father could be called an Ephrathite and yet be a descendant of the tribe of Levi that is, he was a Levite living in the territory of Ephraim.
The bigamy of Samuel’s father produced the usual bitter fruit. The first and favorite wife had no children, so in order to perpetuate his name he took a second wife, and when that second wife bore him a large brood of children she gloried over the first wife, and provoked her and mocked at her for having no children, and it produced a great bitterness in Hannah’s soul. The history of the Mormons demonstrates that bitterness always accompanies a plurality of wives. I don’t see bow a woman can share a home or husband with any other woman.
We will now consider the attitude of the Mosaic law toward a plurality of wives, divorce, etc. In Deu 21:15-17 we see that the Mosaic law did permit an existing custom. It did not originate it nor command it, but it tolerated the universal custom of the times, a plurality of wives. From Deu 24:1-4 , we learn that the law permitted a husband to get rid of a wife, but commanded him to give her a bill of divorcement. That law was not made to encourage divorcement, but to limit the evil and to protect the woman who would suffer under divorce. Why the law even permitted these things we see from Mat 19:7-8 . Our Saviour there tells us that Moses, on account of the hardness of their hearts, permitted a man to put away his wife. That is to say, that nation had just emerged from slavery, and the prevalent custom all around them permitted something like that, and because they were not prepared for an ideal law on the subject on account of the hardness of their hearts, Moses tolerated, without commending a plurality of wives or commanding divorce both in a way to mitigate the evil, but when Jesus comes to give his statute on the subject he speaks out and says, “Whosoever shall put away his wife except for marital infidelity and marries again committeth adultery, and whosoever shall marry her that is put away committeth adultery.” A preacher in a recent sermon, as reported, discredited that part of Matthew because not found also in Mark. I have no respect for the radical criticism which makes Mark the only credible Gospel, or even the norm of the others. Nor can any man show one shred of evidence that it is so. I have a facsimile of the three oldest New Testament manuscripts. What Matthew says is there, and may not be eliminated on such principles of criticism.
The radical critics say that the Levitical part of the Mosaic law was not written by Moses, but by a priest in Ezekiel’s time, and that Israel had no central place of worship in the period of the judges, but this section shows that they did have a central place of worship at Shiloh, and the book of Joshua shows when Shiloh became the central place of worship. The text shows that they did come up yearly to this central place of worship, and that they did offer, as in the case of Hannah and Elkanah, the sacrifices required in Leviticus.
In Jos 18:1 we learn that when the conquest was finished Joshua, himself, placed the ark of the covenant and the tabernacle at Shiloh, and constituted it the central place of worship. In this section we learn what disaster ended Shiloh as the central place of worship. The ark was captured, and subsequently the tabernacle was removed, and that ark and that tabernacle never got together again. In Jer 7:12 we read: “But go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh, where I caused my name to dwell at the first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel.” Jeremiah is using that history as a threat against Jerusalem, which in Jeremiah’s time was the central place of worship. His lesson was, “If you repeat the wickedness done in Samuel’s time God will do to your city and your home what he did to Shiloh.” It is important to know the subsequent separate history of the ark and the tabernacle, and when and where another permanent central place and house of worship were established. The Bible tells us every move that ark and that tabernacle made, and when, where, and by whom the permanent central place and house of worship were established.
Eli was high priest at Samuel’s birth. In those genealogical tables that we omitted from 1 Chronicles we see that Eli was a descendant of Aaron, but not of Eleazar, the eldest son; therefore, according to the Mosaic law, he ought never to have been high priest, but he was, and I will have something to say about that when the true line is established later. 1Sa 4 , which comes in the next chapter, distinctly states that Eli judged Israel forty years, and he was likely a contemporary of Samson. But Eli, at the time we know him, is ninety-eight years old, and nearly blind. He was what we call a goodhearted man, but weak. That combination in a ruler makes him a curse. Diplomats tell us “a blunder is worse than a crime,” in a ruler. He shows his weakness in allowing his sons, Hophni and Phinehas, to degrade the worship of God. They were acting for him, as he was too old for active service. The most awful reports came to him about the infamous character of these sons, who occupied the highest and holiest office in a nation that belonged to God.
This section tells us that he only remonstrated in his weak way: “My sons, it is not a good report that I hear about you,” but that is all he did. As he was judge and high priest, why should he prefer his sons to the honor of God? Why did he not remove them from positions of trust and influence? His doom is announced in this section, and it is an awful one. God sent a special prophet to him and this is the doom. You will find it in 1Sa 2 , commencing at 1Sa 2:30 : “Wherefore the Lord, the God of Israel, saith, I said indeed that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before me forever: but now the Lord saith, Be it far from me; for them that honor me I will honor, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed. Behold, the days come, that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father’s house, that there shall not be an old man in thine house. And thou shalt see an enemy in my habitation (Shiloh), in all the wealth which God shall give Israel: and there shall not be an old man among thy descendants forever. And the descendants of thine, whom I do not cut off from mine altar, shall live to consume thine eyes and grieve thine heart: and all the increase of thine house shall die in the flower of their age.”
Or as Samuel puts it to him, we read in 1Sa 3 , commencing at verse 1Sa 3:11 : “And the Lord said unto Samuel, Behold I will do a thing in Israel, at which both the ears of every one that heareth it shall tingle. In that day I shall perform against Eli all things that I have spoken against his house: when I begin I will also make an end. For I have told him that I will judge his house forever for the iniquity which he knoweth, because his sons made themselves vile and he restrained them not; therefore I have sworn unto the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be purged with sacrifice nor offering forever.”
What was the sign of his doom? The same passage answers: “And this shall be a sign unto thee, that shall come upon thy two sons, on Hophni and Phinehas: in one day they shall die both of them. And I will raise me up a faithful priest, that shall do according to that which is in my heart and in my mind: and I will build him a sure house; and he shall walk before mine anointed forever. And it shall come to pass, that everyone that is left in thy house shall come and bow down to him for a piece of silver and a loaf of bread.” That was the sign. In the time of Solomon the priesthood goes back to the true line, in fulfilment of the declaration in that sign. The priesthood passes away from Eli’s descendants and goes back where it belongs, to Zadok who is a descendant of Aaron’s eldest son.
The Philistine nation at this time dominated Israel. The word, “Philistines,” means emigrant people that go out from their native land, and it is of the same derivation as the word “Palestine.” That Holy Land, strangely enough, takes its name from the Philistines. The Philistines were descended from Mizraim, a child of Ham, and their place was in Egypt.
Leaving Egypt they became “Philistines,” that is, emigrants, and occupied all of that splendid lowland on the western and southwestern part of the Jewish territory, next to the Mediterranean Sea, which was as level as a plain, and as fertile as the Nile Valley. There they established five independent cities, which, like the Swiss Cantons, formed a confederacy. While each was independent for local affairs, they united in offensive and defensive alliances against other nations, and they had complete control of Southern Judea at this time. Joshua had overpowered them, but the conquest was not complete. They rose up from under his power, even in his time, and in the time of Samson and Eli they brought Israel into a pitiable subjection. They were not allowed to have even a grindstone. If they wanted to sharpen an ax they had to go and borrow a Philistine’s grindstone, and what a good text for a sermon! Woe to the man that has to sharpen the implement with which he works in the shop of an enemy! Woe to the Southern preacher that goes to a radical critic’s Seminary in order to sharpen his theological ax!
Speaking of the evils of a plurality of wives, we found Hannah in great bitterness of heart because she had no child, and we saw her lingering at the central place of worship, and without saying words out loud, her lips were moving, and her face was as one entranced, so that Eli thinks she is drunk. The New Testament tells us of a certain likeness between intoxication with ardent spirits and intoxication of the Holy Spirit. She told him that she was praying. When her child was born she came back and said to him, “I am the woman that you thought was drunk, but I was praying,” and then she uses this language: “I prayed for this child,” holding the little fellow up in her hands, “and I vowed that if God would give him to me I would lend him to the Lord all the days of his life,” and therefore she brings him to be consecrated perpetually to God’s service. The scripture brings all that out beautifully.
So the text speaks of the woes pronounced on a parent who put off praying for and restraining his children until they were grown. Like Hannah we should commence praying for them before they are born; pray for them in the cradle, and if we make any promise or vow to God for them, we should keep the vow.
I know a woman who had many children and kept praying that God would send her one preacher child, promising to do everything in her power to make him a great preacher. The Lord gave her two. One of my deacons used to send for me when a new baby was born, to pray for it. Oliver Wendell Holmes says a child’s education should commence with his grandmother. Paul tells us that this was so with Timothy. The Mosaic law required every male to appear before the Lord at the central place of worship three times a year. The text says that Elkanah went up yearly, but does not state how many times a year. The inference is fairly drawn that he strictly kept the Mosaic law.
Samuel had certain duties in the tabernacle. He slept in the Lord’s house and tended to the lights. It is a great pity when a child of darkness attends to the lights in God’s house. I heard a preacher say to a sexton, “How is it that you ring the bell to call others to heaven and you, yourself, seem going right down to hell?” And that same preacher said to a surveyor, “You survey land for other people to have a home, and have no home yourself.” So some preachers point out the boundaries of the home in heaven and make their own bed in hell.
Samuel’s call from God, his first prophecy, and his recognition by the people as a prophet are facts of great interest, and the lesson from his own failure to recognize at once the call is of great value. In the night he heard a voice saying, “Samuel! Samuel!” He thought it was Eli, and he went to Eli and said, “Here I am. You called me.” “No, I didn’t call you, my son; go back to bed.” The voice came again, “Samuel, Samuel,” and he got up and went to Eli and said, “You did call me. What do you want with me?” “No, my son, I did not call you; go back and lie down,” and the third time the voice came, “Samuel, Samuel,” and he went again to Eli. Then Eli knew that it was God who called him, and he said, “My son, it is the Lord. You go back and when the voice comes again, say, Speak, Lord; for thy servant heareth,” and so God spoke and the first burden of prophecy that he put upon the boy’s heart was to tell the doom of the house of Eli. Very soon after that all Israel recognized Samuel as a prophet of God.
The value of the lesson is this: We don’t always recognize the divine touch at first. Many a man under conviction does not at first understand its source and nature. Others, even after they are converted, are not sure they are converted. It is like the mover’s chickens that, after their legs were untied, would lie still, not realizing that they were free. The ligatures around their legs had cut off the circulation, and they felt as if they were tied after they were loose. There is always an interval between an event and the cognition of it. For example, when a shot is fired it precedes our recognition of it by either the sight of smoke or the sound of the explosion, for it takes both sound and sight some time to travel over the intervening space. I heard Major Penn say that the worst puzzle in his life was the experiences whereby God called him to quit his law work and become an evangelist. He didn’t understand it. It was like Samuel going to Eli.
I now will give an analysis of that gem of Hebrew poetry, Hannah’s song, showing its conception of God, and the reason of its imitation in the New Testament. The idea of Hannah’s conception of God thus appears:
There is none besides God; he stands alone. There is none holy but God. There is none that abaseth the proud and exalteth the lowly, feedeth the hungry, and maketh the full hungry, except God; and there is none but God that killeth and maketh alive. There is none but God who establisheth this earth; none but God who keepeth the feet of his saints; none but God that has true strength; none but God that judgeth the ends of the earth, and the chief excellency of it is the last: “He shall give strength unto his king and exalt the horn of His Anointed.” That is the first place in the Bible where the kingly office is mentioned in connection with the name “Anointed.” The name, “Anointed,” means Christ, the Messiah.
It is true that it was prophesied to Abraham that kings should be his descendants. It is true that Moses made provision for a king. It is true that in the book of Judges anointing is shown to be the method of setting apart to kingly office, but this is the first place in the Bible where the one anointed gets the name of the “Anointed One,” a king. Because of this messianic characteristic, Mary, when it was announced to her that she should be the mother of the Anointed King, pours out her soul in the Magnificat, imitating Hannah’s song.
The state of religion at this time was very low. We see from the closing of the book of Judges that at the feast of Shiloh they had irreligious dances. We see from the text here that Hophni and Phinehas, the priests of religion, were not only as corrupt as anybody, but leaders in corruption. We see it declared that there is no open vision, and it is further declared that the Word of God was precious rare.
I will now explain these two phrases in the texts, 1Sa 1:16 (A. V.), where Hannah says, “Count not thine handmaid for a daughter of Belial,” and in 1Sa 2:12 (A. V.), where Hophni and Phinehas are said to be the “sons of Belial.” The common version makes Belial a proper name; the revised version does not, and the revised version is at fault. If you will turn to 2Co 6:15 , you will see that Belial is shown to be the name of Satan: “What concord hath Christ with Belial?” Get Milton’s Paradise Lost, First Book, and read the reference to Hophni and Phinehas as sons of Belial, and see that he correctly makes it a proper name.
Samuel was not a descendant of Aaron. He was merely a Levite, but he subsequently, as we shall learn, officiated in sacrifices as if he were a priest or high priest. It will be remember-ed that the priesthood was under the curse pronounced on Eli, and Samuel was a special exceptional appointee of God, as Moses was.
