The Real Issue with Eli’s Sons

As we have previously observed, the narrator of First Samuel compares Samuel with the sons of Eli. The purpose of this comparison is to establish that God is about to create a new order and Samuel represents the expectation of that new order. The period of the Judges was a dismal display of human failure to put God into the supreme position which He, as God, deserves. Instead, Judges demonstrated the fickle and flimsy fruit of sinful man’s efforts to rule his own kingdom. “Every man did that which was right in his own eyes.” There is nowhere that this trend is more evident than in God’s priestly family, the sons of Levi.

Exodus 19:4–6 declares the fundamental statement of the divine plan for His covenant people. Israel became the first step in the progression to the full, perfect, and final realization of that purpose. The question is whether this plan was limited to Israel, or if Israel’s role was to point to a far more comprehensive realization of the divine purpose. The answer to that question lies in the very nature of the priesthood as standing between the people who need God and God Himself. They were to be God’s agents to bring men to God. Israel was called to be that kingdom of priests, a light pointing all the nations of the world to the one true God. As God was holy, so must those who represent Him be holy. In other words, to represent God properly, Israel must be like God in every way possible. To promote that obligation, God instituted three offices: priest, prophet, and king.

The duty of the priest was mediation and intercession in order to promote holiness, without which Israel could not be God’s light in the world. In effect, the priests ministered in God’s sanctuary in such a way as to invoke a proper fear of God through the display of His greatness in Israel’s worship. But what do we read? These priests, the sons of Eli, did not even know the Lord (v. 12).

The very first impression of God that these men mediated was one of carnal fulfillment in excess (vv. 13-17). The offerings, designed to promote God’s holy standards of righteousness and mercy, were treated with contempt by men whose real god was their own belly (Phil. 3:19).

The next section (vv. 22-25) shows that these priests not only indulged the flesh with food but further provoked Yahweh by adopting the pagan practice of temple prostitution. The text points to an official assembly of women serving at the temple’s entrance. There is no such instruction from Moses regarding such an assembly, and that the priest’s engaged sexually with these women argues for the pagan rite adopted into their worship (Acts 7:41). Eli condemned the practice as sin, warning that God’s judgment was inevitable unless they repented and abandoned such activity. The narrator points out that Eli’s lecture fell on deaf ears because God was about to put them to death (v. 25b). Is it possible that their deafness was increased by Eli’s own self-indulgence (4:18)? However, the ultimate reason for this failure was God’s purpose to bring in His ultimate Priest (2:35).

The Contrast of Sons

Leaving Samuel in the care of Eli, Hannah worshiped the Lord for His gracious response to her desperate prayer (1:11-18). She offered up the powerful and insightful praise of thanksgiving in the beautiful psalm recorded in the opening verses of chapter 2. In it she observed that Yahweh will judge His adversaries in order to strengthen His king. The narrative shifts in verse 11 from Hannah’s struggle resulting in the gift of Samuel to the divine purpose, the establishment of Israel’s judge and prophet in order to begin the process of the judgment predicted.

The next section (vv. 12-21) reveals the condition of the priesthood at that time. Eli has two sons who are described as “worthless men” (bâliyaʿal, something that does not conform to a right standard, so is of no worth, Prov. 6:12, 27; 19:28; Nahum 1:11; 2 Cor. 6:15; 2 Thess. 2:3). In this book, the expression first appeared in 1:16, which suggests that it was the general condition of the people. Like priest, like people.

The root of their condition was that “they did not know the Lord.” Their hearts were not set on seeking the Lord, understanding His will, or what it took to please Him. They were self- servers, seeking to satisfy their fleshly appetites. Notice the very next phrase, “The custom of the priests with the people was . . .” (v. 13). They did not know or care for what the Lord revealed or required concerning the priest’s portion of certain offerings. They took what they wanted, when and how it suited them. They had no regard for the Lord. The people even sought to caution them (v. 16). Yet, they rejected counsel and took the meat by force. “Thus, the sin of the young men was very great in the sight of the Lord, for the men treated the offering of the Lord with contempt” (v.17). Gluttony is the first of the sons’ sins that is condemned for which God’s wrath will fall on this corrupt family of the Aaronic priesthood, the descendants of Abiathar (1 Kings 2:27). Service to the Lord driven by selfish motives and desires shows no respect for the things of the Lord.

