Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim Zophim, of the hill country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. He had two wives. The name of one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah. Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.
Show the surrounding paragraph
1 Samuel 1:1-2 sits inside this longer paragraph.
Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim Zophim, of the hill country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. He had two wives. The name of one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah. Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children. This man went up out of his city from year to year to worship and to sacrifice to Yahweh of Armies in Shiloh. The two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, priests to Yahweh, were there. When the day came that Elkanah sacrificed, he gave to Peninnah his wife, and to all her sons and her daughters, portions; but to Hannah he gave a double portion, for he loved Hannah, but Yahweh had shut up her womb. Her rival provoked her severely, to irritate her, because Yahweh had shut up her womb. So year by year, when she went up to Yahweh’s house, her rival provoked her. Therefore she wept, and didn’t eat. Elkanah her husband said to her, “Hannah, why do you weep? Why don’t you eat? Why is your heart grieved? Am I not better to you than ten sons?”
Parallel Translations
-
Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim Zophim, of the hill country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite.
He had two wives. The name of one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah. Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.
-
Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim, of mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite:
And he had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah: and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.
Show all 3 translations
-
NOW THERE was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim, of the hill-country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite.
And he had two wives: the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah; and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.
Examined in Scripture Analysis
Contradictions (3)
Questions where the Bible appears to say two different things, with the passages on each side set together.
Cross-references (25)
- 1 Chronicles 6:34 (v1) the son of Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Eliel, the son of Toah,
- 1 Chronicles 6:25-27 (v1) The sons of Elkanah: Amasai and Ahimoth. As for Elkanah, the sons of Elkanah: Zophai his son, Nahath his son, Eliab his son, Jeroham his…
- 1 Samuel 1:19 (v1) They rose up in the morning early and worshiped Yahweh, then returned and came to their house to Ramah. Then Elkanah knew Hannah his wife;…
- Judges 17:1 (v1) There was a man of the hill country of Ephraim, whose name was Micah.
- Ruth 1:2 (v1) The name of the man was Elimelech, and the name of his wife Naomi. The names of his two sons were Mahlon and Chilion, Ephrathites of…
Show all 25 cross-references
- Judges 19:1 (v1) In those days, when there was no king in Israel, there was a certain Levite living on the farther side of the hill country of Ephraim, who…
- 1 Samuel 9:5 (v1) When they had come to the land of Zuph, Saul said to his servant who was with him, “Come! Let’s return, lest my father stop caring about…
- 1 Samuel 17:12 (v1) Now David was the son of that Ephrathite of Bethlehem Judah, whose name was Jesse; and he had eight sons. The man was an elderly old man in…
- Genesis 4:23 (v2) Lamech said to his wives, “Adah and Zillah, hear my voice. You wives of Lamech, listen to my speech, for I have slain a man for wounding…
- Genesis 16:1-2 (v2) Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, bore him no children. She had a servant, an Egyptian, whose name was Hagar. Sarai said to Abram, “See now, Yahweh…
- Genesis 25:21 (v2) Isaac entreated Yahweh for his wife, because she was barren. Yahweh was entreated by him, and Rebekah his wife conceived.
- Genesis 29:23-29 (v2) In the evening, he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to Jacob. He went in to her. Laban gave Zilpah his servant to his daughter Leah…
- Genesis 29:31 (v2) Yahweh saw that Leah was hated, and he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren.
- Deuteronomy 21:15-17 (v2) If a man has two wives, the one beloved and the other hated, and they have borne him children, both the beloved and the hated, and if the…
- Joshua 24:33 (v1) Eleazar the son of Aaron died. They buried him in the hill of Phinehas his son, which was given him in the hill country of Ephraim.
- Judges 8:30 (v2) Gideon had seventy sons conceived from his body, for he had many wives.
- Judges 12:5 (v1) The Gileadites took the fords of the Jordan against the Ephraimites. Whenever a fugitive of Ephraim said, “Let me go over,” the men of…
- Judges 13:2 (v2) There was a certain man of Zorah, of the family of the Danites, whose name was Manoah; and his wife was barren, and childless.
- Matthew 19:8 (v2) He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it has not been…
- Matthew 27:57 (v1) When evening had come, a rich man from Arimathaea, named Joseph, who himself was also Jesus’ disciple came.
- Luke 1:7 (v2) But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and they both were well advanced in years.
- Genesis 4:19 (v2) Lamech took two wives: the name of the first one was Adah, and the name of the second one was Zillah.
- Joshua 17:17-18 (v1) Joshua spoke to the house of Joseph, that is, to Ephraim and to Manasseh, saying, “You are a numerous people, and have great power. You…
- 1 Kings 11:26 (v1) Jeroboam the son of Nebat, an Ephraimite of Zeredah, a servant of Solomon, whose mother’s name was Zeruah, a widow, also lifted up his hand…
- Luke 2:36 (v2) There was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher (she was of a great age, having lived with a husband seven…
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this passage (25 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On v1 There were two Ramatus, so that in this city…
There were two Ramatus, so that in this city in mount Ephraim were Zophim, that is, the learned men and Prophets.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv1–2 1Sa 1:1 Now there was a certain man of…
1Sa 1:1 Now there was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim, of mount Ephraim, and his name [was] Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite:
Samuel was in the number of those few in Scripture, that lived and died with glory. His birth, life, and acts take up a great part of this book, which seemeth to have been written by some disciple of his, who, in honour of his master, called it by his name. Like Anna Comnena, daughter of Alexius Comnenus the Emperor, wrote the history of her father’s deeds and called it Alexias.
Read full note →
Ver. 1. Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim.] Called also Ramah, and Arimathaea. The Hebrews {a} say it was a school of prophets, who are frequently in Scripture called Zophim, that is, watchmen, and that Elkanah himself was a prophet, as being of the sons of Korah, who are called prophets. See 1Ch 6:22; 1Ch 6:27; 1Ch 6:33, compared with those titles of Psalms "to" or "of the soils of Korah." Of that gainsaying "sinner against his own soul," came Samuel, Homo ille virtute simillimus.
An Ephrathite.] So called, because he dwelt in the tribe of Ephraim, as Jdg 12:5; likeas those Jews are called Cretes and Arabians, Elamites and Parthians, &c., {Act 2:9-10} because they sojourned in those countries.
{a} Chald. Paraph., Kimchi, Ben-Gerson.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv1–2 Ramathaim-zophirn, called Ramah, 1Sa 1:19, and here is the…
Ramathaim-zophirn, called Ramah, 1Sa 1:19, and here is the dual number Ramathaim, i.e. double Ramah, probably because it consisted of two parts, whereof the one might be called the old city, the other the new, both being united into one; and the additional title of Zophim, which signifies watch-towers, or watchmen, may note either the height of its situation, which made it fit for that use; or that the prophets, who are called watchmen, as Eze 3:17, had a school or college there.
An Ephrathite, i.e. one of Bethlehem-judah, Rth 1:2, to wit, by his birth and habitation, though by his original a Levite. Thus divers Jews by nation are called Medes, Elamites, Cretians, &c., Act 2:9-11, because they were born and bred there.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On v1 We have here an account of the state of…
We have here an account of the state of the family into which Samuel the prophet was born. His father's name was Elkanah, a Levite, and of the family of the Kohathites (the most honourable house of that tribe) as appears, Ch1 6:33, Ch1 6:34. His ancestor Zuph was an Ephrathite, that is, of Bethlehem-Judah, which was called Ephrathah, Ruth, Rut 1:2. There this family of the Levites was first seated, but one branch of it, in process of time, removed to Mount Ephraim, from which Elkanah descended. Micah's Levite came from Bethlehem to Mount Ephraim, Jdg 17:8. Perhaps notice is taken of their being originally Ephrathites to show their alliance to David. This Elkanah lived at Ramah, or Ramathaim, which signifies the double Ramah, the higher and lower town, the same with Arimathea of which Joseph was, here called Ramathaim-zophim. Zophim signifies watchmen; probably they had one of the schools of the prophets there, for prophets are called watchmen: the Chaldee paraphrase calls Elkanah a disciple of the prophets. But it seems to me that it was in Samuel that prophecy revived, before his time there being, for a great while, no open vision, Sa1 3:1. Nor is there any mention of a prophet of the Lord from Moses to Samuel, except Jdg 6:8. So that we have no reason to think that there was any nursery or college of prophets here till Samuel himself founded one, Jdg 19:19, Jdg 19:20. This is the account of Samuel's parentage, and the place of his nativity. Let us now take notice of the state of the family.
I. It was a devout family. All the families of Israel should be so, but Levites' families in a particular manner. Ministers should be patterns of family religion. Elkanah went up at the solemn feasts to the tabernacle at Shiloh, to worship and to sacrifice to the Lord of hosts. I think this is the first time in scripture that God is called the Lord of hosts - Jehovah Sabaoth, a name by which he was afterwards very much called and known. Probably Samuel the prophet was the first that used this title of God, for the comfort of Israel, when in his time their hosts were few and feeble and those of their enemies many and mighty; then it would be a support to them to think that the God they served was Lord of hosts, of all the hosts both of heaven and earth; of them he has a sovereign command, and makes what use he pleases of them. Elkanah was a country Levite, and, for aught that appears, had not any place or office which required his attendance at the tabernacle, but he went up as a common Israelite, with his own sacrifices, to encourage his neighbours and set them a good example. When he sacrificed he worshipped, joining prayers and thanksgivings with his sacrifices. In this course of religion he was constant, for he went up yearly. And that which made it the more commendable in him was, 1. That there was a general decay and neglect of religion in the nations. Some among them worshipped other gods, and the generality were remiss in the service of the God of Israel, and yet Elkanah kept his integrity; whatever others did, his resolution was that he and his house should serve the Lord. 2. That Hophni and Phinehas, the sons of Eli, were the men that were now chiefly employed in the service of the house of God; and they were men that conducted themselves very ill in their place, as we shall find afterwards; yet Elkanah went up to sacrifice. God had then tied his people to one place and one altar, and forbidden them, under any pretence whatsoever, to worship elsewhere, and therefore, in pure obedience to that command, he attended at Shiloh. If the priests did not do their duty, he would do his. Thanks be to God, we, under the gospel, are not tied to any one place or family; but the pastors and teachers whom the exalted Redeemer has given to his church are those only whose ministration tends to the perfecting of the saints and the edifying of the body of Christ, Eph 4:11, Eph 4:12. None have dominion over our faith; but our obligation is to those that are the helpers of our holiness and joy, not to any that by their scandalous immoralities, like Hophni and Phinehas, make the sacrifices of the Lord to be abhorred, though still the validity and efficacy of the sacraments depend not on the purity of him that administers them.