Dr. Burleson, a great Texas preacher, and a president of Baylor University, preached all over Texas a sermon on family government, taking his text from 1Sa 2:31 .
There are some passages and quotations from Geikie’s Hours With the Bible on the evils of a plurality of wives that are pertinent. Commenting on Elkanah’s double marriage he says, “But, as might have been expected, this double marriage a thing even then uncommon did not add to his happiness, for even among the Orientals the misery of polygamy is proverbial. ‘From what I know,’ says one, ‘it is easier to live with two tigresses than with two wives.’ And a Persian poet is of well-nigh the same opinion: “Be that man’s life immersed in gloom Who needs more wives than one: With one his cheeks retain their bloom, His voice a cheerful tone: These speak his honest heart at rest, And he and she are always blest. But when with two he seeks for joy, Together they his soul annoy; With two no sunbeam of delight Can make his day of misery bright.” An old Eastern Drama is no less explicit: “Wretch I would’st thou have another wedded slave? Another? What? Another? At thy peril Presume to try the experiment: would’st thou not For that unconscionable, foul desire Be linked to misery? Sleepless nights, and days Of endless torment still recurring sorrow Would be thy lot. Two wives! O never! Never! Thou hast not power to please two rival queens; Their tempers would destroy thee; sear thy brain; Thou canst not, Sultan, manage more than one. Even one may be beyond thy government!”
QUESTIONS
1. Why omit Part I of the textbook?
2. What, in bulk, is the supplemental matter in Chronicles, and what its importance?
3. What and where is the place of Samuel’s birth, residence, and burial?
4. What is his ancestry and tribe?
5. If he belonged to the tribe of Levi, why then is he called an Ephraimite, or Ephrathite, which in this place is equivalent?
6. Show that the bigamy of Samuel’s father produced the usual bitter fruit.
7. What was the attitude of the Mosaic law toward a plurality of wives, and divorce, and why?
8. Why did the law ever permit these things?
9. What is the bearing of this section of the contention of the radical critics that the Levitical part of the Mosaic law was not written by Moses, but by a priest in Ezekiel’s time, and that Israel had no central place of worship in the period of the Judges?
10. When did Shiloh become the central place of worship, how long did it so remain, and what use did Jeremiah make of its desolation?
11. Trace the subsequent and separate history of the ark of the covenant and the tabernacle, and show when and where another permanent central place and house of worship were established.
12. Who was high priest at Samuel’s birth, how was he descended from Aaron, and what the proof that he also judged Israel?
13. With which of the judges named in the book of Judges was he likely a contemporary?
14. What was Eli’s character, sin, doom, sign of the doom, and who announced it to him?
15. What nation at this time dominated Israel?
16. Give a brief and clear account of these people.
17. Show how Samuel was a child of prayer, the subject of a vow, a Nazarite, how consecrated to service, and the lessons therefrom.
18. How often did the Mosaic law require every male to appear before the Lord at the central place of worship, and to what extent was this law fulfilled by Samuel’s father and mother?
19. What were the duties of the child Samuel in the tabernacle?
20. Give an account of Samuel’s call from God, his first prophecy, his recognition by the people as a prophet, and the lesson from his own failure, for a while, to recognize the call.
21. Analyze that gem of Hebrew poetry, Hannah’s song, showing its conception of God, and give the reason of its imitation in the New Testament.
22. What was the state of religion at this time?
23. Explain the references to Belial in 1Sa 1:16 ; 1Sa 2:12 .
24. As Samuel was not a descendant of Aaron, but merely a Levite, why does he subsequently, as we shall learn, officiate in sacrifices as if he were a priest or high priest?
25. What great Texas preacher preached all over Texas a sermon on family government, taking his text from 1Sa 2:31 ?
26. Cite the passages and quotations from Geikie’s Hours With the Bible on the evils of a plurality of wives.
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
III
THE FALL OF THE HOUSE OF ELI, AND THE RISE OF SAMUEL
1Sa 4:1-7:17
I will give, in order, the passages showing the rise of Samuel over against the descent of Eli. Samuel, more than any other book of the Bible, excels in vividness of detail, and especially in showing progressiveness in character, either upward or downward growing either better or worse. Over against the iniquities of Eli’s sons and the doom pronounced on his house, we have in order, these passages: 1Sa 1:27-28 ; 1Sa 2:18 , and the last clause of 1Sa 2:21 ; 1Sa 2:26 ; 1Sa 3:1-4 ; 1Sa 1 Samuel 19-21; 1Sa 4:1 .
The progress is: (1) For this child I prayed. (2) The child prayed for is devoted to Jehovah. (3) His home is God’s house and there he serves and worships. (4) The child is called. (5) The child grew in favor with God and man. (6) The child kept on growing. (7) He is recognized as a prophet by all Israel from Dan to Beersheba. In the meantime Eli’s house steadily descends until the bottom is reached. Macaulay, in his History of England, in telling about the great men in power at a certain time, including Lord Halifax, substantially makes this remark: “These great men did not know that they were even then being eclipsed by two young men who were rising up, that would attain to greater heights and influence than the others had ever attained,” and he gives the names of the two young men as John Somers and Charles Montagu.
We may apply this throughout life: A train once in motion will run for a while on its own impetus, but in both cases the motion will gradually cease unless new power be applied. So in every community there are leaders holding positions from past momentum, while new men are rising that will eclipse and succeed them. As in nature when a tree quits growing it begins to die, and when a stream quits flowing its waters stagnate, so when a leader quits studying he begins to lose power and must give place to younger men who are studious. And it will some day be so with you, and you will enter what is called the declining period of your life. For a while it will astonish you that you are not cutting as wide a swath as you used to cut, and unless you live only in God, that will be the bitterest hour of your life. Very few people know how to grow old gracefully; some of them become very bitter as they grow old. The following is a summary of the events connected with the fall of the house of Eli:
1. An enemy is strengthened to smite them. The absence of purity, piety, veneration, and fidelity in God’s people, either his nominal people like Hophni and Phinehas, or his real people, as Eli, always develops a conquering enemy. The case of Samson, Eli’s contemporaneous judge, illustrates this. When he betrayed the secret of his strength, he went out as aforetime and knew not that the Spirit of the Lord had departed from him, and so became an easy victim of the Philistines, bound, eyes put out, enslaved, grinding in the mills of God’s enemies, a sport to them, with the added despair that the cause suffered in his downfall.
The devil has known from the beginning that his only chance to win against God’s people is, by their sins, to turn God against them. He knows that as long as God is for you, nobody can be against you. He knows that he cannot fight against you when you have God back of you, but if you become estranged from God, the devil will show you very quickly that when it comes to a wrestle he can give you a fall, and it does not take him long to do it.
It was in this way that he influenced Balaam to suggest to Balak the plan to make Israel sin with women, as a step toward idolatry. His slogan was: “If you can make them sin against their God and put him against them, then you can down them.” The Phinehas of that day, how different from this Phinehas, Eli’s son! Naming a child after a great and good man does not make him like his namesake.
One of the most unpatriotic men I ever knew was named after George Washington; one of the greatest failures as a preacher was named after Spurgeon; one of the poorest excuses for a statesman was named after Sam Houston. Now here is Phinehas, the son of Eli, named after that other Phinehas of Balaam’s time.
The devil, here called Belial, is never more satisfied than when he can nominate his own children as ministers of religion. Hophni and Phinehas, children of Belial, were priests. The prevalent evils of today arise from the fact that children of Belial occupy many pulpits and many chairs in theological seminaries and Christian schools. Always they are the advance couriers of disaster to God’s cause, and herald the coming of a triumphant adversary.
When preachers and professors, in schools begin to hawk at and peck at the Bible, and rend it with their talons, or defile the spiritual feasts like harpies) you should not only count them as unclean birds of prey, but should begin to set your own house in order, for trouble is coming fast.
2. The Philistines won a battle. Four thousand Israelites were slain.
3. Stimulated by fear, the sons of Eli resorted to an expedient, tempting God. They sent for the ark of the covenant, taking it from its appointed place to be used as a fetish or charm. So used as an instrument of superstition it had no more power to avert evil than a Negro’s use of a rabbit’s foot, or the nailing up of a horseshoe over a door to keep off witches.
As religion becomes decadent its votaries resort to charms, amulets, relics of the saints, alleged pieces of the cross, images and other kinds of evil, instead of resorting to repentance, faith, and obedience. So used, the most sacred symbol becomes worse than any common thing.
We will see later in Jewish history the idolatrous worship of the brazen serpent made by Moses, and we will hear good King Hezekiah say, as he breaks it to pieces, “Nehushtan,” i.e., “it is only a piece of brass.” As a symbol, when lifted up, it was of great use, but when used as an object of worship it became only a piece of brass. A student of history knows that a multiplication of holy days, pyrotechnic displays, games, festivities, plays, and cruel sports, until there are no days to work, marks the decadence of a people. We need not be afraid of any nation that gives great attention to fireworks, a characteristic of the Latin races.
We shout in vain: “The ark of the Lord! The ark of the Lord!” when we fail to follow the Lord himself. No issue is made in that way, as it is not an issue of the Lord against Dagon, but a superstitious and impious use of sacred symbols against the devil, and the devil will whip every time. In the medieval times, early in the history of the crusades, we see that even the cross so used falls before the crescent, the sign of Mohammed followers.
We might as well seek the remission of sins in baptism, or salvation in the bread of the Supper, as to expect God’s favor sought by any such means.
When Elisha smote the Jordan with Elijah’s mantle, he trusted not to the mantle, nor did he say, “Where is Elijah?” but he said, “Where is the Lord God of Elijah?” and so he divided the waters.
4. The Philistines won another battle. Thirty thousand Israelites perished; Hophni and Phinehas were slain; the ark was captured; Eli died, and the wife of Phinehas died in premature labor, naming her new born babe, “Ichabod,” that is, “The glory is departed from Israel”; Shiloh was captured and made desolate forever, ceasing to be the central place of worship; both the ark and the tabernacle became fugitives, separating never to meet again, and so Israel lamented after the Lord.
5. The Philistines regarded the capture of the ark, (1). as a triumph of their god, Dagon, over Jehovah, the God of Israel, and so they placed it in a subordinate position before Dagon in their temple. (2) They regarded it as the capture of Jehovah himself, obligated by his captivity now to serve the Philistines as be had heretofore ministered to Israel.
The prevalence of such conceptions in ancient times is very evident. For ages the presence of a deity was associated with his symbol. To capture his symbol, or image, was to capture the deity, as in the story of Aladdin in The Arabian Nights, whoever held the lamp of the genie controlled the genie himself. Assyrian sculptures today exhibit the idols of vanished nations borne in triumphant procession, and the parade is always to show that they have triumphed over the gods of that country.
The Hebrew prophets allude to this custom frequently. The passages are: Isa 46:1 ; Jer 48:7 ; Jer 49:3 ; Hos 10:6 ; Dan 11:8 . Cyrus, when he captured Babylon, adopted its gods, but the Romans under Marcellus brought to adorn their own cities the captured images and pictures of the Greek gods. Nebuchadnezzar carried away the sacred symbols of Jerusalem when he captured that city, as did Titus after our Lord’s time, and we see in Rome today carved on the Arch, the sevenbranched golden candlestick which Titus carried from the Temple of Jerusalem in triumph to Rome. The Roman general, Fabius, when he captured the city of Tarentum, said to his soldiers, “Leave their gods here; their gods are mad at them; so let us leave them with their gods which they have offended,” and so they left the idols. It would have been a good thing, as after-events show, had Nebuchadnezzar done the same thing, for when Belshazzar, his successor, on a certain night at a drunken feast, used the sacred vessels of the Temple for desecration, it was then that the hand came out and wrote on the wall, Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin.
Jehovah showed the Philistines that their victory was not over him: (1) By causing the image of Dagon to fall down before the ark, and when they set it up again, caused it to fall down again, and to break its head and arms off; (2) by sending two great plagues: tumors or boils, violent and fatal, under which thousands died, and field mice that swarmed so as to destroy the great harvests of grain that made their land famous; (3) by causing the cessation of the worship of Dagon in Ashdod, for after taking the falls and breaking his head and arms off, no man would go in and worship Dagon.
A natural inquiry when an individual or a people is subject to a series of severe and extraordinary disasters is, What sin have we committed and how may we expiate it, or avert its judgment? Such an inquiry is inseparably connected with any conception of the moral government of God. Men may indeed often fail to note that all afflictions are not punitive, some being disciplinary, or preparatory to greater displays of mercy. We see this problem discussed in the case of Job and his friends; also to those who asked Jesus, “Who did sin, this man or his parents?” He answered that this affliction did not result from personal sin of either of them, but that the glory of God might be manifested. It is the most natural thing in the world for anybody who has suffered one buffet of ill fortune after another, to ask, “What have I done?” and it is perfectly natural for the neighbors to point out that one and say, “Ah, you have been doing something against the Lord: your sin is finding you out.” Therefore it was the most natural thing in the world for the Philistines, when they saw such disasters coming in connection with the capture of the ark, to put the question, “What is our sin?”