Samuel is contrasted with Eli’s sons in verses 18-21. This small section is bookended with two significant statements. First, Samuel is ministering “before Yahweh,” the narrator's way to highlight the contrast. Eli’s sons served themselves; Samuel served the Lord. His godly family is, then, set in stark contrast to Eli’s, and one can almost feel the storm brewing in the interaction between these two families. The section closes with Samuel’s growing up in Yahweh’s presence (21).

Eli’s (and all the priests’) responsibility was to walk with God (2:35), to render complete obedience to God (2:13), to discipline the flesh (2:29; 4:18), and to heed the warnings from God (2:27). Eli’s failure in these important areas was magnified in his sons. As has been said, what fathers tolerate in moderation, children practice in excess. A conviction in the first generation is an observation in the second generation but becomes a nuisance in the third. Oh, that God would keep us always a first-generation people.  

Hannah’s Psalm of Praise

The story of Samuel begins with his mother’s tribulation. This seems to be the typical pattern of God’s dealings with His people. It is “through many tribulations that we must enter the kingdom of God” (Acts 14:22). Hannah was barren, and this condition caused her considerable distress, especially due to the harassment heaped upon her by her rival, Peninnah, Elkanah’s second wife (1 Sam 1:6).

Tribulation develops saints, as Paul understood (Rom. 5:1-5). The grace of God that causes one to rejoice in the hope of glory is the grace that first brings suffering. Gracious suffering shapes sinful character into godly character. This suffering produces endurance that leads to rejoicing hope. This was true of Hannah. Her suffering produced hope, hope that was realized in the man who would be God’s agent to establish a monarchy is Israel. The same difficulties will attend David before he will wear the crown. God humbles His servants before He exalts them (see 2:7, 8).

God heard and answered Hannah’s prayer (1:20) that she poured out in the agony of her soul before the Lord, and she delivered a son. She called his name Samuel, which means “asked of the Lord.” That name would remind her that her God was good and worthy of all her love and devotion. Promising to “lend” Samuel to the Lord for his whole life, she prepared him and when the time came, she brought the young child to Shiloh and presented him to Eli, the priest for service in the house of the Lord (1:24-28).

Chapter 2 opens with Hannah’s psalm of praise to God (2:1-10). Liberal Bible scholars have long rejected this beautiful Hebrew poetry as being a later addition to the text, written by a priest or scribe during David’s or Solomon’s reign. This idea was based solely on the mention of a king (v. 10), supposedly an anachronism since there was no king in Israel at that time. Even conservative scholars suggest that Hannah’s prayer was expanded by a well-meaning scribe during the monarchy. Cannot God prompt this mother of a prophet to say what every Israelite who knew the Pentateuch expected (Deut. 17:14, 15; 28:36)?

This psalm of prayer and praise is much deeper than its surface reading might lead one to see. For instance, it is generally regarded that Hannah’s mention of “my enemies” refers to Peninnah and others who made her life difficult (v. 1). Could this reference not be to the Philistines who would be subdued under David?

Certainly, the richness of the poetic language extends far beyond Hannah’s personal difficulties as she attributes to God greatness that exceeds His answer to her prayer for a son, even as wonderful at that was. Somehow, Hannah understood that this boy was destined to exceed all her hopes and expectations. The Lord was about to do great things in Israel.

Note verse five: “The barren has borne seven,” reminiscent of the blessing given to Naomi (Ruth 4:15). Seven is the number of completeness and perfection. This theme of humbling before exaltation is a basic principle of Scripture (Matt. 23:12). 

History of the King-Maker: Part Two—the Prayer of Hannah (1 Samuel 1)

The Law of Moses required that all males appear before the Lord for three major festivals at the tabernacle (Ex. 23:14-17). During this period (1076 b.c.), the tabernacle was located at Shiloh, about 15 miles north of Ramah, Samuel’s hometown. (To add a little perspective, Jephthah was judging from 1078 to 1072 b.c., Samson died in 1055 b.c., and Saul was anointed king in 1050 b.c.) Elkanah was a Levite (1 Chron. 6:22-28, 33-38) of the priestly Kohathite family originally dwelling in Ephraim; although Ramah, his home, was actually in Benjamin.

Elkanah regularly traveled to Shiloh to worship as prescribed. His bigamy, however, trends to accepted custom and clearly against Yahweh’s revealed definition of marriage (Gen. 2:24), which prohibited all other deviations. It is customary with imperfect humans to accept tradition against biblical standards because they work in situations where strict obedience is difficult. Thus, while the law did not explicitly prohibit polygamy, it did strictly regulate it. As already noted in a previous lesson, taking a second wife in cases of barrenness was a practical remedy to provide sons as heirs, but it produced difficulties in the home between wives. This trend of pragmatic solutions to tough situations is to be resisted by true saints at all costs. The appearance of godliness without its true power is the curse of modern Christianity for this reason.