Read full note →
II. Yet it was a divided family, and the divisions of it carried with them both guilt and grief. Where there is piety, it is a pity but there should be unity. The joint-devotions of a family should put an end to divisions in it.
1. The original cause of this division was Elkanah's marrying two wives, which was a transgression of the original institution of marriage, to which our Saviour reduces it. Mat 19:5, Mat 19:8, From the beginning it was not so. It made mischief in Abraham's family, and Jacob's, and here in Elkanah's. How much better does the law of God provide for our comfort and ease in this world than we should, if we were left to ourselves! It is probable that Elkanah married Hannah first, and, because he had not children by her so soon as he hoped, he married Peninnah, who bore him children indeed, but was in other things a vexation to him. Thus are men often beaten with rods of their own making.
2. That which followed upon this error was that the two wives could not agree. They had different blessings: Peninnah, like Leah, was fruitful and had many children, which should have made her easy and thankful, though she was but a second wife, and was less beloved; Hannah, like Rachel, was childless indeed, but she was very dear to her husband, and he took all occasions to let both her and others know that she was so, and many a worthy portion he gave her (Sa1 1:5), and this should have made her easy and thankful. But they were of different tempers: Peninnah could not bear the blessing of fruitfulness, but she grew haughty and insolent; Hannah could not bear the affliction of barrenness, but she grew melancholy and discontented: and Elkanah had a difficult part to act between them.
(1.) Elkanah kept up his attendance at God's altar notwithstanding this unhappy difference in his family, and took his wives and children with him, that, if they could not agree in other things, they might agree to worship God together. If the devotions of a family prevail not to put an end to its divisions, yet let not the divisions put a stop to the devotions.
(2.) He did all he could to encourage Hannah, and to keep up her spirits under her affliction, Sa1 1:4, Sa1 1:5. At the feast he offered peace-offerings, to supplicate for peace in his family; and when he and his family were to eat their share of the sacrifice, in token of their communion with God and his altar, though he carved to Peninnah and her children competent portions, yet to Hannah he gave a worthy portion, the choicest piece that came to the table, the piece (whatever it was) that used to be given on such occasions to those that were most valued; this he did in token of his love to her, and to give all possible assurances of it. Observe, [1.] Elkanah loved his wife never the less for her being barren. Christ loves his church, notwithstanding her infirmities, her barrenness; and so ought men to love their wives, Eph 5:25. To abate our just love to any relation for the sake of any infirmity which they cannot help, and which is not their sin but their affliction, is to make God's providence quarrel with his precept, and very unkindly to add affliction to the afflicted. [2.] He studied to show his love so much the more because she was afflicted, insulted, and low-spirited. It is wisdom and duty to support the weakest, and to hold up those that are run down. [3.] He showed his great love to her by the share he gave her of his peace-offerings. Thus we should testify our affection to our friends and relations, by abounding in prayer for them. The better we love them the more room let us give them in our prayers.
(3.) Peninnah was extremely peevish and provoking. [1.] She upbraided Hannah with her affliction, despised her because she was barren, and gave her taunting language, as one whom Heaven did not favour. [2.] She envied the interest she had in the love of Elkanah, and the more kind he was to her the more was she exasperated against her, which was all over base and barbarous. [3.] She did this most when they went up to the house of the Lord, perhaps because then they were more together than at other times, or because then Elkanah showed his affection most to Hannah. But it was very sinful at such a time to show her malice, when pure hands were to be lifted up at God's altar without wrath and quarrelling. It was likewise very unkind at that time to vex Hannah, not only because then they were in company, and others would take notice of it, but then Hannah was to mind her devotions, and desired to be most calm and composed, and free from disturbance. The great adversary to our purity and peace is then most industrious to ruffle us when we should be most composed. When the sons of God come to present themselves before the Lord Satan will be sure to come among them, Job 1:6. [4.] She continued to do this from year to year, not once or twice, but it was her constant practice; neither deference to her husband nor compassion to Hannah could break her of it. [5.] That which she designed was to make her fret, perhaps in hopes to break her heart, that she might possess her husband's heart solely, or because she took a pleasure in her uneasiness, nor could Hannah gratify her more than by fretting. Note, It is an evidence of a base disposition to delight in grieving those that are melancholy and of a sorrowful spirit, and in putting those out of humour that are apt to fret and be uneasy. We ought to bear one another's burdens, not add to them.
(4.) Hannah (poor woman) could not hear the provocation: She wept, and did not eat, Sa1 1:7. It made her uneasy to herself and to all her relations. She did not eat of the feast; her trouble took away her appetite, made her unfit for any company, and a jar in the harmony of family-joy. It was of the feast upon the sacrifice that she did not eat, for they were not to eat of the holy things in their mourning, Deu 26:14; Lev 10:19. Yet it was her infirmity so far to give way to the sorrow of the world as to unfit herself for holy joy in God. Those that are of a fretful spirit, and are apt to lay provocations too much to heart, are enemies to themselves, and strip themselves very much of the comforts both of life and godliness. We find that God took notice of this ill effect of discontents and disagreements in the conjugal relation, that the parties aggrieved covered the altar of the Lord with tears, insomuch that he regarded not the offering, Mal 2:13.
(5.) Elkanah said what he could to her to comfort her. She did not upbraid him with his unkindness in marrying another wife as Sarah did, nor did she render to Peninnah railing for railing, but took the trouble wholly to herself, which made her an object of much compassion. Elkanah showed himself extremely grieved at her grief (Sa1 1:8): Hannah, why weepest thou? [1.] He is much disquieted to see her thus overwhelmed with sorrow. Those that by marriage are made one flesh ought thus far to be of one spirit too, to share in each other's troubles, so that one cannot be easy while the other is uneasy. [2.] He gives her a loving reproof for it: Why weepest thou? And why is thy heart grieved? As many as God loves he rebukes, and so should we. He puts her upon enquiring into the cause of her grief. Though she had just reason to be troubled, yet let her consider whether she had reason to be troubled to such a degree, especially so much as to be taken off by it from eating of the holy things. Note, Our sorrow upon any account is sinful and inordinate when it diverts us from our duty to God and embitters our comfort in him, when it makes us unthankful for the mercies we enjoy and distrustful of the goodness of God to us in further mercies, when it casts a damp upon our joy in Christ, and hinders us from doing the duty and taking the comfort of our particular relations. [3.] He intimates that nothing should be wanting on his part to balance her grief: "Am not I better to thee than ten sons? Thou knowest thou hast my entire affection, and let that comfort thee." Note, We ought to take notice of our comforts, to keep us from grieving excessively for our crosses; for our crosses we deserve, but our comforts we have forfeited. If we would keep the balance even, we must look at that which is for us, as well as at that which is against us, else we are unjust to Providence and unkind to ourselves. God hath set the one over-against the other (Ecc 7:14) and so should we.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv1–2 Now there was a man of Ramathaimzophim, of Mount…
Now there was a man of Ramathaimzophim, of Mount Ephraim,.... Ramathaim is a word of the dual number, and signifies two Ramahs; the city consisted of two parts, being built perhaps on two hills, and were called Zophim; because, as the Rabbins say, they looked one to another; or rather, because situated on eminences, there were watchtowers in them, where watchmen were placed; or because they were inhabited by prophets, who were sometimes called watchmen, Eze 3:17 and here is thought to be a school of the prophets, see Sa1 19:19 and which seems to be countenanced by the Targum, in which the words are paraphrased thus, "and there was one" man of Ramatha, of the disciples of the prophets; or, as others think, the sense is this, this man was one of the Ramathites, the inhabitants of Ramah, and of the family of Zuph, or the Zuphites, which gave the name to the land of Zuph, and the grand ancestor of Elkanah is in this verse called Zuph, see Sa1 9:5. According to Jerom (e), this is the same with Arimathaea, of which Joseph was, Mat 27:57 for thus he writes,"Armatha Sophim, the city of Helcanah and Samuel, in the Thamnitic region near Diospolis (or Lydda), from whence was Joseph, who in the Gospels is said to be of Arimathaea;''but Reland (f) thinks it cannot be the same that was about Lydda, which was all a champaign country; whereas this was in the mountains of Ephraim, which must be sought to the north of Jerusalem, and not the west, and so it follows:
of Mount Ephraim: which is added to distinguish it from other Ramahs in several tribes, as in Benjamin, Naphtali, &c. though this may refer not to the situation of Ramathaim, but to the country of this man, who was originally of Mount Ephraim, as was the Levite in Jdg 19:1 who was the cause of much evil to Israel, as this was of great good, as Kimchi observes:
Read full note →
and his name was Elkanah; which signifies "God hath possessed"; that is, possessed him, or he was in possession of God; he had an ancestor of the same name, Ch1 6:23. This man was a Levite, one of the Kohathites, and a descendant of Korah; so that the famous prophet Samuel was of the sons of Korah:
the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph; the three last of these names are somewhat differently read in Ch1 6:26, where they are Eliab, Nahath, Zophai; and in Ch1 6:34. Eliel, Toah, Zuph:
an Ephrathite; which appellation is to be connected, according to Kimchi, not with Elkanah, but with Zuph; though neither of them were so called from Bethlehemjudah, the inhabitants of which were indeed called Ephrathites from Ephratah, another name of it; so Elimelech, and his sons Mahlon and Chilion, being of that city, were so called, Rut 1:2 not from their being of the tribe of Ephraim, as Jeroboam of that tribe is called an Ephrathite, Kg1 11:26, see Jdg 12:5 for these were Levites, the descendants of Kohath, in the line of Korah; but because they sojourned in Mount Ephraim, or dwelt there, as Elkanah did; and it is well known that the Kohathites had cities given them in the tribe of Ephraim, Jos 21:5.
(e) De loc. Heb. fol. 88. K. (f) Palestin. Illustrat. tom. 2. p. 581.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv1–2 The affliction of Hannah, ver. 1-8. Her prayer to…
The affliction of Hannah, ver. 1-8. Her prayer to God, with Eli's blessing, ver. 9-18. The birth and nursing of Samuel, ver. 19-23. The presenting of him to God, ver. 24-28.