We will see what expedients the Philistines adopted to determine whether their calamities came only in a natural way, or were supernatural afflictions connected with the ark and coming from the offended Jehovah, and if from Jehovah, how be was to be appeased. 1Sa 5:7-11 gives us the first expedient: “We will move this ark from Ashdod to the next one of the five cities, and see what happens then. If the same things happen there, we will move it to the next city, and if the same things happen there we will move it to the next city, and so on around the circle of the five cities, and if the same results follow all of these cities, such a series of incidents will be regarded as full proof that the judgments are from Jehovah.”
We recall the story of the boy and the cow bells: He said, “When my father found a cow bell, Ma and I were mighty glad, for we needed one. And when he found another cow bell we were glad again, for we really needed another one, but when Dad found another cow bell, Ma and I became suspicious.” A man would not naturally find three cow bells one after another, so they thought that “Dad” had stolen them. So when five cities, one after the other, had the same afflictions, they could not call that chance.
I knew of a general in a terrible battle who, when a bombshell as big as a water bucket came from a gunboat, cut through a tree and sank into the ground, making an excavation that you could put a house in, ran and put his head right into the hole where the shell came. Somebody asked him why, and he said that such a shell as that would never come twice in the same place. And so the Philistine idea was to move the ark from Ashdod to the next city, and if nothing happened, then they were mistaken about this being chastisement from Jehovah, but if wherever they took it there came the mice and boils on the inhabitants, they were not mistaken, and they could not misunderstand.
That was their first expedient. Their second expedient was to call upon their religious leaders, their diviners and soothsayers, and to ask them to tell them how they could conciliate Jehovah. And the diviners told them that the ark must be sent back, and it must be sent back with a gift, and the gift must signify their confession of sin. In the olden times if a man was healed of a wound in his hand, the Lord was presented with a silver offering to commemorate the healing of the hand. So they had five golden mice made, one for each city, and five golden tumors, one for each city, to symbolize their conception that the evils had come upon them for this offense to Jehovah. But as there still might be a question as to whether these afflictions were natural or supernatural, they tested it in this way: They went to the pen where were cows with young calves (you know what a fool a cow is over her first calf when it is little) and hitched two of these cows to a cart, put the ark on it, to see if the cows, against nature, would go away and leave their calves willingly, and still thinking about the calves and calling them, would carry the ark back to some city of the Levites; that would show that Jehovah was in it.
That was a pretty wise idea of those Philistines, and so when they took a new cart and put the ark on it, and took those two mother cows, they never hesitated but struck a beeline for the nearest Levite city, about twelve miles, and they went bellowing, showing that they felt the absence from their calves. These were their two expedients.
1Sa 6:19-20 says that some of the people at Bethshemesh looked into the ark to see what was in there, and the blow fell in a minute. No man was authorized to open that sacred chamber over which the mercy seat rested and on which the cherubs sat, but the high priests of God. If you will turn to the Septuagint, you will find another remarkable thing which does not appear in the Hebrew Bible, viz.: all of the Levites of the city of Bethshemesh rejoiced at the return of the ark of God, except one man, Jeconiah, and his family, who refused to rejoice at its homecoming, and God smote that family in a moment.
Now, a later instance: The ark, at the request of the citizens of Bethshemesh, was moved to Kirjathjearim, and stayed there until David had been reigning a long time; he sent after it, and Uzzah, when the ark was shaken by the oxen stumbling, reached up his hand to steady the ark and God struck him dead. His attempt was well meant, but it presumed that God was not able to take care of himself. It was a violation of the law for any man to touch that ark except the ones appointed by Jehovah. Which one of the Psalms commemorates the capture and restoration of the ark?
After twenty years Samuel led Israel to repentance and victory. 1Sa 7:3-12 tells us all about it. It says that Samuel called upon them to repent truly of their sins; if they ever wanted the favor of God any more, to cast off their idols and obey God. This is like John the Baptist saying, “Repent ye, repent ye.” Every prophet, in order to be a reformer, was a preacher of repentance. The people repented of their sins, turned from their idols, and returned to God. He assembled all Israel at Mizpah; the Philistines heard of it and came with a great army. Samuel and Israel met them and smote them hip and thigh, and broke their power.
The next paragraph in the Harmony tells how Samuel judged Israel and the regular circuit he made while living at Ramah. He would go to Beth-el, Gilgal, and Mizpah, then come back, holding special courts of judgment, and with such wisdom, purity, and impartiality that he must be classed as the last, best, and greatest of the judges.
QUESTIONS
1. Cite, in order, the passages showing Samuel’s rise over against the descent of Eli.
2. What said Macaulay on this point, and what other examples cited by the author?
3. Give a summary of the events connected with the fall of the house of Eli.
4. How did the Philistines regard the capture of the ark?
5. Show the prevalence of such conceptions in ancient times.
6. How did Jehovah show the Philistines that their victory was not over him?
7. What is the natural inquiry when an individual or a people is subject to a series of severe and extraordinary disasters?
8. To what expedients did the Philistines resort to determine whether their calamities came only in a natural way, or were supernatural afflictions connected with the ark and coming from the offended Jehovah, and if from Jehovah, how was he to be appeased?
9. How else did Jehovah manifest the sanctity of his ark, both at Bethshemesh and later, as we will find in the history?
10. What Psalm commemorates the capture and restoration of the ark?
11. How does Samuel lead Israel, after twenty years, to repentance and victory?
12. What cities did Samuel visit in his judgeship, and what can you say of the judgments rendered by him?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
1Sa 4:1 And the word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out against the Philistines to battle, and pitched beside Ebenezer: and the Philistines pitched in Aphek.
Ver. 1. And the word of Samuel came to all Israel. ] It was commonly noised and noticed what he had foretold against Eli and the whole people; and it happened accordingly, because they prepared not to meet the Lord with entreaties of peace, as afterwards they did, 1Sa 7:2-6 when once and again they had paid for their learning. Samuel was but a child when he foretold this calamity; but at man’s estate, fit to succeed Eli in the government, ere it was inflicted. God is slow, but sure, if men repent not; and those that will not hearken to the word shall “bear the rod, and who hath appointed it.” Mic 7:9
And pitched beside Ebenezer,
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1 Samuel
FAITHLESSNESS AND DEFEAT
1Sa 4:1 – 1Sa 4:18
The first words of 1Sa 4:1 are closely connected with the end of 1Sa 3:1 – 1Sa 3:21 , and complete the account of Samuel’s inauguration. ‘The word of the Lord’ came to Samuel, and ‘the word of Samuel came to all Israel.’ The one clause tells of the prophet’s inspiration, the other of his message and its reception by the nation. This bond of union between the clauses has been broken by the chapter division, apparently for the sake of representing the revolt against the Philistines as due to Samuel’s instigation. But its being so is very doubtful. If God had sent the army into the field, He would have prepared it, by penitent return to Him, for victory, as no defeat follows on war which He commands. Probably Samuel’s mission made an unwholesome ferment in minds which were quite untouched by its highest significance, and so led to a precipitate rebellion, preceded by no religious reformation, and therefore sure to fail. It was twenty years too soon 1Sa 7:3. Samuel took no part in the struggle, and his name is never mentioned till, at the end of that period, he emphatically condemns all that had been done, and points the true path of deliverance, in ‘return to the Lord with all your heart.’ So the great lesson of this story is that when Israel fights Philistines, unbidden and unrepentant, it is sure to be beaten,-a truth with manifold wide applications.
The first disastrous defeat took place on a field, which was afterwards made memorable by a great victory, and by a name which lives still as a watchword for hope and gratitude. Happy they who at last conquer where they once failed, and in the retrospect can say, ‘Hitherto the Lord helped,’ both by defeat and by the victory for which defeat prepared a way! That opening struggle, bloody and grave as it was, was not decisive; for the Israelites regained their fortified camp unmolested, and held together, and kept their communications open, as appears from what followed.
1Sa 4:3 – 1Sa 4:5 give us a glimpse into the camp of Israel, and 1Sa 4:6 – 1Sa 4:9 into that of the Philistines. These two companion pictures are worth looking at. The two armies are very much alike, and we may say that the purpose of the picture is to show how Israel was practically heathen, taking just the same views of its relation to God which the Philistines did. Note, too, the absence of central authority. ‘The elders’ hold a kind of council. Where were Eli the judge and Samuel the prophet? Neither had part in this war. The question of the elders was right, inasmuch as it recognised that the Lord had smitten them, but wrong inasmuch as it betrayed that they had not the faintest notion that the reason was their own moral and religious apostasy. They had not learned the A B C of their history, and of the conditions of national prosperity. They stand precisely on the Pagan level, believing in a national God, who ought to help his votaries, but from some inexplicable caprice does not; or who, perhaps, is angry at the omission of some ritual observance. What an answer they would have got if Samuel had been there! There ought to have been no need for the question, or, rather, there was need for it, and the answer ought to have been clear to them; their sin was the all-sufficient reason for their defeat. There are plenty of Christians, like these elders, who, when they find themselves beaten by the world and the devil, puzzle their brains to invent all sorts of reasons for God’s smiting, except the true one,-their own departure from Him.
The remedy suggested by the united wisdom of the leaders was as heathen as the consultation which resulted in it. ‘Let us send for the ark’ ‘Those who regarded not the God of the ark,’ says Bishop Hall, ‘think themselves safe and happy in the ark of God.’ They thought, with that confusion between symbol and reality which runs through all heathen worship, and makes the danger of ‘images,’ whether in heathenism or in sensuous Christianity, that if they brought the ark, they brought God with it. It was a kind of charm, which would help them, they hardly knew how. Its very name might have taught them better. They call it ‘the ark of the covenant of the Lord’; and a covenant has two parties to it, and promises favour on conditions. If they had kept the conditions, these four thousand corpses would not have been lying stiff and stark outside the rude encampment. As they did not keep them, bringing the chest which contained the transcript of them into their midst was bringing a witness of their apostasy, not a helper of their feebleness. Repentance would have brought God. Dragging the ark thither only removed Him farther away. We need not be too hard upon these people; for the natural disposition of us all is to trust to the externals of worship, and to put a punctilious attention to these in the place of a true cleaving of heart to the God who dwells near us, and is in us and on our side, if we cling to Him with penitent love. Even God-appointed symbols become snares. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are treated by multitudes as these elders did the ark. The fewer and simpler the outward observances of worship are, the less danger is there of the poor sense-bound soul tarrying in them, instead of passing by means of them into the higher, purer air beyond.
What right had these presumptuous elders to bring the ark from Shiloh? Eli was its guardian; and he, as appears probable from his anxiety about its fate, did not approve of its removal. But ‘the people’ took the law into their own hands. There seems some hint that their action was presumptuous profanation, in the solemn, full title given in 1Sa 4:4 : ‘The ark of the covenant of the Lord of Hosts which dwelleth between the cherubim,’-as if contrasting His awful majesty, His universal dominion over the armies of heaven and the embattled powers of the universe, and the dazzling light of that ‘glory,’ which shone in the innermost chamber of the Tabernacle, with the unanointed hands that presumed to press in thither and drag so sacred a thing into the light of common day and the tumult of the camp. Nor is the profanation lessened, but rather increased, by the priestly attendants, Eli’s two sons, themselves amongst the worst men in Israel. When Hophni and Phinehas are its priests, the ark can bring no help. Heathenism separates religion from morality altogether. In it there is no connection between worship and purity, and the Old Testament religion for the first time welded these two inseparably together. That tumultuous procession from Shiloh, with these two profligates for the priests of God, and the bearers thinking that they were sure of their God’s favour now, whatever their sin, shows how completely Israel had forgotten its own law, and, whilst professedly worshipping Jehovah, had really become a heathen people. The reception of the ark with that fierce shout, which echoed among the hills and was heard in the Philistines’ encampment, shows the same thing. Not so should the ark have been received, but with tears and confessions and silent awe. No man in all that host had ever looked upon it before. No man ought to have seen it then . Once a year, and not without blood sprinkled on its cover, the high priest might look on it through the cloud of incense which kept him from death, while all the people waited hushed till he came forth, but now it is dragged into the camp, and welcomed with a yell of mad delight, as a pledge of victory. What could display more strikingly the practical heathenism of the people?
1Sa 4:6 – 1Sa 4:9 take us into the other camp, and show us the undisguised heathens. The Philistines think just as the other side did, only, in their polytheistic way, they do not use the name ‘Jehovah,’ but speak first of ‘God’ and then of ‘gods’ as having arrived in the camp. The nations dreaded each other’s gods, though they worshipped their own; and the Philistines believed quite as much that ‘Jehovah’ was the Hebrew’s God, as that ‘Dagon’ was theirs. There was to be a duel then between the two superhuman powers. The vague reports which they had heard of the Exodus, nearly five hundred years ago, filled the Philistines with panic. They had but a confused notion of the facts of that old story, and thought that Egypt had met the ten plagues ‘in the wilderness.’ The blunder is very characteristic, and helps to show the accuracy of our narrative. It would not have occurred to a legend-maker. It sounds strange to us that the Philistines’ belief that the Hebrews’ God had come to their help should issue in exhortations to ‘fight like men.’ But polytheism makes that quite a natural conclusion; and there is something almost fine in the truculent boldness with which they set their teeth for a fierce struggle. They reiterate to one another the charge to ‘quit themselves like men’; and while they do not hide from themselves that the question whether they are to be still masters is hanging on the coming struggle, a dash of contempt for the ‘Hebrews’ who had been their ‘slaves’ is perceptible.