Hannah’s grief over her barrenness was aggravated by Peninnah’s provocations. This was not eased by her well-intentioned and loving husband who sought to counter her distress by giving her a “worthy portion.” It only increased her distress. At issue was her very identity as a daughter of Abraham, which demanded that she bear a son and thus lend her part to fulfill the promised innumerable multitude of Abraham’s seed (Gen. 15:5). Her trials were designed to drive her to seek her God for a miracle solution. God is the God of the impossible and the manifestation of His great power glorifies His name (Psa. 50:15).

Thus, Hannah prayed before the tabernacle (vv. 9-13). But how long was her prayer? Notice that she rose up from the table to go to prayer and when finished, she returned to the table to eat (vv. 9, 18). Yet, she poured out her heart in overwhelming emotion to God. She was not ashamed to vent her shame to the One who could grant her a remedy. Psalm 42 is a great reference for this kind of praying. Notice her prayer itself. She is humble, referring to herself three times as a slave of Yahweh (v. 11). She did not demand but requested and beseeched Yahweh, pressing the need and at the same time yielding to His sovereign will—“if you will indeed look on the affliction of your servant and remember me and not forget your servant, but will give to your servant a son.” Lastly, her prayer was accompanied by a vow, common to OT times and regulated by the law (Num. 30:6-16). She promised to put her son in Yahweh’s service to prove her motive selfless. Hannah’s prayer provided the means the Lord sought to prepare Israel for her king.

History of the King Maker: Part-One—the Birth of Samuel (1 Samuel 1)

First Samuel 1 documents yet another story from the period of the Judges. The book records the establishment of Israel’s first monarchy (about 1050 b.c.), taking the name of the last Judge and king-maker. Who authored 1 Samuel is uncertain, but Samuel could very well have written at least some of the book (see 1 Chron. 29:29). Samuel served the Lord in Israel as prophet, priest, and judge for a number of years, bridging the period from the judges to the monarchy, anointing both Saul and David (in this connection, note the first appearance of the title “Lord of Hosts” in verse 3).

The account of Samuel’s birth begins with a little background. “A certain man” was from Ramathaim-zophim (meaning “double height of the watchers,” also known as Ramah) located in the hill country of Ephraim, north of Jerusalem, in the land of Zuph (9:5). It is interesting to note how the author first establishes the setting by noting Samuel’s hometown (see v. 19, 2:11; 7:17).

The “man” is identified as Elkanah (meaning “God has possessed” or “God has obtained”). His lineage is also listed. He was an Ephrathite (meaning “fruitful”) who had a troubled (less than fruitful) house. He married Hannah (meaning “grace”); however, Hannah was barren. Having heirs was necessary to passing the inheritance of land on to succeeding generations. Marrying a second wife was a way to fix the problem (as was Levirate marriage). Thus, Elkanah married Peninnah (meaning “jewel”). A jewel she was, for she bore him many sons and daughters (v. 4).

Since God made the rules about the land’s remaining within the tribes and clans of Israel, barrenness was considered a curse from God (“the Lord had closed her womb,” vv. 5, 6). Because of this, Hannah was treated scornfully by her rival, probably based on two things. First, although Peninnah blessed Elkanah with heirs, his first love was Hannah (v. 5). Second, Hannah’s barrenness was seen as the consequence of some evil thing in her life that drew down the displeasure of God. (Note the connection between the provocations and the trips to worship at Shiloh, v. 7.)

The times of worship at Shiloh involved sharing portions of the sacrifices (vv. 4-6). This was a particularly difficult time for Hannah, for we read that although her husband loved her, he gave her but one portion. (The Massoretic text from which our English translation is made, has double portion; however, both text and context argue for “one,” which is supported by the Septuagint, the Greek OT.) As a consequence, Hannah grieved her condition. To console her, Elkanah reasoned that he was better to her than ten sons (compare Ruth 4:15). While an effort to comfort, his is remark is a bit of self-inflation. Sons equated to security for a widow, the more the better.

How one handles trials demonstrates one’s spiritual character. Compare Naomi, her bitterness and resignation, with Hannah’s earnest seeking of the Lord. Trial’s should not discourage us but drive us to seek God (Psalm 42).