Ramathaim-zophim - Called Ramah, ver. 19. Eparathite - That is, one of Bethlehem-judah, by his birth and habitation, though by his original a Levite.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv1–2 -Year from the Creation, 2833.
THE FIRST BOOK OF SAMUEL
-Year from the Creation, 2833.
Read full note →
-Year before the Incarnation, 1171.
-Year before the first Olympiad, 395.
-Year before the building of Rome, 418.
-Year of the Julian Period, 3543.
-Year of the Dionysian Period, 351.
-Cycle of the Sun, 15.
-Cycle of the Moon, 9.
CHAPTER I
Some account of Elkanah and his two wives, Peninnah and Hannah,
1, 2.
His annual worship at Shiloh and the portions he gave at such
times to his wives, 3-5.
Hannah, being barren, is reproached by Peninnah, especially in
their going up to Shiloh; at which she is sorely grieved, 6, 7.
Elkanah comforts her, 8.
Her prayer and vow in the temple, that if God would give her a
son, she would consecrate him to His service, 9-11.
Eli, the high priest, indistinctly hearing her pray, charges her
with being drunk, 12-14.
Her defence of her conduct, 15, 16.
Eli, undeceived, blesses her; on which she takes courage,
17, 18.
Hannah and Elkanah return home; she conceives, bears a son, and
calls him Samuel, 19, 20.
Elkanah and his family go again to Shiloh to worship; but Hannah
stays at home to nurse her child, purposing, as soon as he is
weaned, to go and offer him to the Lord, according to her vow,
21-23.
When weaned, she takes him to Shiloh, presents hear child to Eli
to be consecrated to the Lord, and offers three bullocks, an
ephah of flour, and a bottle of wane, for his consecration,
24-28.
NOTES ON CHAP. I
Verse 1. Ramathaim-zophim] Literally, the two high places of the watchman; these were, no doubt, two contiguous hills, on which watchtowers were built, and in which watchmen kept continual guard for the safety of the country and which afterwards gave name to the place.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv1–2 1Sa 1:1. Ramathaim-zophim — The latter word means watchers,…
1Sa 1:1. Ramathaim-zophim — The latter word means watchers, or watchmen, and the former the Ramahs. The place is called Ramah, (1Sa 1:19,) and seems to have been a village situated on two hills, which, on account of their elevation, commanded extensive prospects, and were proper places from which to make observations. Probably there might be a watch-tower and sentinels placed in each. Of mount Ephraim — This is added to distinguish this from other places, which had the name of Ramah in other tribes, particularly in that of Benjamin, Jos 18:25. An Ephrathite — That is, one of Beth-lehem-judah, by his birth and habitation, though by his origin a Levite.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv1–2 Ramathaim-zophim may signify “the two hills 1Sa 9:11-13 of…
Ramathaim-zophim may signify “the two hills 1Sa 9:11-13 of the watchmen,” so called from its being a post from which the watchmen looked out. But since Zuph is the name of the head of the family, it is more probable that Zophin means the Zuphites, the sons of Zuph (see Zophai, 1Ch 6:26), from whom the land about Ramah was called “the land of Zuph,” 1Sa 9:5.
There is reason to believe that Elkanah - an Ephrathite, or inhabitant of Bethlehem 1Sa 17:12; Rth 1:2 and of the territory of the tribe of Ephraim 1Ki 11:26 - the father of Samuel, represents the fifth generation of settlers in Canaan, and therefore that Samuel was born about 130 years after the entrance into Canaan - four complete generations, or 132 years - and about 40 years before David.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv1–2 There. Hebrew, Septuagint, &c., "And there," &c. The books…
There. Hebrew, Septuagint, &c., "And there," &c. The books of Scripture are thus frequently connected. The authors present us with a series of events, without prefixing any title, or their own names, that our attention may be wholly fixed on what we read. The birth of Samuel being so miraculous, deserves to be recorded, as he was the last judge of Israel, and had so much to do under the first of their kings, whose election and misconduct brought a great change into the state of the commonwealth. (Calmet) --- Ramathaimsophim. Rama, or Ramatha, "a height," and the environs were occupied by the family of Suph, a descendant of Core; (1 Paralipomenon vi. 29.) though the place did not properly belong to the Levites. It lay probably between Gabaa and Bethel, where Samuel spent much of his time, while he was judge, and obliged to be frequently absent from the tabernacle. (Calmet) --- Ragusinus and Prince Radzivil think it was afterwards called Arimathea, the birth-place of Joseph, and now Ramula. (Tirinus) (Chap. ii. 11.) --- Ephraimite. He was of the tribe of Levi, (1 Paraliponmenon vi. 34.) but is called an Ephraimites from dwelling in Mount Ephraim. (Challoner) --- So we read of Cretan Jews, Acts ii. 11. (Tirinus)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v1 1 Samuel 1-7
FIRST PART: SAMUEL
1 Samuel 1-7
Read full note →
Samuel’s Life and Work as Judge, Priest and Prophet, Directed Towards a Through Reformation of the Theocracy and Laying the Foundation of the Theocratic Kingdom
____________
FIRST DIVISION: SAMUEL’S EARLY LIFE
1 Samuel 1-3
____________
FIRST SECTION
Samuel’s Birth in Answer to Prayer to the Lord
1Sa_1:1-20
I. Samuel’s parents, the Ephrathite Elkanah and the childless Hannah. 1Sa_1:1-8
1Now [om. Now1] there was a certain [om. certain] man of Ramathaim-zophim,2 of Mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of 2Elihu, the son of Tohu, the Son of Zuph, an Ephrathite. And he had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah; and Peninnah 3had children, but [and] Hannah had no children. And this man went up yearly out of [from] his city to worship and to sacrifice unto the Lord [Jehovah] of hosts [Hosts] in Shiloh. And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, the priests of the Lord, were there [And there the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, 4were priests of Jehovah3]. And when the time was that Elkanah offered, Hebrews 5 gave to Peninnah his wife, and to all her sons and her daughters, portions; but unto Hannah he gave a worthy [double4] portion, for he loved Hannah, but [and] 6the Lord [Jehovah] had shut up her womb. And her adversary also [om. also] provoked her sore [ins. also], for [om. for] to make her fret because5 the Lord [Jehovah] 7had shut up her womb. And as he did so [And so it happened6] year by year; when she went up to the house of the Lord [Jehovah], so she [she thus] provoked 8voked her, therefore [and] she wept and did not eat. Then said Elkanah her husband [And Elkanah her husband said] to her, Hannah, why weepest thou? and why eatest thou not? and why is thy heart grieved? am not I better to thee than ten sons?
II. Hannah’s Prayer far a Son. 1Sa_1:9-18 a
9So [And] Hannah rose up after they [she7] had eaten in Shiloh, and after they [she] had drunk. Now [And] Eli the priest sat upon a [the] seat by a [the] post 10of the temple [Sanctuary8] of the Lord [Jehovah]. And she was in bitterness of 11soul, and prayed unto the Lord [Jehovah], and wept sore. And she vowed a vow, and said, O Lord of hosts [Jehovah of Hosts], if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thine handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thy handmaid, but [and] wilt give unto thine handmaid a male-child, then I will give him unto the Lord [Jehovah] all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his 12head. And it came to pass, as she continued praying before the Lord [Jehovah], 13that Eli marked her mouth. Now [And] Hannah, she [om. she9] spake in her heart; only her lips moved, but her voice was not heard; therefore [and] Eli 14thought she had been [was] drunken. And Eli said unto her, How long wilt thou 15be drunken? put away thy wine from thee. And Hannah answered and said, No, my lord, I am a woman of a sorrowful spirit; I have drunk neither wine nor strong16drink, but have poured out my soul before the Lord [Jehovah]. Count not thine handmaid for a daughter of Belial [dissolute woman10]; for out of the abundance 17of my complaint and [ins. my] grief have I spoken hitherto. Then [And] Eli answered and said, Go in peace; and the God of Israel grant thee [om. thee] thy 18a petition that thou hast asked of him. And she said, Let thine handmaid find grace in thy sight [thine eyes].
III. Samuel’s Birth. 1Sa_1:18-20
18b So [And] the woman went her way and did eat, and her countenance was no 19more sad.11 And they rose up in the morning early, and worshipped before the Lord [Jehovah], and returned and came to their house to Ramah. And Elkanah 20knew Hannah his wife; and the Lord [Jehovah] remembered her. Wherefore [And] it came to pass, when the time was come about, after Hannah had [that Hannah] conceived, that she [and] bare a son, and called his name Samuel, saying, Because [For, said she,] I have [om. have] asked him of the Lord [Jehovah].
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL12
I. Samuel’s Parents. 1Sa_1:1-8
1Sa_1:1-2. And there was a man of Ramathaim-zophim.—Here an account is given of Samuel’s genealogy and birth-place.
There is no sufficient ground for adopting (as Thenius does) the reading of the Sept. MS. R. (Vat.) אִיש הָיָה [there was a man] instead of וַיְהִי אִישׁ [and there was a man], since this latter does not affect the independence of the Books of Samuel; for the ו [and] does not indicate attachment to something preceding, the continuation of the Book of Judges, but וַיְהִי [and there was] stands here, as it often does at the beginning of a narrative, as historical introductory formula, Jos_1:1; Jdg_1:1; Rth_1:1; 2Sa_1:1; 1Ki_1:1; Est_1:1; Ezr_1:1; Eze_1:1; Jon_1:1.