According to 1Sa 4:10 , the Philistines appear to have begun the attack, perhaps taking the enemy by surprise. The rout this time was complete. The grim catalogue of disaster in 1Sa 4:10 – 1Sa 4:11 is strangely tragic in its dreadful, monotonous plainness, each clause adding something to the terrible story, and each linked to the preceding by a simple ‘and.’ The Israelites seem to have been scattered. ‘They fled, every man to his tent.’ The army, with little cohesion and no strong leaders, melted away. The ark was captured, and its two unworthy attendants slain. Bringing it had not brought God, then. It was but a chest of shittimwood, with two slabs of lettered stone in it,-and what help was in that? But its capture was the sign that the covenant with Israel was for the time annulled. The whole framework of the nation was disorganised. The keystone was struck out of their worship, and they had fallen, by their own sin, to the level of the nations, and even below these; for they had their gods, but Israel had turned away from their God, and He had departed from them. Superstition fancied that the presence of the ark secured to impenitent men the favour of God; but it was no superstition which saw in its absence from Shiloh His averted face.
Is there in poetry or drama a more vivid and pathetic passage than the closing verses of this narrative, which tell of the panting messenger and the old blind Eli?
‘Eben-ezer’ cannot have been very far from Shiloh, for the fugitive had seen the end of the fight, and reached the city before night. He came with the signs of mourning, and, as it would appear from 1Sa 4:13 , passed the old man at the gate without pausing, and burst into the city with his heavy tidings. One can almost hear the shrill shrieks of wrath and despair which first told Eli that something was wrong. Blind and unwieldy and heavy-hearted, he sat by the gate to which the news would first come; but yet he is the last to hear,-perhaps because all shrank from telling him, perhaps because in the confusion no one remembered him. Only after he had asked the meaning of the tumult, of which his foreboding heart and conscience told him the meaning before it was spoken, is the messenger brought to the man to whom he should have gone first. How touchingly the story pauses, even at this crisis, to paint the poor old man! A stronger word is used to describe his blindness than in 1Sa 3:2 , as the Revised Version shows. His fixed eyeballs were sightless now; and there he sat, dreading and longing to hear. The fugitive’s account of himself is shameless in its avowal of his cowardice, and prepares Eli for the worst. But note how he speaks gently and with a certain dignity, crushing down his anxiety,-’How went the matter, my son?’ Then, with no merciful circumlocution or veiling, out comes the whole dismal story once again.
Eli spoke no more. His sons’ death had been the sign given him years before that the threatenings against his house should be fulfilled; but even that blow he can bear. But the capture of the ark is more than a personal sorrow, and his start of horror overbalances him, and he falls from his seat which probably had no back to it, and dies, silent, of a broken neck and a broken heart. His forty years of judgeship ended thus. He was in many respects good and lovable, gentle, courteous, devout. His kindly treatment of Hannah, his fatherly training of Samuel, his submission to the divine message through the child, his ‘trembling for the ark,’ his death at the news of its being taken, all indicate a character of real sweetness and true godliness. But all was marred by a fatal lack of strong, stern resolve to tolerate no evil which he ought to suppress. Good, weak men, especially when they let foolish tenderness hinder righteous severity, bring terrible evils on themselves, their families, and their nation. It was Eli who, at bottom, was the cause of the defeat and the disasters which slew his sons and broke his own heart. Nothing is more cruel than the weak indulgence which, when men are bringing a curse on themselves by their sin, ‘restrains them not.’
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren
Came. Compare Act 3:24. Heb 11:32.
Eben-ezer = Stone of help. So called in anticipation of Samuel’s victory twenty years later (1Sa 7:12).
Aphek = Fortress. Jos 15:53.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Chapter 4
Now in chapter four we find the Philistines had come against the Israelites and they met them in battle and defeated them. Four thousand of the men of Israel were slain. So the Philistines were getting ready to attack again, and the people said, “Let us bring the Ark of the Covenant into the camp in order that the Philistines cannot defeat us.”
Now they were beginning to look at the Ark of the Covenant as sort of an amulet, a good luck piece in a kind of a thing. “Well if the Ark of the Covenant is here, it will bring us good luck over the Philistines.” Making it almost a fetish kind of a thing, bringing it into the camp. It was wrong, but they did it anyhow.
When the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, came with the ark of the covenant, all of the men began to shout and, [a big cheer went up, and a lot of shouting]. And the Philistines said, What’s going on over there? And so when they found out that they had brought the ark of the covenant, the Philistines said, Oh that’s not fair it never happened in battle that the people brought their gods into battle with them. These are the Gods that wiped out the Egyptians and the Amorites and all, what chance do we have ( 1Sa 4:4-8 ).
The Philistines, it had a reverse effect actually, they said, “Men fight with everything you got or else you’re gonna be their slaves. Even as they have been our slaves.” It so inspired the Philistines that they attacked. They defeated the men of Israel, and they took the Ark of the Covenant back to their own city. They captured the Ark of the Covenant and took it back to their Philistine cities.
So the two sons of Eli were slain in that battle. A young man came running to tell the news, and Eli was sitting in a chair by the road, and the young man came. And Eli said, What’s the meaning of all this noise, the tumult? [Now Eli at this point was ninety-eight years old, his eyes were dim, he could barely see.] and this young fellow said, I came out of the camp of the army, and he said, Israel is fled before the Philistines, and your two sons were killed, and the Ark of the Covenant was taken. When the old man heard that the Ark of the Covenant was taken, he fell over backwards, broke his neck [Because he was a very heavy man.] and he died: Now his daughter in law, the wife of Phinehas his son, at that time was expecting a child: when she heard that her husband had died, she went into labor pains. The women were standing around her to help her, and they said, Fear not for you have had a son. But she answered not, neither did she regard it. But she named the child Ichabod, saying, The glory is departed from Israel: because the ark of God had been taken by their enemies ( 1Sa 4:11-22 ).
Ichabod means “no glory”, or “the glory is departed.” So this child of course is stuck with this name Ichabod. She died in the birth of the child. “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
The crisis of judgment foretold by Samuel to Eli now arrived. It was a Philistine attack on the people, in which large numbers were slain, among them the two sons of Eli. On hearing the news Eli himself died, as did also the wife of one of the sons in giving birth to a boy, whose name in dying she pronounced Ichabod.
It was a terrible and significant name, indicating that the glory of Jehovah had departed.
Perhaps the most significant teaching in this story is derived from a consideration of the action of the men of Israel in the presence of the Philistine attack. Realizing their peril, and hoping in some way to save themselves, they carried the Ark of God into the midst of the fray. It was an entirely superstitious use of the Ark, and was utterly unavailing. The Philistines were afraid, but, strengthening their hearts, went forward, gained a great victory, and captured the Ark itself.
How often men who have neglected God, and the rites and ceremonies of His worship, hope in some crisis to save themselves by superstitious use of some of the holy things of the faith.
It is always not only unavailing, but blasphemous. In any hour of peril a genuine return to God is of value; but an attempt to make use of sacred things to procure personal safety is the worst form of blasphemy.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
Trusting in the Ark, not in God
1Sa 4:1-11
The predictions against Elis house now begin to be fulfilled. It was fitting for Israel to institute an inquiry into the causes of defeat. This is always the first step toward victory. There was no doubt as to the ancient Covenant with Israel; the one question was to ascertain what had suddenly neutralized that divine assistance which in former days had always been forthcoming. Failure often indicates that something has happened to cut off the supply of Gods saving help.
In this instance, however, Israel did not carry the inquiry into Gods presence, but endeavored to supply the lapse of divine help by introducing the symbol of the Covenant. Fetch the Ark! they cried. They supposed that, in some mysterious way, it would bring God into their camp and ally Him with their arms. In the same manner a brigand might expect an amulet or charm to preserve his life, while violating the laws of God and man. These materialized views of the Israelites relations with God had to be corrected; and hence defeat ensued. Our only safety lies, not in an outward act or token, but in simple, pure-hearted and unbroken fellowship with God. Then we become invincible.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
1Sa 4:10-11
I. Look first at the connection between declension and defeat, at the root of the calamity which befell the nation and the dishonour to the cause of God. There was a deep moral apostasy. (1) The character of the priesthood had become thoroughly corrupt, and this is one of the most ominous signs that can appear in any society. (2) Another feature of declension in the people of Israel was that they had changed their religion into a formal superstition. After their first defeat by the Philistines they began to think of higher help. But it was not of God they thought, the living God, but only of the ark. The ark has been changed into a fetish; the name of it is to be their deliverer. When religion comes to this, it sinks into a hideous idol, and the petrified shell must be broken in pieces if the spirit is to be saved. (3) There is a further stage in the ark’s history before it reaches its lowest fall. It has been dissociated from the living God, and has become not merely a common, but a desecrated, thing. To redeem the Israelites from their error, they must learn that the ark is powerless if God forsakes them, and that the symbol cannot save without the living presence. In this stern lesson God uses their enemies as teachers. In this case the Philistines were on the better side. It was not man against God, but man against falsehood under His name, and the battle ended as one might anticipate. Natural human courage proved itself stronger than corrupted religion, and hypocrisy was broken and scattered.
II. Look next at God’s victory. It is when men think they have gained a victory over God that they are on the edge of sore disaster. What to do with God is the world’s great trial, as what to do with Jesus was the difficulty of Pilate. For the world cannot make God to its mind, and in the end the world cannot do without Him. It carries His ark hither and thither, seeks to bring Him to the level of its own conceptions, to subject Him to its own idols, but finds in all its efforts no true rest till it suffers Him to take His own way to His throne. Notice: (1) The only obedience which God accepts is that which is given Him out of love, and for His own sake. (2) If the ark is to find its true place, it must be committed to the hands of men who love it.
J. Ker, Sermons, 2nd series, p. 162.
References: 1Sa 4:10, 1Sa 4:11.-Outline Sermons to Children, p. 37. 1Sa 4:12-18.-J. R. Macduff, Sunsets on the Hebrew Mountains, p. 62. 1Sa 4:13.-R. S. Candlish, Scripture Characters and Miscellanies, pp. 320, 336; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. v., p. 365; W. Morley Punshon, Four Popular Discourses, 2nd series, No. IV. 1Sa 4:21.-Parker, vol. vii., p. 60.
1Sa 4:22
We do not know her name, nor her years, nor her previous career, this poor brokenhearted woman who died with these words on her lips. No doubt her short life had had its blinks of sunshine, but she abides in our memory an image of the deepest tragedy, and after these few minutes of supreme anguish she goes back to the silence whence she came. There is something that comes very straight to our sympathy in the picture of one fairly beaten, one who has quite given up, brokenhearted. It was not with this woman the passing despondency through which human beings get again into the cheerful sunshine. With her it was the last of this life; and thus giving up, she died.
I. We see in the wife of Phinehas both piety and patriotism.
Putting aside her own individual losses, she summed up what had killed her in one woeful wail: “The glory is departed from Israel, for the ark of God is taken.” There are some, indeed, who, in circumstances as desperate as those of Israel on that black day, would have risen to the need of the occasion and gone, with heart and soul, to the work of setting things right again. Such was Luther; such was Knox. But there are few indeed to whom God has given such strength and courage.
II. The great lesson conveyed by the text is that the glory of a nation depends on God’s presence with it; that is, on its religious character, on its solemn holding by what is right and abhorring what is wrong.
III. The glory was departed from Israel when the ark of God was taken. That was the emblem, the flower, the culmination, of all the national faith and consecration. The loss of the mere wooden chest was nothing, except as a reminder of the vital and essential loss of God’s presence which had gone before. It is the Spirit that quickeneth; it is the earnest reality of the worship that alone avails; the outward form, except as it expresses the spirit and is instinct with it, profits nothing at all.