The father of Samuel was a man of Ramathaim-zophim in the hill-country of Ephraim, named Elkanah. The place Ramathaim (הָרָֽמָתַיִם) is doubtless the same that is called in 1Sa_1:3 “his city,” and afterwards in 1Sa_1:19; 1Sa_2:11 by the shorter name Ramah (הָרָמָה), whence it appears that it was not merely the family-residence, but also Elkanah’s abode, where he had “his house.” The full name Ramathaim-zophim is found here only. The dual “Two-hills” points to the site of the place as on the sides or summits of two hills. It is the birth-place of Samuel (1Sa_1:19); the same Ramah in which he had his house (1Sa_7:17), the central point of his labors (1Sa_8:4; 1Sa_15:34; 1Sa_16:13; 1Sa_19:18-22) and his abode as long as he lived, and where he was buried (1Sa_26:1; 1Sa_28:3). But this Ramah of Samuel, according to Pressel’s clear statement in Herzog (R.-E. s. v. Rama), is most probably identical with the Ramah in the tribe of Benjamin (Jos_18:25); for the statement of Josephus (Ant. 8, 12, 3) that Ramathon,13 which = רָמָתַיִם [Ramathaim] and is therefore doubtless the Ramah of Samuel, was forty Stadia from Jerusalem, and that of Eusebius (Onomast. s. v. ’Αρμαθὲμ) that it was somewhat farther north in a line from Jerusalem towards Bethel, carry us into the territory of Benjamin. If it be urged against this view that, according to Jdg_4:5 and this passage, Ramah of Samuel was in the mountains of Ephraim, and therefore in the Tribe-territory of Ephraim, it is to be observed on the other hand that the mountains of Ephraim stretch into the Tribe of Benjamin, and not only include its northern mountains, but extend towards Jerusalem and unite with the mountains of Judah. The Ramah of Samuel lay in Benjamin near Gibeah, Saul’s home, and Mizpah. The addition zophim (צוֹפִים) distinguishes it from the other places of the same name, and indicates the district (the land of Zuph 1Sa_9:5) in which it lay, whose name is to be derived from the family of Zuph or Zophim from whom Elkanah descended (comp. 1Ch_6:11; 1Ch_6:20). Since, according to this, Zophim indicates a region, which took its name from the descendants of Zuph, the place Sôba, which has lately been discovered west of Jerusalem, cannot be the Ramah of Samuel, as Robinson and Ritter suppose (see Then. sächs, exeget. Studien, II. 134 sq., and Ewald, Gesch. II. 595). It is rather to be sought in the site of the present Er-Ram between four and five (Eng.) miles, as Josephus states, from Jerusalem on the summit or side of a conical mountain on the road from Jerusalem to Bethel. When Saul (in 1Sa_9:5) comes into the “ land of Zuph,” he straightway finds Samuel in “this city.” That “this city,” Samuel’s abode, is identical with Ramathaim-zophim here is beyond doubt. But against the view that it, together with the region “Zuph,” belonged to Benjamin, and in support of the view that it is different from Ramah of Benjamin, and lay in the territory of Ephraim, the principal consideration adduced is Saul’s route (1Sa_9:4 to 1Sa_10:2): on the return from Ramah to Gibeah, Saul, it is said, certainly took the directest road; but, according to 1Sa_10:2-5, he first crossed the border of Benjamin (1Sa_10:2), and then came into the neighborhood of Bethel (1Sa_10:3), which lay close to the border of Benjamin and Ephraim; according to this, Ramah of Samuel was situated north of Bethel in Ephraim not far from Gibeah (1Sa_1:20) but near Shiloh (1Sa_1:24), for if it had been far from Shiloh, the animals for offering would not have been carried from home. So Then. on 1Sa_9:5, p. 34. But the assumption that Saul went the directest way to Gibeah is not certain. In 1Sa_1:3, remarks Winer correctly (W.-B. s. v.), nothing is said really of the neighborhood of Bethel, but only that Saul should meet men who were going to Bethel, from what direction we know not. And Ramah of Benjamin was so near Shiloh, that there was no need14 to drive thither the animals which could not easily be purchased on the spot.15 The other geographical term אֶפְרָתִי “Ephraimite” (which must not be connected with צוּף (Luth.) in which case it would have been הָאֶפְרָתִי) certainly describes Elkanah as an Ephraimite, who belonged not only to the mountains, but also to the Tribe of Ephraim—and not as a Bethlehemite, as Hoffmann (Weissag. u. Erfüll. II. 61) and Robinson (Pal. II., 583 [Am. ed. 1Sa_2:7 sq.])sup. pose; for in 1Sa_17:12 and Rth_1:2, to which appeal is made, the word is further expressly defined by the phrase “of Bethlehem.” “It by no means follows, however, from this description of Elkanah (comp. Then. p. 2) that Ramathaim-zophim pertained to the territory of Ephraim, but only that Elkanah’s family had settled in this Ramah, and had afterwards moved to Ramah in Benjamin” (Keil, p. 18). As Elkanah came from the Levitical family of Kohath, son of Levi, whose land lay in Ephraim, Dan and Manasseh (Jos_21:5; Jos_21:21 sq.), and as the Levites generally were counted as citizens of the tribes in which their residence was, it is not strange that Elkanah is here designated as an Ephraimite according to his descent, while he lived in Benjamin, whither his forefathers had immigrated.
The family of Elkanah is here traced back only through four generations to צוּף “Zuph,” no doubt with reference to the preceding designation Zophim, because Zuph had settled in this district with his family, and it had taken its name from him. It would therefore properly be written צוּפִים “Zuphim.” This explanation of the name is certainly more natural than that which supposes that the district in which it lay, the “land of Zuph” (1Sa_9:5) was so called from its abundant supply of water, and than the explanation of some Rabbis, “Ramathaim of the watchers or prophets.” [The first question with regard to this word, whether we read Zophim or, with Erdmann, Zuphim, is a grammatical one: is the combination Ramathaim-zophim in accordance with Heb. usage? In proper names the rule is that the first word of a compound is in the construct. state, but the two exceptions, compounds with אָבֵל “meadow,” Gen_50:11, etc., and שָׁוֵה “plain,” Gen_14:5, seem to prove the possibility of an appositional construction, so that we must admit (against Wellhausen “Der Text. d. Bücker Sam.” in loco) Ramathaim-zophim to be a possible form. But, as “Zophim” never appears again as an appendage to Ramathaim, and the old vss. Chald. and Syr. render it as an appellative, it would perhaps be better, with Wellhausen, to suppose that the final ם m comes by error of transcription from the following word, and to read צוּפִי “a Zuphite,” which would then correspond to the “Zuph” at the end as “an Ephraimite” does to “Mount Ephraim.”—Tr.]. From a comparison of the two genealogies in 1Ch_6:26-27 (Hebrews 11, 12) 34, 35 (Heb. 19, 20) with this genealogy of Samuel it appears that they agree except in the last three names, which in the first list in Chr. are Eliab, Nahath and Zophai, and in the second, Eliel, Toah and Ziph. They are plainly the same names with various changes of form. These changes are probably to be ascribed to differences of pronunciation or to the mis-writing of the original forms which are preserved in this passage (comp. Then. 2).
The Levitical descent of Elkanah and Samuel is put beyond doubt by a comparison of the genealogy here with those in Chronicles. In the first of these, 1Ch_6:22 sq. (Hebrews 7 sq.) the genealogical list descends from the second son of Levi, Kohath, to Samuel and his sons; in the second, 1:33 sq. (Heb. 18 sq.), it ascends from the singer Heman, Samuel’s grandson, to Kohath, Levi and Israel. These Levites of the Family of Kohath had their dwellings appointed them in the tribes of Ephraim, Dan, and Manasseh. As the Levites were usually designated by the tribes in which their dwellings were fixed (Hengstenb. Beitr. [Contributions] zur Einl. ins. A. T. III. 61), the name “Ephraimite” here cannot be adduced against the Levitical descent of Samuel, as is done by Knobel (II. 29, Anm. 2), Nagelsbach (Herzog, R.-E. s. v. Samuel) and others. The latter himself refers to Jdg_17:7; Jdg_19:1 as cases where a Levite is described as belonging to another tribe, but thinks it strange that, while in those passages the Levitical descent of the men is also expressly mentioned, Elkanah’s descent from Levi is here not hinted at, and this is all the more surprising, if he was really a Levite, when his ancestor came from Ephraim to Ramah and gave his name to the region. But the author of the Book of Judges had a special motive for mentioning the Levitical character of those persons, while our author had little or none, since in his narrative of Samuel he lays all the stress on his prophetic office, and writes, as we have seen, from a prophetic stand-point. There was the less need to emphasize Samuel’s Levitical character because, as Ewald (II. 594) remarks, the Levites that were not of Aaron’s family, seem in early times to have been more blended with the people. And the statement in “Chronicles” of Samuel’s Levitical descent was not occasioned by the fact that the prophet performed priestly functions (Knobel ubi sup.), nor is it to be explained by saying that perhaps quite early the conviction that Samuel must have been a Levite grew out of the difficulty which every Levite must have felt at the discharge of priestly duties by Samuel, if he were not of the stem of Levi (Nagelsbach, ubi sup.)—nor to be referred, with Thenius (p. 2), to the fact that, perhaps in later times the genealogy given in our Book was attached to that of Levi in order thus to justify Samuel’s offering sacrifices. “Chronicles” throughout makes its statistical-historical statements from the Levitical point of view, and thus supplements the history of David and Samuel in our Book. Hengstenberg well says (ubi sup.): “We cannot suppose these genealogies to be an arbitrary invention, simply because, if the author had been disposed to this, he would doubtless have put Samuel among the descendants of Aaron.” Ewald remarks, “Anyone who looks narrowly at the testimony in ‘Chronicles’ cannot possibly doubt that Samuel was of a Levitical family,” while our author attached no importance to this fact (ubi sup. Anm. 2). So Bunsen (in loco), referring to Jos_21:21, where the dwellings of the Kohathites are fixed in Mount Ephraim also, says: “The Levitical descent of Samuel is certain; only it is not made specially prominent here.” Nägelsbach himself is obliged to admit that the proofs of Samuel’s Levitical descent are convincing; for 1) looking at “Chronicles” (1Ch_25:4; comp. 1Sa_6:18 sq.), he is obliged to concede that Samuel’s posterity is very decidedly considered as belonging to the Levites, since Heman, the renowned singer, grandson of Samuel and father of a numerous posterity, has an eminent place in the lists of Levites of David’s day; and 2) he urges further as a not unimportant consideration the name of Samuel’s father, “Elkanah, that is, he whom God acquired or purchased,” for this name is both in signification and use exclusively a Levite name, and all the Elkanahs mentioned in the Old Test, (leaving out the one in 2Ch_28:7, whose tribe is not stated) were demonstrably Levites, and belonged mostly to the family of Korah from whom Samuel also was descended. See Simonis Onomast., p. 493; Hengstenb., ubi supra 61; Keil in loco.—The further objection is made that Samuel was really dedicated to the Sanctuary-service by his mother’s vow, which would not have been necessary if Elkanah had been a Levite. To this the answer is not that Hannah’s vow referred to the Nazariteship of her son—for though all Nazarites were specially consecrated to the Lord, they did not thereby come under obligation to serve in the Sanctuary like the Levites—but rather that in Hannah’s vow the words “all the days of his life” (1Sa_1:11; 1Sa_1:22) are to be emphasized. While she consecrates him to the Lord as Nazarite, she at the same time by her vow devotes him for his whole life to the service of the Lord in the Sanctuary; while the Levites did not enter the service till the age of twenty-five or thirty (Num_8:23 sq.; Num_4:23; Num_4:30; Num_4:47), and then needed not to remain constantly at the Sanctuary, Samuel as soon as he is weaned is destined by his mother to continual service there (1Sa_1:22), and while yet a boy wears there the priestly dress.—It is again urged against the Levitical descent of Elkanah that, according to the Septuagint rendering of 1Sa_1:21 (which adds πάσας τὰς δεκάτας τῆς γῆς αὐτοῦ “all the tithes of his land”), he brought tithes (Then.); but the genuineness of this addition is very doubtful, and, even if it be received, the bringing of tithes is no evidence of Elkanah’s non-Levitical character (Josephus, who relates the Levitical descent, makes no difficulty in speaking of the tithe-bringing), for, according to the Law, the Levites had to bestow on the priests, as gift of Jehovah, one-tenth of the tenth which they themselves received from the other tribes, Num_18:26 sq.; comp. Neh_10:38 (Keil 26, Note). Ewald (II. 594) says: “The tithe which Elkanah (according to 1Sa_1:21, Sept.) brought proves nothing against his Levitical cha racter.” See his Alterthümer (Archæology), p. 346. Thenius refers the fulfilment of the prophecy in 1Sa_2:35 to Samuel, and thereon bases the assertion that Samuel’s Levitical descent is set aside by the prophecy; but, even if his reference be conceded, this consequence does not follow, for in this prophecy the sense requires us to emphasize not the priest but what is predicted of him.
חַנָּה, ̓́Αννα, Hannah (found in Phœnician also; Dido’s sister was named Anna), a common name for women among the Hebrews, signifying “charm,” “favor,” “beauty,” and in a religious sense “grace.”
Elkanah’s bigamy with Hannah and Peninnah (“coral,” “pearl”), like the custom of taking concubines along with the proper wives, is fundamentally opposed to the original divine ordination of monogamy. The Mosaic Law does not forbid polygamy, but never expressly approves it; it accepts it as a custom and seeks to restrict and govern it by various regulations (Lev_18:18; Exo_21:7-10; Deu_17:17; Deu_21:15-17). According to Gen_4:19 it was a Cainite, Lamech, that first violated the original ordinance. As it was usually only the men of more wealth and higher position that took two or more wives, we may suppose that Elkanah was a wealthy man.—The curse which attached to this relation appears in Elkanah’s married and family-life; Peninnah, who was blessed with children, exalts herself haughtily above the childless Hannah, and embitters her soul. The resulting discord in the family-life shows itself at the holy place, where Hannah’s heart is continually troubled by her “adversary,” while Elkanah seeks to console her by all the more affectionate conduct.
1Sa_1:3-5. Elkanah’s yearly worship and sacrifice at Shiloh. And this man went up, etc.16—The expression “from year to year” (מִיָּמִים י׳) is used in Exo_13:10 of the Feast of Unleavened Bread and so elsewhere (Jdg_11:40; Jdg_21:19). On the traces of the Passover in the Period of the Judges see Hengstenberg Beitr. [Contrib.] 3. 79–85. It is this Feast that is meant here. For Elkanah is said in the text to have traveled regularly every year with his whole household. (1Sa_1:21) to the Sanctuary. This journey was not taken at pleasure, but at an appointed time, and therefore at one of the festivals at which the people were required by the Law to appear before the Lord, Exo_34:23; comp. Deu_16:16. It was only at the Passover that the whole family were accustomed to go up to the Sanctuary, only then that every man without exception went. But Elkanah attended the feast regularly only once a year. Nothing but the Passover, therefore, can be meant here. At this feast Elkanah went up once every year to the Sanctuary with his whole family. [This statement—that the feast which Elkanah attended was the Passover—would be probable, if we could assume regularity in carrying out the Mosaic Law at this time; but this cannot be assumed. See Judges 17., 18., 19.; 1Sa_2:12-17. Some prefer to see here a feast different from any of the three great festivals, referring to the feasting (1Sa_1:9) and David’s “yearly sacrifice,” 1Sa_20:6; comp. Deu_12:11-14 (Bib. Comm. in loco). This, however, is not conclusive; feasting would be appropriate at the great festivals, (see Lev_23:40; Neh_8:12); and the question what occasion this was must be left undecided.—Tr.].
To worship and to sacrifice.—The beautiful picture of Israelitish piety which we have in the following account of Elkanah and Hannah is introduced by these features as the chief and fundamental ones. The worship relates to the name of the Lord who dwells in His chosen place in the Sanctuary, and is the expression of the remembrance of this name before the Lord. The sacrifice is the embodied prayer; in the sacrifice worship is presented to the Lord as the act by which the offerer brings himself, and all that he has, to the Lord. According to the Law (Exo_23:15; Exo_34:20; comp. Deu_16:16) those who came to the Sanctuary to attend the festival were not to appear empty-handed before the Lord, but “every man shall give as he is able, according to the blessing of the Lord thy God which He hath given thee.” The לִזְבֹּחַ (“to sacrifice”) is to be understood of the Shelamim, which consisted of free-will offerings (Deu_16:10), partly from the tithes set apart for this purpose (Deu_14:22 sq.) and the first-born of cattle (Deu_15:20; Num_18:17), which were preceded by burnt offerings, (Num_10:10) and followed by joyful feasting. (Oehler, Herzog R.-E. IV. 386). With reference to this sacrificial meal, which belonged essentially to the peace-offerings (Shelamim), the whole act of sacrifice is designated by זָבַח, because this word denotes slaying with reference to a meal to be afterwards held, and the expressions שְׁלָמִים (peace-offerings) and זְבָחִים (sacrifices) are exactly equivalent, the זָבַח זֶבַח (“to sacrifice a sacrifice”) being used of the Shelamim. This peace-offering, whose performance is called זֶבַח “slaughter,” was preceded by a sin-offering and a burnt-offering, of which the former removed the alienation from God occasioned by sin, and the latter through the worship offered made the offerer acceptable in the sight of God; and thus the peace-offering was the representation and confirmation of the relation of integrity, the peaceful and friendly communion between the Lord and the man who was brought near to Him (שָׁלֵם integer fuit); comp. Oehler in Herzog 10:637, Hengstenb. Beitr. III., p. 85 sq.
To the Lord of Hosts, Jehovah Sabaoth. Elkanah draws near with worship and with sacrifice. The signification of the name יָהוֶה [Jahveh, which probably, and not Jehovah, is the correct pronunciation,—Tr.] is the ground of the worship and of the presentation of the offering. The living, unchangeable eternal God, who by His historical self-revelation as His people’s Covenant-God has prepared Himself the name by which they are to know and call Him, and by which He comes into direct intercourse with them, has thus first made possible for His people the worship and sacrifice which they are to bring to His honor, and also made it a sacred duty.
In Shiloh Elkanah brings his offering to the Lord of Hosts. Shiloh (שִׁלֹה, that is, “Rest”) lay in the territory of Ephraim, “on the north side of Bethel, on the east side of the highway that goeth up from Bethel to Shechem and on the south of Lebonah,” Jdg_21:19. Here the Sanctuary of Israel, the Tabernacle with the Ark, which immediately after the entrance into Canaan was placed in Gilgal (fifty stadia from Jordan, ten from Jericho), was located from the time mentioned in Jos_18:1 (the sixth year after the passage of the Jordan according to Joseph. Ant. 5., 1. 19), to the capture of the Ark by the Philistines. For a time only, during the Benjamite war (Jdg_20:27), the Ark was in Bethel. Shiloh was the permanent seat of the Sanctuary till the unfortunate Philistine war under Eli. And this Sanctuary was, during the whole period of the Judges up to Samuel’s time when the Ark fell into the hands of the Philistines, the only one that the people of Israel had, the national Sanctuary instituted by Moses, where men came into the presence of the Lord, where all sacrifices were offered and the great festivals celebrated, where the whole nation assembled: the dwelling, the house, the temple of God (1Sa_1:7; 1Sa_1:9; 1Sa_1:22). In regard to Shiloh as the religious centre of the people during the whole period of the Judges on account of the location there of the Sanctuary with the Ark by Joshua, see for further details Hengstenb. Beitr. [Contrib.] III., p. 52 sq. Shiloh was the home of the prophet Ahijah under Jeroboam II. (1Ki_11:12; 1Ki_11:14) and was still in existence at the time of the Exile (Jer_41:5). Jerome found there some ruins and the foundation of an altar (see on Zep_1:14). According to Robinson (3:302 sq. [Am. ed. II. 267–270]) and Wilson (The Lands of the Bible, II. 292 sq.) the ancient Shiloh is the present ruin Seilûn, whose situation answers exactly to the description in Jdg_21:19. The position of the place was such that, in accordance with its name, the Sanctuary of Israel could there have a quiet permanent place. This quiet place, situated on a hill (Psa_78:54) was the scene of the mighty revolution brought about in the history of the Theocracy by the call of Samuel to be the Prophet of God and by the overthrow of the priestly house of Eli.