A. K. H. B., The Graver Thoughts of a Country Parson, 3rd series, p. 57.
References: 1Sa 5:2-4.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxiii., No. 1342. 1Sa 5:4.-A. Scott, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxi., p. 237. 1Sa 5:7.-J. Ker, Sermons, 2nd series, p. 162. 1Sa 6:9.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. vii., p. 257. 1Sa 6:20.-Bishop Thirlwall, Good Words, 1876, p. 17. 1Sa 7:3.-Parker, vol. vi., p. 269. 1Sa 7:8.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. xi., p. 140. 1Sa 7:12.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. ix., No. 500, and Morning by Morning, p. 365; G. Matheson, Moments on the Mount, p. 201. 1Sa 7:15-17.-G. B. Ryley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiii., p. 206 1Sa 7:17.-Parker, vol. vii., p. 61.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
5. The judgment of Eli and His Sons–Ichabod
CHAPTER 4
1. The fulfilled prediction: The death of Elis sons (1Sa 4:1-11)
2. The death of Eli (1Sa 4:12-18)
3. Ichabod (1Sa 4:19-22)
Israel then renewed the conflict with the Philistines and suffered defeat. It seems that they acted in self-confidence, and when the battle was lost they readily acknowledged the hand of the Lord in the disaster: Wherefore has the LORD smitten us today before the Philistines? But there was no self-judgment, no repentance, no crying unto the Lord. The ark of the covenant of the LORD is brought out of Shiloh. They trust in the ark instead of Jehovah; they expect salvation from the ark of gold and wood: it may save us out of the hand of our enemies. Alas! the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there with the ark of the covenant of God (verse 4). They forgot Jehovah whom they had offended and insulted. How could He bless and deliver His people when such sons of Belial were associated with the sanctuary? A worse defeat followed. Thirty thousand Israelites fell, among them the sons of Eli. The Philistines, first terrified by the presence of the ark, gain a great victory and capture the ark.
On the words these are the gods that smote the Egyptians with every plague in the wilderness Wellhausen, the well known critic, remarks: Either an excusable inaccuracy, or a copyists slip. He meant that the Egyptians were not smitten in the wilderness, but in their own land. However, Wellhausen did not see that the Philistines said this. They expressed their inaccurate knowledge of what had happened and Samuel reports it as if it was spoken by the Philistines.
The tidings of the awful disaster reach Eli, ninety-eight years old and totally blind. When he heard that the ark of God was taken, he fell backward, broke his neck and died. Significant is the final paragraph of this chapter. The wife of Phinehas in child-birth also hears of the capture of the ark and the death of Eli, her father-in-law, the death of her husband and his brother. Dying, she named her baby son Ichabod, which means no glory. The glory had departed from Israel. Israel had indeed brought forth, by her departure from God, the condition of Ichabod. The ark as the glory of Gods manifest presence among His people was gone. He forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent which he placed among men; and delivered his strength into captivity, and His glory into the enemys hand (Psa 78:60-61). In a higher sense the word Ichabod is written over that which professes to be the church, but which has departed from the truth. The power and the manifest presence of Jehovah are lost. And many individual Christians have drifted into the same conditions by their sinful and worldly ways.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
am 2863, bc 1141, An, Ex, Is, 350
came: or, came to pass, Heb. was, 1Sa 3:11
Ebenezer: That is, the place afterwards so called. See the parallel texts. 1Sa 5:1, 1Sa 7:12
Aphek: This Aphek was situated in the tribe of Judah, and is probably the same as Aphekah. Jos 15:53, It must be carefully distinguished from that near Jezreel, and another in Asher. 1Sa 29:1, Jos 19:30, 1Ki 20:30
Reciprocal: Jos 12:18 – Aphek Jos 13:4 – Aphek Jdg 3:3 – five lords Jdg 3:31 – Israel 1Ki 20:26 – Aphek 2Ki 13:17 – Aphek Eze 25:15 – to destroy
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
The Ark Taken by the Philistines
1Sa 4:1-22
INTRODUCTORY WORDS
We would like to suggest something of the history of the Ark of the Covenant.
1. The Ark was symbolical of Christ Jesus our Lord. The shittim wood stood for the body of our Lord, and linked Him to humanity. The wood overlaid with pure gold within and without, demonstrated how Christ was very God of very God; God the Son, and Son of God; God manifested in flesh.
The staves of wood covered with gold, with the rings where the staves were to be placed for the purpose of carrying the Ark, showed how Christ in the flesh was circumscribed and dependent upon others.
The mercy seat was all of gold, pure gold. It made clear the fact that Christ who knew no sin, did no sin, and in whom there was no sin, made the sacrifice for sinners, the Just for the unjust. Anything other than God in flesh; God, a Lamb spotless and pure, could not become God’s mercy seat for sinners.
The two cherubim made of pure beaten gold, which overlooked the mercy seat, showed that God could look down upon the sinner only through the mercy seat where the shed blood was sprinkled.
2. The Ark was the place where the Lord dwelt. We read: “And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat.”
However, that sacred place of meeting was not apart from the shedding of blood. Not only the Ark itself was to have the blood sprinkled on the mercy seat, but the approach to the Holy of Holies was possible only by way of the altar of burnt offering, in the outer court.
There is also a place of meeting for the saint of today. It is at the altar of prayer that He promises to meet with us; however, Christ plainly said, “No man cometh unto the Father, but by Me.” His presence chamber is closed to all, therefore, unless they come by the way of the cleansing Blood, all-clothed in the imputed righteousness of God. in Christ,
3. The Ark in the midst of Israel spoke victory to God’s people. They knew that when the Ark was there, power was there; victory was there.
Here is a lesson that needs to be emphasized just now among God’s people. If the Lord is not in the house, they labor in vain who build it; if God is not with us, we are a defeated, disheartened people.
I. ISRAEL SMITTEN BEFORE THE PHILISTINES (1Sa 4:1)
1. A sad spectacle. We remember how Joshua was overcome with grief when Israel was smitten at Ai. He said: “What shall I say, when Israel turneth their backs before their enemies!” Then Joshua added, “And what wilt Thou do unto Thy great Name?”
Were ever words more true than Joshua’s? He felt that Israel’s defeat was God’s defeat. That was correct in the days of Joshua, and it is correct unto this day. Israel’s downfall meant, in the eyes of men, God’s downfall.
Our God is so inseparable from His people that what happens to the one must, of necessity, affect the other. Did God not call Israel that they might be unto Him for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory? He did. Therefore, if Israel fails, their failure drags the Name, the praise, and the glory of God into their defeat.
God has also said to the Church, “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into His marvellous light.” We are * * that we may.
2. A solemn result. Whenever there is a defeat on the part of one side of the battle, there is a glorying on the part of the other side. In this case the Philistines most assuredly gloried over the Israelites. If that had been all, it had not been so bad; they, however, also gloried over the Lord, Israel’s God.
In the life of the Christian this is always true. No Christian liveth a separated life, a life unto himself alone. He is linked and interlinked, woven and interwoven into the life of his Lord. The fact is that the believer and his Lord have one life. Everything that he is or does, affects not only himself, but his Lord also.
II. A SOLEMN QUESTION (1Sa 4:3)
1. Seeking for the cause of defeat. When Israel found herself beaten in battle, she inquired, “Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us to day before the Philistines?”
In this Israel did well. We, too, whenever there is defeat, should seek the reason why. Surely the Lord would not leave us in the shame of failure, especially when His own holy Name is involved, unless there was some just reason for it all,
2. The great decision. I suppose they thought that they had discovered the cause of their defeat. Their decision was that the cause lay in their failure to take the Ark of the Covenant with them. They seemed to have no thought that their own sins had caused their slaughter. Beyond doubt it is necessary to have God with us, and yet, can an outward display of God suffice?
The church, in many places, has a form of godliness but they have no power. The church, no doubt, imagines that this vain carrying of the emblems of the Lord with them, will assure them of victory. Let us see how it worked out in the case of Israel.
3. The Ark brought forth. 1Sa 4:4 tells us, “So the people sent to Shiloh, that they might bring from thence the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord of Hosts, which dwelleth between the cherubims.” Thus they had God with them once more-at least they did so far as the outward semblance thereof was concerned.
4. Hophni and Phinehas were there with the Ark. They had the Ark, but they had men under God’s curse carrying it. Suppose a church does formally have God with them, yet, in their pulpit they have men associated with their worship who are altogether unacceptable with God; or, suppose they have God with them in form, but their officers are men of the world, wholly unacceptable to the Lord, should they expect victory?
III. THE FEAR OF THE PHILISTINES (1Sa 4:7)
1. The shouts of Israel. When the Ark was brought up out of Shiloh, the Children of Israel “shouted with a great shout, so that the earth rang again.” It was the sound of the shout and the noise of great rejoicing in the camp of the Hebrews, that caused the Philistines to fear. They supposed that the Lord was, in fact, with His people.
2. The despair of the Philistines. 1Sa 4:7 tells us that the Philistines were afraid and they said: “God is come into the camp. And they said, Woe unto us! * * who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty Gods? these are the Gods that smote the Egyptians.” They might well have been afraid, for had the God of Israel truly been with the Israelites, the gods of the Philistines and all their armies would easily have been overthrown. It has been said,
“The devil fleeth when he sees,
The praying Christian an his knees.”
The devil, however, does not always need to fear, for it is not everyone that goes through the form of prayer that prays. Whenever there is sin, there is always defeat.
3. The appeal. The leaders of the Philistines cried out to their soldiers: “Be strong, and quit yourselves like men, O ye Philistines, that ye be not servants unto the Hebrews.” In the New Testament we read almost these very same words: “quit you like men.” This is God’s call to saints.
IV. SMITTEN AGAIN (1Sa 4:10)
1. Wherein a false hope faded. As Israel went forth to battle, they went forth in all seeming confidence. This time they carried the Ark with them. Perhaps they said within themselves, “If God be for us, who can be against us?” They knew that when God lifted up His hand, victory was sure.
It is in the time when victory seems certain, that defeat seems so disastrous. Israel thought she would win, but she lost.
2. Wherein there was a great slaughter. “There fell of Israel thirty thousand footmen. And the Ark of God was taken; and the sons of EH, Hophni and Phinehas, were slain.”
Here was a defeat that was more than a defeat. It was a threefold disaster.
1.Thirty thousand footmen were slain.
2.The Ark was taken.
3.The two priests of Israel were killed.
How could so terrific a defeat have happened when the Children of Israel had gone up to battle with their eyes upon the Ark of the Covenant? That Ark certainly stood for victory. It signified that God was with them, for He Himself had said that He would dwell between the cherubim.
3, The true cause.
(1) The people had taken the Ark of God, but they had not cleansed their hearts from sin. They had not put away their false gods. They had an idea that God would work, even though they themselves were wrong. They forgot the instructions of the Almighty to Moses (Deu 23:14).
Think you that a church that is disobedient, and carnal, can have victory simply because it carries with it the “Ark of the Lord”?
(2) Hophni and Phinehas were wicked men-men under the curse of the Almighty. They were exploiting God’s people. They were serving for filthy lucre, and God could not bless as long as they were there.
V. WHAT MEANETH THIS NOISE? (1Sa 4:14)
1. The great slaughter. The Philistines who had slaughtered 4,000 men before the Ark was brought, now slew 30,000; the Ark was captured, the two sons of EH were slain. So great was the victory of the enemy of Jehovah. The havoc wrought could hardly be measured. It seemed impossible. Yet, there it was-ruin and wreckage on every hand.
2. What meaneth this noise? The aged seer sat by the wayside watching. It was he, even Eli, who said, “What meaneth the noise of this tumult?” Perhaps he knew full well; perhaps he had deceived himself. In any event, we know what the tumult meant. We know the meaning of the great defeat.
Eli, the priest, was as much to blame as was anyone. He had condoned the sins of his sons. He had sat quietly by while his two sons held the place of power in the priesthood, although he had been sufficiently warned of God.
The two sons, likewise, had their part in the meaning of Israel’s overthrow. They had been untrue to both God and man. They were corrupt in every way.
The sins of Israel had a part in their defeat. There was sin in the camp. Not that alone, but they had gone so far as to drag God into their midst. They had thought to take the Ark of the Covenant into a place where God could not dwell.
VI. THE DEATH OF ELI (1Sa 4:18)
1. Eli was a “good” man. Forty years he judged Israel. He lived to a good old age. He was not aggressive for the Lord, but he was “good.” He was good to the lack of firmness. He was good to the exclusion of rebuking sin.
Eli was, we fear, as many preachers and pastors are today. No one could, perhaps, charge him with any evil way or word. But no one could charge him with any outstanding conflict with sin.
Shall ministers who find themselves environed with a careless, carnal, and ofttimes corrupt membership, be just good and kind, and passive, when words of condemnation and judgment are needed? God forbid. We need to rebuke evil in our own church or home, just as much as we need to approve of righteousness. We need men who are not for sale.
2. Eli was a God-fearing man. He did love God, he did love the Ark of God. When he heard that the Ark was taken by the Philistines, it was then that he fell backwards from off the seat where he sat, and broke his neck. The death of his sons was bad, but the capture of the Ark was the thing that broke his heart.
VII. THE GLORY IS DEPARTED FROM ISRAEL (1Sa 4:21)
When the wife of Phinehas heard the tidings that her husband was dead, that Eli was dead, and that the Ark was taken, she died in childbirth, naming her son, as she died, Ichabod, and saying, “The glory is departed from Israel: because the Ark of God was taken.”
1. The glory has departed from Israel even today. The people who of yore knew God and who walked in His statutes and in His ways, are now scattered and driven forth among all nations.