Instead of “and there the two sons, etc.” (וְֹשָם שְׁנֵי בּ׳) the Sept. gives καὶ ἐκεῖ ‘Ηλί καὶ οἱ δύο υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ (“and there Eli and his two sons,” 1Sa_1:3), as if the text had read “and there Eli,” etc. (וְשָׁם עֵלִי); but this is clearly a change of the original text occasioned by the fact, which seemed strange to the translator, that not Eli but his two sons are mentioned at the beginning of the Book. This mention of the priests accords with the following narrative, which speaks of the sacrificial function, which Eli on account of age no longer discharged. Eli, though termed only priest, yet filled the office of High-priest, but had made over the priestly duties to his sons; hence it is that they, and not he, are here specially mentioned as persons who were priests to the Lord (כֹּהֲנִים ליהוה), by which it is intimated that there were others who performed this priestly service before the Lord. From the fact that only these two, with their father, are here mentioned expressly, it has been concluded that the Priesthood was numerically very meagre and simple; but this conclusion is wholly unfounded; for, on the one hand, not all the priests are mentioned here, but only the two who figure in the succeeding history and illustrate the corruption of the Priesthood, and, on the other hand, from the fact that all Israel sacrificed at the Sanctuary at Shiloh it is clear that two or three priests would not suffice for the service, comp. 1Sa_2:14; 1Sa_2:16. What a contrast is given us here in the two sons of Eli, representatives of a priesthood inwardly estranged from God and sunk in immorality, and the pious God-fearing Elkanah and his consecrated wife Hannah!
1Sa_1:4. “The day” (הַיּוֹם), that is, on the day when he came to Shiloh to sacrifice.17
That Elkanah’s sacrifice (זָבַח) was a praise or thank-offering is clear from what follows; for, according to the Law (Lev_7:15) the flesh of this offering, of which the offerer kept a part, had to be eaten on the day on which it was brought. This praise-offering or thank-offering is (Lev_7:11 sq.) the first and principal sort of the peace-offering (זֶבַח עַל־תּוֹדָה = שְׁוָמִים or זֶבַח תּוֹדת שׁ׳ 1Sa_1:13; 1Sa_1:15), the sacrifice of the thankful recognition of God’s undeserved benefits. The second sort of peace-offering is the vow-offering (נֶדֶד), which was promised when a request was made for God’s favor, and offered when it was granted; the third sort is the free-will-offering (נְדָבָה) for a special experience of God’s favor, and in a wider sense a voluntary contribution to the Sanctuary and its furniture [Exo_35:29.—Tr.].—Elkanah’s whole family took part in the feasts which he made there from the Shelamim [peace-offerings] in accordance with the provision of the Law, Deu_12:11-12; Deu_12:17-18. These meals had a joyful character, comp. Deu_12:12; Deu_16:11; Deu_27:7. In Elkanah’s household this joy was disturbed all the while by the childlessness of Hannah.
While he divided to Peninnah and her children their pieces, parts, portions of the flesh of the offering, he gave Hannah
1Sa_1:5. מָנָה אַחַת אַפָּיִם. Of the various explanations of these words (in which the אַפַּיִם makes the difficulty), only two now deserve consideration; the first (Syr., Targ., Gesen., Winer, De Wette, Bunsen, Keil [Wordsworth, Bib. Com., Cahen]) takes אַפָּיִם in the sense of “persons,” so that it would read “a, portion for two persons,” or “for persons” ([Fürst], Bunsen, that is, “a large piece”); the second (Thenius, Böttcher, “neua exeget. krit. Aehrenlese z. A. T.”, p. 85 sq.) after the Vulgate and Luther renders אַפָּיִם “sad,” or better, “displeased,” “unwilling.” Against the first explanation is the fact that the sing. אף never has the meaning “person,” nor can it be shown that this meaning belongs to the dual; it means “countenance,” but it is only by forcing that the signification “person” can thence be gotten (Keil) on the ground that לְאַפֵּי is equivalent to לִפְנֵי in 1Sa_25:23, and פָּניִם is used for “person” in 2Sa_17:11. It is, however, on linguistic grounds, better to explain the word, according to its usual signification, as expressing a displeased disposition or emotion, akin to anger. It is then to be taken adverbially (as, for example, the opposite feeling נְדָבָה, Deu_23:24; Hos_14:5) equivalent to בְּאַפָּיִם in Dan_11:20, “in anger.” In contrast with the joy which ought to have reigned undisturbed at this feast, Elkanah’s heart was full of sadness because his beloved Hannah remained without the blessing of children, while her adversary, proud of her children, vexed her with it; for childlessness was held to be a great misfortune, a reproach, yea a divine punishment (Gen_19:31; Gen_30:1; Gen_30:23). The one portion, which alone he could give Hannah, was a contrast to the many portions which he gave to Peninnah and her sons and daughters, and was, as it were, the mark of her desolate despised condition over against the fortunate and boastful Peninnah.
[It is difficult to give any satisfactory rendering of this much-disputed phrase. The word אַפַּים has only three meanings in the Old Test. (excluding this passage): 1) nostrils (Gen_2:7; Lam_4:20); 2) face (1Sa_20:41); 3) anger (1Sa_11:6). The rendering, therefore, “sadness,” “displeasure,” defended above by Dr. Erdmann, is hardly allowable. Nor does the word mean “person;” in 2Sa_17:11 (adduced by Keil) the similar word פָּנִים means not “persons,” but “presence,” and offers no support to this rendering. The Chaldee translation “a chosen portion” takes it in the sense “presence,” “a portion worthy to be set in one’s presence,” as the bread in the Tabernacle was called לֶחֶם פָּנִים “bread of presence,” “show-bread.” Another translation (mentioned by Gesenius, Thesaurus s. v.) is “one portion of faces,” that is, two slices of bread with meat between. The Syriac translation “double” is apparently based on an accidental resemblance in two words. The Sept. omits the word and renders “one portion,” but the context requires an explanatory word here. The original strictly allows only two translations, either “a portion of anger” (so Abarbanel, who speaks of two angers or griefs which Elkanah had), which seems out of keeping with Elkanah’s character, or “a portion set in one’s presence,” that is, “an offered portion,” which is jejune. In this failure of the strict rendering to make sense, it is perhaps better to conjecture a meaning “persons” for אַפַּיִם, (following Syr. and Arab.) and render “a double portion.”—TR.].
1Sa_1:6-8. Hannah, provoked by her adversary, consoled by Elkanah. Peninnah is Hannah’s adversary on account of Elkanah’s special love for the latter (1Sa_1:5); out of jealousy she is her rival. Bigamy, which is in opposition to God’s appointment, bears its bitter fruits for Elkanah and his house.—גַּס־כַּעַם “with anger (or vexation) also.” כַּעַם is not simply “vexation” in a subjective-intransitive sense, but is found also in an objective-transitive sense, as in Deu_32:27 (the wrath which the enemy produces in me) and 2Ki_23:26 (כְּעָסִים, provocations to anger, in reference to God). This last is the sense here also, and the גַּם (“also”) indicates the heaping up of anger and vexation which Peninnah occasioned in Hannah. In what sense and with what design Peninnah did this is shown by the following words (בַּעֲבוּר etc.). The word (רָעַם)in Hiph. means “to rouse, excite, put in lively motion;” here, as the context (כִּי סָגַר י׳) shows, against God; she not only held up before her her unfruitfulness, itself reckoned a reproach, but represented it also as a punishment from God, or at least as a lack of God’s favor.—In 1Sa_1:7 Elkanah cannot be taken as subject, as is done in the present pointing (יַעֲשֶׂה); for in the preceding independent sentence (1Sa_1:6) Peninnah is the subject; still less, for the same reason, can the suffix in עֲלֹתָהּ (when she went up) according to this construction be referred to Hannah. In accordance with the tenor of the narrative it is better, with Luther, De Wette, Bunsen, Thenius, to read יִעָשֶׂה and translate “and so it happened.” [Others read not so well תַּעֲשֶׂה “and so she did.”—Tr.]. The two כֵּן (so … so) correspond therefore in relation to Peninnah’s conduct, not in relation to Elkanah’s bearing towards Hannah, and Peninnah’s provocation (Keil). “So it happened (in reference to Peninnah) etc., thus she provoked her (Hannah).” The words “and she wept, etc.” (וַּתִּבְכֶּה) are referred naturally to Hannah by a sudden change of subject, which is allowable only in this understanding of the subjects from “it happened” (יֵעָשֶׂה) on.—In 1Sa_1:8 Elkanah’s consoling address is contrasted with Peninnah’s provocations. After “Hannah” the Sept. adds: “and she said, “Here am I, my lord, and he said;” but we are not to suppose (with Thenius) that the corresponding Hebrew words have fallen out of the text, for this phrase, a very common one in the circumstantial accounts of speeches and conversations, is here clearly an insertion. The attempt to give a more fitting expression to Elkanah’s feeling gives too subjective a character to this reading; and this feeling is sufficiently portrayed by the Masoretic text, in which the first three questions about the why or wherefore of her grief set it forth in a climax (weeping, not eating, grief of heart). The translation of the Sept. τί ἐστί σοι ὅτι (“what is to thee that”) does not warrant us in taking (with Thenius) for the original text the corresponding Heb. (מַה־לָּךְ בִּי) instead of “why” (לָמֶה), for, comparing it with ἱνατί [why] for the second and third “why” of the Heb., it is easily explained as a freedom of the translator. Elkanah, by the reference to himself, “am I not better to thee than ten children?” will comfort his wife for her lack of children. This supposes that she feels herself united to him by the most cordial love. We here have a picture of deepest and tenderest conjugal love. The number ten is merely a round number to express many.
IΙ. Hannah’s Prayer For A Son. 1Sa_1:9-18 a
1. First in 1Sa_1:9-11 an account is given of her prayer and vow before the Lord. The “eating and drinking” is the sacrificial meal of the whole family, at which Hannah was present, though out of sorrow she ate nothing, and at the conclusion of which she rose up in order to pray to the Lord. As it is expressly said, “she ate nothing,” and Elkanah asks “why eatest thou not?” we must not, with Luther, translate “after she had eaten,” on the groundless assumption that she had done so on Elkanah’s consoling address (Von Gerlach). The Sept. renders rightly according to the sense μετὰ τὸ φαγεῖν αὐτούς [after they had eaten], though this does not justify us (Then.) in so reading the Heb. (אָכְלָם). The passage from rose up (וַתָּקָם) to drunk (שָׁתֹה on this Inf. Abs. for Inf. Con., see Ewald, § 339 b) is to be connected with prayed, 1Sa_1:10 (וַתִּתְפַּלַּל) the latter expressing the act which followed her rising from the meal; the rest, from “Eli” to “soul” is parenthesis, which, in two circumstantial sentences, gives the ground and explanation of the following narrative. Eli’s sitting at the entrance of the Sanctuary is specially mentioned because of his after conduct to the praying Hannah; Hannah’s bitterness of soul is mentioned because it was the reason of her praying to the Lord. [The Heb. favors the translation, 1Sa_1:9, “after she had eaten … and drunk;” it may be a mere general expression, or she may have yielded to her husband’s request. There is no contradiction in this case between 1Sa_1:7 and 1Sa_1:9. See Bib. Comm. in loco.—Tr.].
In distinction from his sons, who are called “priests of the (to the) Lord” (כֹּהֲנִים לַיהֹוָה), Eli is called the priest (הַכֹּהֵן). Though called simply “the priest,” he yet filled the office of High-Priest (Aaron and Eleazar, his son, are so called Num_26:1; Num_27:2). In the beginning of the period of the Judges Phinehas, son of Eleazar, was High-Priest, Jdg_20:28. This office was bestowed not only on him, but also on his posterity, Num_25:13. At the end of the period of the Judges it is in the possession of Eli, who, however, was a descendant, not of Eleazar and Phinehas, but of Ithamar, Aaron’s fourth son. In 1Sa_2:28 the continued existence of the High-priesthood from its institution to Eli is taken for granted, and is confirmed by Jewish tradition (Josephus, Ant. 5, 11, § 5). According to this the High-priesthood continued to exist indeed in the period of the Judges, but did not remain, in accordance with the promise in Numbers 25, with “the seed of Phinehas,” but passed over to the family of Ithamar. It is not our author’s purpose to tell anything of the history of the High-priests and Judges. What he relates in the beginning of his Book of Eli and his sons serves only to illustrate the history and importance of Samuel’s call, and to show that it was a historical necessity that the reformation of religious-moral life should be undertaken by the Prophetic Order which entered with Samuel as a new and mighty factor into the development of the Theocracy over against the corrupted priesthood.—The door-post (מְזוּזָה), at which Eli sat, hardly accords with the curtain which formed the entrance to the Holy Place, except on the supposition that, after the Sanctuary was permanently fixed in Shiloh, a solid entrance-way, perhaps of stone, with doors, was built; this is favored by 1Sa_3:15, where the “doors” are presupposed by the door-post here. הֵיכַל יְהֹוָה is the Tabernacle in relation to God as King of Israel; it is his “palace” where, in His royal majesty as “King of glory” (Psalms 24), He dwells in the midst of His people, meets with them, and holds with them covenant-communion (Exo_25:8; Exo_29:45-46).—Hannah was “in bitterness of soul” (מָרַת נֶפֶשׁ) at the continuance of her hopelessness, and the vexations which she suffered from her adversary (comp. 2Ki_4:27).—Her supplication was the outpouring of her troubled soul before the Lord, and the words of the prayer (that her request for a son might be heard) were accompanied with many tears (וּבָכֹה תִבְכֶּה); that was the expression of her grief because her petitions had been hitherto unheard.
1Sa_1:11. And she vowed a vow is, as it were, the superscription and theme of the following words, which form a vow-prayer. The word here used (נֶדֶר) usually means the positive vow (Num_6:2-5 is an exception), the promise to return fitting thanks to the Lord, in case the petition is granted, by something performed for His honor or by an offering (the first ex. is in Gen_28:20-22); the negative vow, the promise to refrain from something, is אִסָּר or אֱסָר=obligatio (Num_30:3). The former is connected with the Shelamim, as here Hannah’s vow with Elkanah’s peace-offering. [For the law of vows in the case of married women, see Num_30:6-16.—Bib. Comm. in loco.—TR.]—Hannah addresses Jehovah Sabaoth in view of His all-controlling power, by virtue of which He can put an end to her disgrace. The “if” (אִם) denotes not doubt, but the certainty of the fact, that, etc. The three-fold expression: “if thou wilt look on the affliction of thine handmaid, and remember me, and not forget,” betokens in the clearest manner her confidence that God cares for her, has fixed His eyes on her person and her troubles, and characterizes the fervor and energy of her believing prayers. The thrice-repeated “thy handmaid” expresses the deep humility and resignation with which she brings her petition to the Lord. The object of her petition is male seed, a son. (אֲנָשִׁים, plural of אִישׁ comp. Ewald, § 186 f.)—[The Sept. has ἐπιβλέψῃς ἐπὶ τὴν ταπείνωσιν τῆς δούλης σου, which are the identical words of the Magnificat. He hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden (Luk_1:48). Bib. Comm. in loco.—TR.]—The vow (then I will give him, etc.) has two parts: 1) the consecration of the son all the days of his life to the Lord; she will give him to the Lord for His own, that he may serve the Lord all his life in the Sanctuary.18 The emphasis is on the words “all the days” (כָּל־יְמֵי ח׳): the son was already called and pledged as Levite to service in the sanctuary, but not till his thirtieth or twenty-fifth year, and then to periodical service; Hannah consecrates him to the Lord all the days of his life, that is, to a life-long and constant service in the sanctuary. But this is entirely independent of the second part of the vow. 2) “No razor shall come upon his head,” that is, he shall be a Nazir (נָזִירְ), one set apart to the Lord. The nazirate (nazariteship), as we see it in its representatives in the time of the Judges, Samson and Samuel, belonged to the holy institutions with which special consecration to God was connected. The Nazarite-vow belonged to the negative or abstinence-vows. According to the legal prescriptions in Num_6:1 sq. (which indeed presuppose the nazirate as a custom, and only regulate it, and affirm its importance), the characteristic marks of the Nazarite were the refraining from wine and all intoxicating drinks, letting the hair grow, and avoiding defilement by corpses even of the nearest kin. The one controlling ethical principle in these three negative prescriptions is expressed in 1Sa_1:2; 1Sa_1:5; 1Sa_1:8 : the separation or abstinence is for the Lord; the Nazir is holy to Jehovah (קָדשׁ ליהוה). To the negative element answers the positive—the special devotion and consecration of person and life to the Lord. This shows itself 1) in the abstinence from intoxicating drinks, which betokens the maintenance of complete clearness of mind for the Lord in the avoidance of sensual indulgences which destroy or hinder communion with God; 2) in avoiding contact with the dead, which sets forth the preservation of purity of life against all moral defilement, and its complete devotion to the living God, and 3) in keeping the razor from the free-growing hair, which indicates the refraining from intercourse with the world, and the consecration of the whole strength and the fulness of life, whose symbol is the free growth of hair as the ornament19 (נֵזֶר of the Lord, 1Sa_1:7) of the head. It is in keeping with the great importance which is attached (in 1Sa_1:7) to the hair of the Nazarite as “consecration (נֵזֶר) of his God upon his head,” that here this mark alone is mentioned, and Hannah thereby distinguishes her desired son as one vowed to God, see Num_6:11. Comp. Oehler in Herzog’s R.-E. s. v. Nasiräat. [A similar omission occurs in the case of Samson, Jdg_13:5, who is, however, called a Nazarite. It may, perhaps, be doubtful whether all the conditions of the Nazirate were observed in these cases. Comp. the fuller statement concerning John the Baptist, Luk_1:15. The Sept. inserts “And he shall drink neither wine nor strong drink,” plainly an addition to bring it into exacter accordance with the law in Numbers 6. It is possible that some freedom was used in making the vow, as the time was left at the option of the consecrator. Samuel was what the Talmud calls נזיר עולם, “a perpetual Nazarite.”—The preservation of the hair does not seem to symbolize withdrawal from the world; and in fact the Nazarite did not lead a secluded life. The view of Oehler, adopted above by Erdmann, that the hair represents vigor and life, is perhaps supported by the connection between the hair and strength in Samson’s case. Another view, that it symbolizes the subjection of man to God, is adopted by Baumgarten and Fairbairn; the latter refers to Paul’s teaching in 1Co_11:10. On the general subject see Smith’s Bib. Dict., Fairbairn’s Typology II. 346.—Tr.]—The nazirate is in its essential elements related to the priesthood, and represents the idea of a truly priestly life withdrawn from earthly-worldly things and devoted to God. But it has nothing in common with the priestly order as such; it was, along with that, a special temporary form of consecration to the Lord in opposition to the unholy, impure life of the world. The Nazarites were not bound to service in the sanctuary, and not all who were called to this service were Nazarites. The son whom Hannah had consecrated by her first vow to life-long service in the sanctuary she consecrated by her second to be a Nazarite for life. The latter was the condition and foundation of an all the more hearty and faithful devotion to the Lord in His sanctuary-service. The life-long nazirate, to which children could be devoted before birth, as was true here and with Samson (comp. John the Baptist), was the highest and most comprehensive presentation of that idea. This double vow of Hannah and its fulfillment gave to Samuel from childhood on the disposition of heart and direction of life towards the Lord, in which all the powers of his mind, all the striving and struggling of his inner and outer life were consecrated for the performance of the holy mission which he had received from the Lord.
2. 1Sa_1:12-13. Eli’s profane view of the condition of the praying Hannah. Her manner of praying is very distinctly described: 1) she prayed much and long, before the Lord—this marks the energy of thorough devotion and ardent piety towards God; 2) she spake to her heart (עַל is not “in,” nor is it=אֵל, Gen_24:25, where there is a similar phrase); in her prayer Hannah looked altogether into her heart, that she might obtain consolation and rest for it, and thus it was certainly in fact speaking in her heart. This marks the deep sincerity of heart, the profound concentration and emotion of soul with which she prayed; it was so intense that only her lips moved as the involuntary expression of her emotion, and her voice was not heard, which was the necessary result of the fact that her heart was turned in on itself and thoroughly immersed in God.—In contrast with this picture of the believing suppliant, Eli’s conduct is portrayed as really profane; his view of Hannah’s condition is precisely the opposite of the truth. He appears here as a very bad Judge. He judges merely from the outward appearance; he looks only at the movement of her lips (פִּיהָ), which from the Heb. expression (נָעוֹת) must have been lively; he remains fixed at the surface, while, considering the source of Hannah’s emotion, he ought to have seen the prayerful energy of her heart through the outward appearance; he passes rash judgment on her, holding her from the signs of her emotion to be a drunken woman; instead of “making the best” of what seemed to him strange, he suspiciously takes it in the worst sense, for he must have seen that Hannah came to pray, and was really praying, and need not have thought of drunkenness to explain her demeanor. There is a noteworthy irony in the fact that, while the High-priest takes her to be drunk, she has made a vow for her son which looks to the very opposite. This conduct is characteristic of Eli. With all his piety and good nature, he was lacking religiously and morally in proper earnestness and true depth and thoroughness. To the same source, his natural-fleshly disposition of heart, whence came his conduct towards his unworthy sons, we must refer his profane conduct and his so false judgment on the praying Hannah. Yet there was some ground for his hasty suspicion of Hannah in the frequent occurrence of such cases in connection with the sacrificial meals; and this points to a certain externalized and brutalized condition of the religious-moral life in the very precincts of the sanctuary under a brutalized priesthood. “Such heartfelt prayer seems not to have been usual at that time” (Bunsen).