Jeremiah the wailing Prophet cried out, “She that was great among the nations, * * is * * become tributary”! “Her adversaries are the chief, her enemies prosper.”
Hosea said, “As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly away like a bird.” Christ said, “Your house is left unto you desolate.”
2. The glory has departed from the church. No, not altogether, thank God. However, for a great part, her glory is gone. I sit writing in the very heart of India. Even here, in the mission fields, where the church should find its most spiritual leaders, it is Ichabod in many places. Modernists are bringing the glory of God our Saviour, Jesus Christ, down to the level of mere man; they are turning away from a message of salvation by faith in Christ’s redemptive, Calvary, substitutionary work, unto a mere social gospel which centers in no more than an ethical conception of the Gospel.
AN ILLUSTRATION
“It is true that, ‘Our present social troubles are only the outward symptoms of a deep-seated disease-a false view of the very ends of life.’ Again, it has been well said, ‘The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.’ But men have become possessed of the idea that personal pleasure and enjoyment constitute the chief end of life, and have largely yielded to the siren’s seductive charms.
The world has been offered a ‘play-spell.’ Life is largely judged by the display of scenery and the glare of the footlights on the stage of life. The poet has said,
‘Life is real! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal,’
but man’s response is, ‘That is old poetic fogyism, “On with the dance, let joy be unconfined.” ‘Do we wonder why we have a ‘World Depression’? Why not wonder, rather, why it has been so long delayed. Has it any moral lesson for the world at large? Let the wise understand. Wisdom lifts her voice in the streets, but she is unnoticed, unheard, ignored, scorned. But God is not mocked, whatsoever is sown will surely be reaped. The wind has been sown, and now the harvest-the whirlwind.
But the sad, solemn truth is, the professing church has not escaped; the suction has drawn her into the whirlpool of social pleasure and stage acting. The solemn truths about sin and salvation, and God’s world-wide program must be ‘played out,’ and consequently they are ‘played at.’ We would be surprised at the number of church deserters, could we know it. A sailor boy enlists in the navy. A few nights later he slinks over the side of his ship, a deserter. What is the matter? He came in with a false idea of sailor life. He thought it meant to just board the vessel, sit in the sunlight, and sail, sail, sail on to some distant port of enchantment. And lo: what have they done, but set him to scrubbing the deck and washing dishes! A false idea has ruined his sailor life. The number of people that has come into the church with ideas equally false, is legion, and they have slunk over the side of the old ship Zion-deserters. Many have become church tramps in their eager pursuit of pleasure, entertainment, and sensuous delight, and wherever that abounds, there is their resort.”
Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water
1Sa 4:1. The word of Samuel came to all Israel The revelation of Gods mind and will, which had been very rare among them in former days, (1Sa 3:1,) now became frequent and plentiful. For as Samuel himself was ready to instruct every one that came to him, so he instituted schools or colleges of prophets, (as we read in the following parts of this book,) which, in time, were settled in divers parts of the country, for the better preserving and spreading the knowledge of God among the people, 1Sa 10:5; 1Sa 19:18-20. Israel went out against the Philistines Some have thought they did this at the word of Samuel, and that he was commanded by God to direct them to go, in order that they might be humbled and punished for their sins, and so be prepared for deliverance. But we are not told that they went by Samuels direction, and it is more likely that they were induced to take this step by the death of the lords of the Philistines, and the great slaughter which Samson had made of them at his death, Jdg 16:27; Jdg 16:30. Or, perhaps the Philistines, having recruited themselves from that loss, and wishing to be revenged of the Israelites, had made an inroad into their country, which they might the rather be induced to do at this time, in consequence of receiving intelligence that an eminent prophet had arisen in Israel, by whom they were likely to be united and assisted, and so to be rendered more formidable, unless they were crushed in the very beginning of their hopes and efforts.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Sa 4:5. Israel shouted. But why had they not put away their sins? And why had they not enquired of God? Alas, these priests, like Saul in his last moments, were not fit persons to enquire of God. Their guilty consciences augured that God was about to inflict the punishment their father had failed to do. They lost the ark; they lost their country; they lost themselves!
1Sa 4:17. The ark of God is taken, by hands less profane than those of the two Hebrew priests. With Joshua and holy men, the ark had divided the Jordan, and had thrown down the walls of Jericho. What a lesson, not to trust in exterior privileges while our hearts are profane.
1Sa 4:18. His neck brake. The Septuagint, which is followed by many, says, He brake his back.
1Sa 4:21. I-chabod. Josephus writes . But the Latin versions turn the word interrogatively, where is the glory? Elisha asked, where is the Lord God of Elijah. He is nigh to them that fear him; but here the glory is departed, and shame attends the nation.
REFLECTIONS.
In the hands of Eli, a soft, quiet, corpulent man, and in the hands of his two sons, consummate in wickedness, neither the civil nor the religious affairs of the people could prosper. The Philistines, long emboldened by Israels supineness, and having now recovered from the terrors Samson inflicted upon them at his death, venture once more to invade the land. The Israelites assembled to repel the aggression; but knowing the character of their priests, they never dream of consulting God. The piety found in Greece and in Rome at the worst of times, is now not to be found in Israel: defeat is the consequence. God is ever faithful in his promises of support to the righteous, and in his menaces of punishment to the wicked. Next, the ark of God must be fetched, for it had divided the Jordan, and thrown down the walls of Jericho, therefore it is called the ark of his strength. But shall God glorify a priesthood which had not glorified him? Shall he defend a people who had not put away their sins, nor deigned to ask counsel at his throne, nor victory at his hand? And what was the ark, already dishonoured, to him, when the hearts of the people were departed from his law? For those causes the Lord had no delight in his inheritance. Mark well: that man who forsakes God cannot be saved in the day of trouble by privileges and opinions.
While thirty four thousand of Israel fall in disobedience and error, the two sons of Eli did not escape. This ark, this hallowed ark, they had long profaned with crimes; and now they fall, perhaps holding it by the staves, that they might purge their crimes with blood. Ah, if the zealous Phinehas had been there, God would have been there also. But now the guilty priests bleed, and the profaned ark is captured by the heathen. Thus Christ, the ark of the everlasting covenant, in the hands of profane priests, was delivered over to the gentiles, to be insulted and put to open shame.
These were calamities hitherto unknown in Israel; but they stopped not in the field of defeat; the tidings quickly reached Shiloh. Eli could not see, but he could hear the voice of weeping, therefore he required to be informed of the calamities which the people would have wished to conceal a little longer. He sat on his seat of judgment, and bore with fortitude the news of Israels defeat, and the closer intelligence that both his sons were dead: but when the messenger added, And the ark of God is taken, down dropped the venerable priest, and finished together his life and his woes. He lived not to bewail his own errors. He had not power to say, I neglected to punish my sons, and now the Lord has taken the heavier vengeance into his own hands. But though dead, let him still speak to all supine and effeminate fathers who honour their sons above the laws of heaven, and above the gospel of Christ.
Death stopped not here. The wife of Phinehas, more worthy than her husband, travailed in premature labour, and named her son I-chabod, for the glory was departed from Israel. Ah, no; it is only eclipsed. There is yet a Samuel in the land; and God has neither forsaken his ark, nor lost sight of his covenant. He has permitted these calamities for the punishment of the wicked, and for the instruction of his people; but he will yet raise Israel to greater glory than the nation has hitherto known. Let us therefore hope at the worst of times, and never despair while we have a God to chasten and to save.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Sa 4:1 b. Now Israel . . .1Sa 4:1 (E).From Ancient History of the Ark (cf. above, p. 273).
1Sa 4:1 b 1Sa 4:11. The Israelites, Defeated by the Philistines, Fetch the Ark. They are again Defeated.
1Sa 4:1. Philistines: pp. 56f., 66f.Eben-ezer: Stone of Help (cf. 1Sa 7:12). Sites of Eben-ezer and Aphek (1Ki 20:26*) not known, probably NW. of Jerusalem, either near the city, or on the inland edge of the Maritime Plain.
1Sa 4:3. ark of the covenant of the Lord: cf. 1Sa 3:3. Deuteronomic title of the Ark; covenant is equivalent to the stone tables of the Ten Commandments which Deu 10:2; Deu 10:5 place in the Ark. In this History of the Ark the title was originally either A. of Yahweh or A. of God . . . our, etc. God; the additional words in the titles having been added by editors. Here read A. of our God, with LXX.that it may become: perhaps read that He, etc. The Ark is a talisman or Palladium, identified with Yahweh, or carrying His presence with it (2Sa 11:11*).
1Sa 4:4. which sitteth upon the cherubim: editorial addition (see above). The Ark is thought of as the throne of Yahweh.cherubim: see Gen 3:24.
1Sa 4:4 f. Lord . . . God . . . Lord: note variation of Divine Names; it has been suggested that this is an indication of compilation from two sources, but this view is not generally adopted. At present there is no satisfactory explanation of this use of the Divine Names; possibly it is due to partial revision: originally the same name was used throughout.
1Sa 4:6. Hebrews: the name for Israelites used by foreigners.
1Sa 4:8. in the wilderness: the plagues were in Egypt and not in the wilderness; apparently either the author or an annotator got confused; unless we read and with pestilence, which would require only a very slight change in the Hebrew.
1Sa 4:10. thirty thousand: probably an exaggeration, even if it was a contemporary guess.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 1 shows that Samuel did not conceal the word that God gave to him, but communicated it to all Israel. But it is not said that it was this word that called them to battle with the Philistines. It seems the battle was initiated by Israel, however. They pitch near Eben-ezer, which means “the stone of help,” evidently confident of God’s help apart from His word and apart from the recognition of His rights among His people. The Philistines pitch in Aphek, meaning “restraint,” which perhaps indicates that they were not so self-confident as Israel. Yet they gained a decisive victory, with a great slaughter of 4000 men.
This surely ought to have brought Israel down to their knees in broken humiliation, and with honest enquiring of God. They do not think of Samuel, the man of God, just as we too often forget to think of Christ and His word at times of facing serious problems for which only He is sufficient. The elders recognize that it is the Lord Himself who has smitten them before their enemies, but instead of seeking His face, they resort to mere fleshly planning, considering that if they bring the ark of the Lord to the battle, it would be a sacred charm to influence the Lord on their behalf! The ark was of course symbolical of Christ, the true Center of His people Israel, but on this occasion Israel thinks of it merely as an idol with magical powers to save them from their enemies.
Eli’s sons, Hophni and Phinehas, came with the ark from Shiloh, having the official position of being in charge of it. The elders, though they knew well the moral corruption of the young men, were blinded to the fact that the living God could not possibly approve of their public identification with the ark, which we are reminded here was “the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts who dwells between the cherubim.” This very expression insists on the absolute holiness of God.
The men of Israel were as blind as the elders: they remembered only that in the past the ark had led the nation into the land in conquest of their enemies, but they depend on past experience while harboring gross moral evil among them at present. Their great shout sounds like that of victory, but their loud noise does not influence God, though it alarmed the Philistines.
When the Philistines hear that Israel has shouted so loudly because the ark had come into the camp, their fear is increased, for they were idolaters, mere formal religion being very familiar to them. They assume (practically as did Israel at this time) that the ark was Israel’s god, and are most apprehensive. For Israel had not used this before when fighting the Philistines, at least since their entrance into the land. They remember that God, whom they call “gods” had sent numerous plagues upon Egypt, but did not know that the ark had not even been in existence at that time! Thus men are often so dense that they can conceive of no god but one this is visible to their eyes, though it is a lifeless, inanimate thing!
Could the Philistines fight against the living God and expect to win? But they stir themselves to fight to the utmost against this mere immobile god. This was unnecessary, for God had already decided that Israel would badly lose. The Philistines gain a far more decisive victory than at first. 4000 men killed was a great loss for Israel, but 30,000 is over 7 times as many! The loss of life among the Philistines is not mentioned: it was likely small. But God will make Israel feel the results of their dishonoring Him.
Far more serious than the defeat, however, was the fact of the ark of God being captured by the Philistines. God’s prophecy concerning Hophni and Phinehas is fulfilled too, both of them being killed. God has used the idolatrous Philistines as a rod to punish His people Israel, who had lapsed into an idolatrous state themselves.
A man of Benjamin brings the sad news to Shiloh, his clothes rent and earth on his head in token of repentant mourning. At this time Eli is again sitting, not at the temple door, but by the wayside for he was fearful of the whole matter, and specially for the ark, for which he felt some responsibility. The man’s message causes a noisy tumult in the city, which stirs the questioning of Eli. In response the messenger tells him personally of his fleeing from the battle, and that Israel had suffered defeat and great slaughter Then he adds that Eli’s sons had been killed and the ark of God taken.
The death of his sons did not have the same effect on Eli as did the loss of the ark. This was such a shock to him that he fainted and fell backward and broke his neck. Certainly it was serious that the ark had been captured, but Eli’s mere formal religion placed more emphasis on the ark that on obedience to God’s word: since the ark was taken, it was to him as though God Himself had been taken away! but God was caring more for His own glory than Eli was. Subsequent history tells us too that He was able to care for the ark among the Philistines when they had full possession of it. Meanwhile, however, it was necessary for God to shock the nation Israel to its depths by removing the three priests and the ark at the same time. Though Eli had lived 98 years, his end was sad, and he was the last of his family to live long. God had patiently borne with the evil of the priestly family for long time, but now Israel must be given the clear evidence that God’s patience is far from indulgence. The sudden swiftness of God’s judgment was intended to put the fear of God into the hearts of all Israel. True indeed were God’s words to Samuel that the ears of every hearer would tingle at what would transpire — the three prominent priests of Israel all killed in one day as well as the ark of God lost to the enemy!
Yet this was not all. The wife of Phinehas, having neared the time of childbirth, when she heard the news that the ark was taken and her husband and father-in-law killed, was so affected that this induced birth pains. Then she lived only long enough to name her child Ichabod (meaning “where is the glory?”). In her case it is sad too that it seemed a worse thing to her that the ark was captured than that her husband and his brother had made a practice of dishonoring God in connection with the ark and the temple. To her, as to the many in Israel, the ark itself was actually “the glory,”: but it was really only a symbol of the glory. Not only had the symbol departed, but how could God’s glory itself remain complacently among the people? As a general rule people have more abhorrence of God’s righteous discipline on account of their sins than they have of their sins themselves. Such is the perversity of man’s sinful nature! How much better if we feel our guilt and accept its results.
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
A. The Capture of the Ark 4:1-22
A new subject comes to the forefront in this section and continues to be a significant motif throughout the rest of Samuel. It is the ark of the covenant. The writer drew attention to the ark in this chapter by mentioning it seven times, including a notation at the end of each text section (1Sa 4:4; 1Sa 4:11; 1Sa 4:17-19; 1Sa 4:21-22). Following the reference to Samuel the prophet in 1Sa 4:1, the writer did not mention him again until 1Sa 7:3.
"The purpose of the story in 1 Samuel 4-6 of the ark’s imprisonment in Philistia and its travels to different Philistine cities, as well as to Beth-Shemesh, is to give an historical background for the Philistines’ rule over the whole country prior to the emergence of the Israelite state which could still accentuate Yahweh’s supremacy as an unconquerable deity. The story explains how Yahweh finally became superior to his captors." [Note: G. W. Ahlstrom, "The Travels of the Ark: A Religio-Political Composition," Journal of Near Eastern Studies 43 (1984):143. See also Antony F. Campbell, "Yahweh and the Ark: A Case Study in Narrative," Journal of Biblical Literature 98:1 (1979):31-43.]
The major historical element of continuity in this section is the fate of Eli’s sons (1Sa 4:9-11). The theological theme of fertility continues to be the primary unifying factor in the narrative.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
1. The battle of Aphek 4:1-11
The Philistines, as we have already seen in Judges, were Israel’s primary enemy to the west at this time. Samson, too, fought the Philistines (Judges 13-16). [Note: For a good, brief history of the Philistines, see Edward Hindson, The Philistines and the Old Testament.] There are about 150 references to the Philistines in 1 and 2 Samuel. They originally migrated from Greece primarily by way of Crete (Caphtor, cf. Gen 10:14; Jer 47:4; Amo 9:7). Their major influx into Canaan occurred about 1200 B.C., about 100 years before the events recorded in this chapter. However there were some Philistines in Canaan as early as Abraham’s day (Gen 21:32; et al.). [Note: For further study, see Trude Dothan, The Philistines and Their Material Culture, especially pp. 13-16, 21-24, and 289-96.]
The town of Aphek (cf. 1Sa 29:1; New Testament Antipatris, Act 23:31) stood on the border between Philistine and Israelite territory. It was about 11 miles east and a little north of Joppa (and modern Tel Aviv). Archaeologists have not yet located Ebenezer, but it was obviously close to Aphek and on Israel’s side of the border. It may have been the modern Izbet Sarteh about two miles east of Aphek on the road to Shiloh. [Note: Moshe Kochavi and Aaron Demsky, "An Israelite Village from the Days of the Judges," Biblical Archaeology Review 4:3 (1978):19-21.]
In Israel’s first encounter with the Philistines in 1 Samuel, the enemy slew 4,000 Israelite soldiers (1Sa 4:2), and in the second, 30,000 Israelites fell (1Sa 4:10). Between these two encounters the Israelites sent to Shiloh for the ark. The ark had always been the place where God dwelt in a special way among the Israelites. It contained the tablets of the Decalogue and the mercy seat where the high priest atoned for the sins of the nation. It was for these reasons a symbol of God and His presence. During the long period of the judges the Israelites as a whole had adopted an increasingly pagan attitude toward Yahweh. They felt that they could satisfy Him with simply formal worship and that they could secure His help with offerings rather than humility. They were treating the ark the same way they treated God; they believed the ark’s presence among them in battle would ensure victory.
"We eventually all learn what Israel discovered in battle against the Philistines. Having the paraphernalia of God and having God are not the same." [Note: Kenneth L. Chafin, 1, 2 Samuel, p. 54.]
The paraphernalia that modern believers sometimes rely on in place of God include a crucifix, a picture of Jesus, or a family Bible positioned conspicuously in the home but seldom read. Others base their hope of spiritual success on a spiritually strong spouse, regular church attendance, or even the daily reading of the Bible. These things, as good as they may be, are no substitute for a vital personal relationship with God.
Perhaps the elders of Israel remembered that in Joshua’s conquest of Jericho, the ark played a very important and visible part in the victory (Jos 6:2-20). Nevertheless, back then the people trusted in Yahweh, not in the ark as a talisman (good luck charm). The custom of taking idols into battle so their gods would deliver them was common among ancient warriors (cf. 2Sa 5:21; 1Ch 14:12). Obviously the Israelites were wrong in thinking that the presence of the ark would guarantee success.
"The offenses against the ark as pledge of Yahweh’s presence appear to be mainly of two kinds: (1) a misplaced reliance on the ark, and (2) an irreverent disregard for the ark." [Note: Marten H. Woudstra, The Ark of the Covenant from the Conquest to Kingship, p. 55.]
The Hebrew word eleph, translated thousand (1Sa 4:2), can also mean military unit. Military units were of varying sizes but considerably smaller than 1,000 soldiers. [Note: For more information concerning the problem of large numbers in the Old Testament, see R. E. D. Clark, "The Large Numbers of the Old Testament," Journal of Transactions of the Victoria Institute 87 (1955):82-92; and J. W. Wenham, "Large Numbers in the Old Testament," Tyndale Bulletin 18 (1967):19-53.]
Ancient Near Eastern artists sometimes pictured a king sitting on a throne supported on either side by a cherub, which the artist represented as a winged lion (sphinx) with a human head. [Note: W. F. Albright, "What Were the Cherubim?" Biblical Archaeologist 1:1 (1938):1-3.] This may have been the image of the Lord of hosts (armies) "who sits above the cherubim" that the writer had in mind here (1Sa 4:4).
The fact that the people shouted loudly when the ark arrived at Ebenezer from Shiloh (1Sa 4:5) may be another indication that they were hoping to duplicate the victory at Jericho (cf. Jos 6:20). Likewise the response of the Philistines when they heard the cry recalls Rahab’s revelation of how the Canaanites feared Yahweh (Jos 2:9-11). These allusions to the victory at Jericho contrast the Israelites’ present attitude toward God with what it had been at that earlier battle.
The fact that the Israelites suffered a devastating slaughter (Heb. makkah, 1Sa 4:10), many times worse than their earlier recent defeat (1Sa 4:2), proved that victory did not come from the ark but from the Lord. Defeat was due to sin in the camp, including Hophni and Phinehas’ sin (cf. 1Sa 2:25). Israel had suffered defeat at Ai about 300 years earlier for the same reason: sin among the people (Jos 7:11). Trying to duplicate previous spiritual victories by going through the same procedures is no substitute for getting right with God (cf. Jdg 16:20; Mat 23:25).
God did not record the destruction of the tabernacle at Shiloh, but some writers assume the Philistines razed it after they captured the ark. [Note: E.g., Joyce Baldwin, 1 & 2 Samuel, p. 71; and Charles Pfeiffer and Howard Vos, The Wycliffe Historical Geography of Bible Lands, p. 143.] The town probably did suffer destruction then (cf. Jer 7:12; Jer 7:14; Jer 26:6). [Note: See John Bright, A History of Israel, p. 165.] However, the writer of Chronicles mentioned that the tabernacle still stood in David’s day (1Ch 21:29) and when Solomon began to reign (2Ch 1:3). The writer of Samuel showed less interest in the sanctuary structure than in the ark. The Philistines may have destroyed the town of Shiloh, but it "revived sufficiently to produce a few worthy citizens in later generations (cf. 1Ki 11:29; Jer 41:5)." [Note: Gordon, p. 96.]
|
The Two Tabernacles and the Ark |
|
Moses’ Tabernacle at: |
The Ark at: |
David’s Tabernacle at: |
|
Gilgal (Jos 5:10; Jos 10:15; Jos 10:43) |
Gilgal (Jos 6:12) |
|
|
Shiloh (Jos 18:1; Jos 18:9-10) |
Shiloh (Jos 18:10) |
|
|
Bethel (Jdg 20:18-28; Jdg 21:1-4) |
Bethel (Jdg 20:27) |
|
|
Shiloh (1Sa 1:3) |
Shiloh (1Sa 4:3) |
|
|
Ebenezer (1Sa 4:4-5) |
||
|
Ashdod (1Sa 5:1) |
||
|
Gath (1Sa 5:8) |
||
|
Ekron (1Sa 5:10) |
||
|
Bethshemesh (1Sa 6:12-14) |
||
|
Kiriath-jearim (1Sa 7:1) |
||
|
Mizpah ? (1Sa 7:9-10) |
||
|
Gilgal ? (1Sa 10:8; 1Sa 13:8-10; 1Sa 15:10-15) |
||
|
Nob (1Sa 21:1-9; 1Sa 22:9-19) |
||
|
Gibeon (1Ch 16:39-40; 1Ch 21:29; 1Ki 3:4; 2Ch 1:3) |
||
|
Perez-uzzah (2Sa 6:2-11; 1Ch 13:5-14) |
||
|
Jerusalem (1Ch 15:1) |
||
|
Jerusalem (2Sa 6:12-17; 1Ch 15:2 to 1Ch 16:6, 1Ch 16:37-38) |
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
II. THE HISTORY OF THE ARK OF THE COVENANT 4:1-7:1
Many serious students of 1 Samuel have noted the writer’s emphasis on the ark of the covenant that begins here in the text. Critical scholars have long argued that 1Sa 4:1 b to 1Sa 7:1 and 2 Samuel 6 are the only remaining fragments of an older and longer ark narrative, which was a source document for the writer here. Of the 61 references to the ark in 1 and 2 Samuel, 36 appear in 1Sa 4:1 b to 1Sa 7:2. More recently some scholars have come to believe that the old ark narratives were somewhat shorter. Conservative scholars generally believe that the ark narratives were not necessarily independent documents but may simply reflect the writer’s particular emphasis on the ark here. [Note: For a discussion of this subject, including a bibliography of books and articles dealing with it, see Youngblood, pp. 593-94.] One writer believed that their purpose was to explain Israel’s demand for a king, as well as the reasons for the end of Eli’s branch of the Aaronic family. [Note: Merrill, "1 Samuel," p. 208.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
CHAPTER VI.
THE ARK OF GOD TAKEN BY THE PHILISTINES.
1Sa 4:1-22.
WE are liable to form an erroneous impression of the connection of Samuel with the transactions of this chapter, in consequence of a clause which ought to belong to the last chapter, being placed, in the Authorized Version, at the beginning of this. The clause “And the word of Samuel came to all Israel” belongs really to the preceding chapter. It denotes that Samuel was now over all Israel the recognized channel of communication between the people and God. But it does not denote that the war with the Philistines, of which mention is immediately made, was undertaken at Samuel’s instance. In fact, the whole chapter is remarkable for the absence of Samuel’s name. What is thus denoted seems to be that Samuel was not consulted either about the war or about the taking of the ark into the battle. Whatever he may have thought of the war, he would undoubtedly have been horrified at the proposal about the ark. That whole transaction must have seemed to him a piece of infatuation. Probably it was carried into effect in a kind of tumultuous frenzy. But there can be no reasonable doubt that whatever Samuel could have done to oppose it would have been done with the greatest eagerness.
The history is silent about the Philistines from the days of Samson. The last we have heard of them was the fearful tragedy at the death of that great Judge of Israel, when the house fell upon the lords and the people, and such a prodigious slaughter of their great men took place. From that calamity they seem now to have revived. They would naturally be desirous to revenge that unexampled catastrophe, and as Ebenezer and Aphek are situated in the land of Israel, it would seem that the Philistines were the aggressors. They had come up from the Philistine plain to the mountainous country of Israel, and no doubt had already sent many of the people to flight through whose farms they came. As the Israelites had no standing army, the troops that opposed the Philistines could be little better than an untrained horde. When they joined battle, Israel was smitten before the Philistines, and they slew of the army about four thousand men. In a moral point of view the defeat was strange; the Philistines had made the attack, and the Israelites were fighting for their homes and hearths; yet victory was given to the invaders, and in four thousand homes of Israel there was lamentation and woe.
But this was not really strange. Israel needed chastening, and the Philistines were God’s instruments for that purpose. In particular, judgment was due to the sons of Eli; and the defeat inflicted by the Philistines, and the mistaken and superstitious notion which seized on the people that they would do well to take God’s ark into the battle, were the means by which their punishment came. How often Providence seems to follow a retrograde course! And yet it is a forward course all the time, although from our point of view it seems backward; just as those planets which are nearer the sun than the earth sometimes seem to us to reverse the direction of their movement; although if we were placed in the centre of the system we should see very plainly that they are moving steadily forward all the time.
Three things call for special notice in the main narrative of this chapter – 1. The preparation for the battle; 2. The battle itself; and 3. The result when the news was carried to Shiloh.
1. The preparation for the battle was the sending for the ark of the Lord to Shiloh, so that Israel might right under the immediate presence and protection of their God.
It seemed a brilliant idea. Whichever of the elders first suggested it, it caught at once, and was promptly acted on. There were two great objections to it, but if they were so much as entertained they certainly had no effect given them. The first was, that the elders had no legitimate control over the ark. The custody of it belonged to the priests and the Levites, and Eli was the high priest. If the rulers of the nation at any time desired to remove the ark (as David afterwards did when he placed it on Mount Zion), that could only be done after clear indications that the step was in accordance with the will of God, and with the full consent of the priests. There is no reason to suppose that any means were taken to find out whether its removal to the camp was in accordance with the will of God; and as to the mind of the priests, Eli was probably passed over as too old and too blind to be consulted, and Hophni and Phinehas would be restrained by no scruples from an act which everyone seemed to approve. The second great objection to the step was that it was a superstitious and irreverent use of the symbol of God’s presence. Evidently the people ascribed to the symbol the glorious properties that belonged only to the reality. They expected that the symbol of God’s presence would do for them all that might be done by His presence itself. And doubtless there had been occasions when the symbol and the reality went together. In the wilderness, in the days of Moses, “It came to pass, when the ark set forward, that Moses said. Rise up, Lord, and let Thine enemies be scattered, and let them that hate Thee flee before Thee “Num 10:35). But these were occasions determined by the cloud rising and going before the host, an unmistakable indication of the will of God (Num 9:15-22). God’s real presence accompanied the ark on these occasions, and all that was expressed in the symbol was actually enjoyed by the people. There was no essential or inherent connection between the two; the actual connection was determined merely by the good pleasure of God. It pleased Him to connect them, and connected they were. But the ignorant and superstitious elders forgot that the connection between the symbol and the reality was of this nature; they believed it to be inherent and essential. In their unthinking and unreasoning minds the symbol might be relied on to produce all the effect of the reality. If only the ark of God were carried into the battle, the same effect would take place as when Moses said in the wilderness, “Rise up, Lord, and let Thine enemies be scattered.”
Could anything show more clearly the unspiritual tendencies of the human mind in its conceptions of God, and of the kind of worship He should receive? The idea of God as the living God is strangely foreign to the human heart. To think of God as one who has a will and purpose of His own, and who will never give His countenance to any undertaking that does not agree with that will and purpose, is very hard for the unspiritual man. To make the will of God the first consideration in any enterprise, so that it is not to be thought of if He do not approve, and is never to be despaired of if He be favourable, is a bondage and a trouble beyond his ability. Yet even superstitious men believe in a supernatural power. And they believe in the possibility of enlisting that power on their side. And the method they take is to ascribe the virtue of a charm to certain external objects with which that powder is associated. The elders of Israel ascribed this virtue to the ark. They never inquired whether the enterprise was agreeable to the mind and will of God. They never asked whether in this case there was any ground for believing that the symbol and the reality would go together. They simply ascribed to the symbol the power of a talisman, and felt secure of victory under its shadow.
Would that we could think of this spirit as extinct even in Christian communities! What is the Romish and the very High Church doctrine of the sacraments but an ascription to them, when rightly used, of the power of a charm? The sacraments, as Scripture teaches, are symbols of very glorious realities, and wherever the symbols are used in accordance with God’s will the realities are sure to be enjoyed. But it has long been the doctrine of the Church of Rome, and it is the doctrine of Churches, with similar views, that the sacraments are reservoirs of grace, and that to those who place no fatal obstacle in their way, grace comes from them ex opere operato, from the very act of receiving them. It is the Protestant and scriptural doctrine that by stimulating faith, by encouraging us to look to the living Saviour, and draw from Him in whom all fullness dwells, the sacraments bring to us copious supplies of grace, but that without the presence of that living Saviour they would be merely as empty wells. The High Church view regards them as charms, that have a magic virtue to bless the soul. The superstitious mother thinks if only her child is baptized it will be saved, the act of baptism will do it, and she never thinks of the living Saviour and His glorious grace. The dying sinner thinks, if only he had the last sacraments, he would be borne peacefully and well through the dark scenes of death and judgment, and forgets that the commandment of Scripture is not, Look unto the last sacraments, but, “Look unto Me and be ye saved.” Alas! what will men not substitute for personal dealings with the living God? The first book and the last book of the Bible present sad proof of his recoil from such contact. In Genesis, as man hears God’s voice, he runs to hide himself among the trees of the garden. In Revelation, when the Judge appears, men call on the mountains to fall on them and hide them from Him that sitteth on the throne. Only when we see God’s face, beautiful and loving, in Christ, can this aversion be overcome.
If the presence of the ark in the field of battle did much to excite the hopes of the Israelites, it did net less to raise the fears of their opponents. The shout with which its arrival was hailed by the one struck something of consternation into the breasts of the other. But now, an effect took place on which the Israelites had not reckoned. The Philistines were too wise a people to yield to panic. If the Hebrew God, that did such wonders in the wilderness, was present with their opponents, there was all the more need for their bestirring themselves and quitting them like men. The elders of Israel had not reckoned on this wise plan. It teaches us, even from a heathen point of view, never to yield to panic. Even when everything looks desperate, there may be some untried resource to fall back on. And if this be a lesson to be learnt from pagans, much more surely may it be thought of by believers, who know that man’s extremity is often God’s opportunity, and that no peril is too imminent for God not to be able to deliver.
2. And now the battle rages. The hope of misguided Israel turns out an illusion. They find, to their consternation, that the symbol does not carry the reality. It pleases God to allow the ark with which His name is so intimately associated to be seized by the enemy. The Philistines carry everything before them. The ark is taken, Hophni and Phinehas are slain, and there fall of Israel thirty thousand foot-men.
Can we fancy the feelings of the two priests who attended the ark as the defeat of the army of Israel became inevitable? The ark would probably be carried near the van of the army, preceded by some of the most valiant troops of Israel. No doubt it had been reckoned on that as soon as its sacred form was recognized by the Philistines, fear would seize on them, and they would fly before it. It must have made the two priests look grave when nothing of the kind took place, but the host of the Philistines advanced in firm and intrepid phalanx to the fight. But surely the first onset of the advanced guard will show with whose army the victory is to lie. The advanced guards are at close quarters, and the men of Israel give way. Was there conscience enough left in these two men to flash into their minds that God, whose Holy Spirit they had vexed, was turned to be their enemy, and was now fighting against them? Did they, in that supreme moment, get one of those momentary glimpses, in which the whole iniquities of a lifetime seem marshaled before the soul, and the enormity of its guilt overwhelms it? Did they feel the anguish of men caught in their own iniquities, every hope perished, death inevitable, and after death the judgment? There is not one word, either in this chapter or in what precedes it, from which the slightest inference in their favour can be drawn. They died apparently as they had lived, in the very act of dishonouring God. With the weapons of rebellion in their hands, and the stains of guilt on their hearts, they were hurried into the presence of the Judge. Now comes the right estimate of their reckless, guilty life. All the arts of sophistry, all the refuges of lies, all their daring contempt of the very idea of a retribution on sin, are swept away in a moment. They are confronted with the awful reality of their doom. They see more vividly than even Eli or Samuel the truth of one part, certainly, of the Divine rule – “Them that honour Me I will honour; but they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed.”
The time of guilty pleasure has passed for ever away; the time of endless retribution has begun. Oh, how short, how miserable, how abominable appears to them now the revelry of their evil life! what infatuation it was to forswear all the principles in which they had been reared, to laugh at the puritanical strictness of their father, to sit in the seat of the scorner, and pour contempt on the law of God’s house! How they must have cursed the folly that led them into such awful ways of sin, how sighed in vain that they had not in their youth chosen the better part, how wished they had never been born!
3. But we must leave the field of battle and hasten back to Shiloh. Since the ark was carried off Eli must have had a miserable time of it, reproaching himself for his weakness if he gave even a reluctant assent to the plan, and feeling that uncertainty of conscience which keeps one even from prayer, because it makes one doubtful if God will listen. Poor old man of ninety-eight years, he could but tremble for the ark! His official seat had been placed somewhere on the wayside, where he would be near to get tidings from the field of anyone who might come with them, and quite probably a retinue of attendants was around him. At last a great shout of horror is heard, for a man of Benjamin has come in sight with his clothes rent and earth upon his head. It is but too certain a sign o calamity. But who could have thought of the extent of the calamity which with such awful precision he crowded into his answer? Israel is fled before the Philistines – calamity the first; there hath been a great slaughter among the people – calamity the second; thy two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, are slain – calamity the third; and last, and most terrible of all, the ark of God is taken! The ark of God is taken! The Divine symbol, with its overshadowing cherubim and its sacred light, into which year by year Eli had gone alone to sprinkle the blood of atonement on the mercy-seat, and where he had solemnly transacted with God on behalf of the people, was in an enemy’s hands! The ark, that no Canaanite or Amalekite had ever touched, on which no Midianite or Ammonite had ever laid his polluted finger, which had remained safe and sure in the perils of their journeys and all the storms of battle, was now torn from their grasp! And there perishes with it all the hope of Israel, and all the sacred service which was associated with it; and Israel is a widowed, desolate, godless people, without hope and without God in the world; and all this has come because they dragged it away from its place, and these two sons of mine, now gone to their account, encouraged the profanation!
“And it came to pass, when he made mention of the ark of God, that he fell from off the seat backward by the side of the gate, and his neck brake, and he died; for he was an old man and heavy. And he had judged Israel forty years.”
This was calamity the fifth; but even yet the list was not exhausted. “His daughter-in-law, Phinehas’ wife, was with child, near to be delivered; and when she heard the tidings that the ark of God was taken, and that her father-in-law and her husband were dead, she bowed herself and travailed, for her pains came upon her. And about the time of her death the women that stood by her said unto her. Fear not, for thou hast born a son. But she answered not, neither did she regard it. And she named the child Ichabod, saying, The glory is departed from Israel; because the ark of God was taken, and because of her father-in-law and her husband. And she said, The glory is departed from Israel; for the ark of God is taken.”
Poor, good woman! with such a husband she had no doubt had a troubled life. The spring of her spirit had probably been broken long ago; and what little of elasticity yet remained was all too little to bear up under such an overwhelming load. But it may have been her comfort to live so near to the house of God as she did, and to be thus reminded of Him who had commanded the sons of Aaron to bless the people saying, ”The Lord bless thee and keep thee; the Lord make His face shine upon thee and be gracious to thee; the Lord lift up His countenance upon thee and give thee peace.” But now the ark of God is taken, its services are at an end, and the blessing is gone. The tribes may come up to the feasts as before, but not with the bright eye or the merry shouts of former days; the bullock may smoke on the altar, but where is the sanctuary in which Jehovah dwelt, and where the mercy-seat for the priest to sprinkle the blood, and where the door by which he can come out to bless the people? Oh, my hapless child, what shall I call thee, who hast been ushered on this day of midnight gloom into a God-forsaken and dishonoured place? I will call thee Ichabod, for the glory is departed. The glory is departed from Israel, for the ark of God is taken.
What an awful impression these scenes convey to us of the overpowering desolation that comes to believing souls with the feeling that God has taken His departure. Tell us that the sun is no longer to shine; tell us that neither dew nor rain shall ever fall again to refresh the earth; tell us that a cruel and savage nation is to reign unchecked and unchallenged over all the families of a people once free and happy; you convey no such image of desolation as when you tell to pious hearts that God has departed from their community. Let us learn the obvious lesson, to do nothing to provoke such a calamity. It is only when resisted and dishonoured that the Spirit of God departs – only when He is driven away. Oh, beware of everything that grieves Him – everything that interferes with His gracious action on your souls. Beware of all that would lead God to say, “I will go and return to My place, till they acknowledge their offence and seek My face.” Let our prayer be the cry of David: – “Cast me not away from Thy presence, and take not Thy Holy Spirit from me. Restore unto me the joy of Thy salvation, and uphold me with Thy free Spirit”