3. 1Sa_1:14-18 a. Hannah’s conversation with Eli concerning her prayer shows again the striking contrast between Eli’s pre-judgment of her condition and her real frame of heart (1Sa_1:14-15), and Hannah’s deep heart-felt piety as the source of her supplication (1Sa_1:15-16), but brings out also Eli’s better nature, the expression of which is the wish for a blessing (1Sa_1:17-18).
1Sa_1:14. Eli sat at the door-post of the sanctuary no doubt to keep watch and prevent all things improper; but his address to Hannah shows how unworthily he did it. The question “How long wilt thou be drunken?” must have wounded her heart all the more in the sorrowful mood of her prayer, and grieved her no less deeply than Peninnah’s speech. (On the form תִּשְׁתַּכָּרִין see Ewald, § 191, and Gesen., § 47, 3). The order: “put away thy wine from thee,” that is, “take steps to get sober again,” or “go and sleep off thy debauch” (comp. 1Sa_25:37), is as rude and profane as the question—least of all becoming to, and to be expected from, a priest. Here, looking at Eli’s sons, we cannot but think of the German proverb: “The apple falls close to the tree.”20 It is the same unworthy littleness that we see in Act_2:13 (“they are full of new wine”). The Sept. has here in Eli’s interests inserted “youth, servant” (נַעַר) before “Eli,” and put the rudeness off on him; but then his dismissal must have been mentioned here, and Hannah could not have answered the servant: “no, my lord,” which words are addressed to Eli (comp. Böttch. against Thenius). To Thenius’ remark that the masoretic recension has here for unknown reasons abridged, we reply that such abridgement, which sets Eli in so bad a light, certainly cannot be regarded as probable. In reference to the “servant” of the Septuagint, the canon of criticism holds that the harder, more offensive reading is to be preferred.
1Sa_1:15 sq. Hannah’s answer is an energetic denial of Eli’s charge; in the spirited fulness of her reply, we may see something of the indignation which Eli’s unworthy speech had called forth in her heart. Her language is in part a denial of his assumption, in part an explanation of her condition of mind as the reason of her conduct in prayer; each of these parts has a three-fold expression, so that each denial answers to an explanation. First, she denies simply and sharply with “no, my lord” (לֹא אֲדֹנִי) the drunkenness imputed to her, and explains that her condition of soul is one of deep sorrow. According to the masoretic text Hannah says: “I am hard of spirit” (קְשַׁת רוּחַ). Though in Eze_3:7 the similar phrase “hard of heart” (קְשֵׁה לֵב) means “obstinate,” “stiff-necked,” yet the combination of this Adj. (קשׁה) in the signification “heavy” (Jdg_4:24 [the hand … was heavy against Jabin]; Exo_18:26) with the subst. (רוּחַ= disposition, mind, Gen_41:8; Psa_34:19 [18]) may give the signification “heavy-hearted.” It is not clear why it should sound strange (as Thenius thinks) that Hannah, in her condition, should speak of herself as heavy-hearted; the expression is so natural in reply to Eli’s outspoken suspicion, that she had dulled her mind with intoxicating drink. Hence, also, follows immediately the express denial of this suspicion. The Sept., on the other hand, has the strange expression: γυνὴ̣ ἐν σκλήρᾷ ἡμέρᾳ ἐγώ εἰμι (I am a woman in a hard day). This is based on the reading “hard of day” (קְשַׁת יוֹם), an expression which in Job_30:25 [“in trouble”] describes one who has a hard day, a hard life, is unhappy. So the Vulg.: infelix nimis ego sum, “I am very unfortunate.” Perhaps this is the original reading, as Thenius supposes. Clericus: “This reading is not to be wholly despised.”—The negation advances from the simple “no, my lord,” to the denial that there is anything in her case to produce drunkenness, that is, that she has drunk wine or any intoxicating drink (שֵׁכָר); with this denial she connects, so as to bring out a sharp contrast, the explanation and assurance that she has “poured out her soul before the Lord.” Comp. Psa_42:5 [4]: I pour out my soul in me; Psa_42:9 [8]: Pour out your heart before him; and Psa_142:3 [2]: “I pour out my complaint before him.” This expression, common in German [and English] also and Latin (fundere preces), indicates the lightening of the deeply moved, sorrowful heart by complaints, petitions, etc., before God the Lord, based on humble submission to His will and trust in His help, that is, on the opposite of the feeling which Peninnah wished to excite in Hannah (1Sa_1:6). Comp. Calvin on Psa_142:3 : “He sets the pouring out one’s thoughts and telling one’s trouble over against the confused anxieties which unhappy men nurse in their hearts, preferring to gnaw the bit rather than flee to God.” Such pouring out of the heart before the Lord witnesses for Hannah of itself against Eli’s charge of intemperance and drunkenness.—A third and still stronger denial she makes (1Sa_1:16); and this time it refers to the bad, worthless character which he had imputed to her. “Daughter of worthlessness” (on the etymology of בְּלִיַּעַל, comp. Gesen. s. v.)=bad woman. The words “count not,” etc. (אַל־תִּתֵּן etc.).cannot be explained: “Do not make me the scorn of bad women” (Clericus), but must be rendered: “Do not in thought set thy handmaiden before (לִפְנֵי) a worthless woman,” that is, let not thy handmaid be taken for a worthless woman, do not liken her to such a one. She grounds her denial of this bad opinion of her on the assurance, which answers to the two positive explanations, and forms their conclusion, that out of the abundance (רֹב) of her complaint and grief she had spoken “hitherto” (עַד־הֵנָּה), that is, as long as Eli had observed her.—Comp. Calvin ad h. I.: “Consider the modesty of Hannah, who, though she suffered injury from the High-priest, yet answers with reverence and humility.”
1Sa_1:17. Eli’s reply. Eli, as Calvin remarks, “not only insulted a feeble woman, but blasphemed against God Himself, though unintentionally.” Now he retracts his accusation; indeed, he really, though silently, accuses himself of injustice to Hannah, in that 1) he replies with the usual parting-formula “Go in peace !” and 2) he adds the wish that her request may be granted. (שֵׁלָתֵךְ is for שְׁאֵלָתֵךְ). There is no prophecy in this; it was a wish which God fulfilled.
1Sa_1:18. Hannah’s answer does not ask for his mediation (Keil), but is a respectful request that the High-priest would further grant her his favor, as he had already done (comp. 1Sa_1:26).—[There seems to be no advantage in closing this section in the middle of 1Sa_1:18. The latter part of the verse forms a fitting conclusion to the interview of Eli and Hannah, since it describes the result to Hannah of her prayer and conversation, and 1Sa_1:19 begins a new narrative, as in Eng. A. V.—TR.]
III. The Answer to the Prayer. 1Sa_1:18-20
Hannah went her “way,” namely, back to her husband. The words of the Sept.: “and she went to her inn,” and (after “she did eat”) “with her husband and drank,” are explanatory and descriptive additions to the original text: it is inconceivable why these words, if they stood in the text originally, should have been left out. [The words “and did eat” are wanting in the Syriac and Arabic versions and in five MSS. of Kennicott, and were omitted perhaps because supposed to be inappropriate; but they fitly describe Hannah’s more cheerful mood.—TR.] “And her countenance was no more to her”—that is, her countenance was no longer disturbed as before. There are similar expressions in German. Comp. Job_9:27, where, from the context, the word “countenance” (פָּנִים) is likewise to be taken in the sense “sad countenance” [“heaviness” in Eng. A. V.—Tr.].21
1Sa_1:19 describes circumstantially and vividly, almost solemnly, the return to Ramah after early worship together before the Lord. Elkanah knew his wife (יָדַע, “know,” as in Gen_4:7). “The Lord remembered her,” indicates the fulfilment of her request; the divine control, under which (1Sa_1:11) she had placed herself, is quite appropriately here again expressly mentioned. At the end of the verse the Sept. (Alex.) adds “and she conceived,” explaining and filling out the “remembered.” There is no necessity for supposing (with Thenius, following the Sept.) that this expression has fallen out of the original text, where it was a needful explanation of the “remembered,” since in the following 1Sa_1:20 the significance of the latter is expressed, though it cannot be considered a mere addition. [The change in the text of the Sept. (in the Vat., not Al.) is easily explained. The Heb. (1Sa_1:20) reads “and in the course of time Hannah conceived and bare a son.” The Greek translator stumbled at the place assigned the conceiving, and therefore changed the word from after to before the “course of time.” The difficulty is removed when we remember that “conceived and bare” as the common phrase to express the birth of a child. The other versions sustain the Heb. order of words.—Some Heb. MSS. read “in the course of a year” (so De Wette), or, as some translate, “at the beginning of the new year” (in the autumn, Feast of Tabernacles), but there is no authority for this.—Abarbanel: “At the end of a month.”—Tr.].
1Sa_1:20. “Up to the circuit or conclusion of the days or of the regular time”—that is, not “in the space of a year,” but “at the conclusion of the period of pregnancy” (Thenius), at the end of the time necessary for what is afterwards said.—“She bare a son, whom she called Samuel.” Hannah her-self gives the explanation of this name, not etymological but factual, “I asked him from the Lord.” (On the form שְׁאִלְתִּיו see Gesen. 44, 2, Rem. 2.) According to this explanation the name שְׁמוּאֵל (which belongs to two other persons only, Num_34:21; 1Ch_7:2) is formed by contraction from שְׁמוּע אֵל, the ע falling out (Ewald, Gr. § 275, A. 3). The Rabbinical derivation from שָׁאוּלמֵאֵל, whence שָׁאוּמֵאֵל and שְׁמוּאֵל is far-fetched and improbable. [That is, “ asked of God”]. The name signifies literally “heard of God,” auditus Dei. For Samuel was for his mother the sign of a special answer to prayer. Similar names of children, suggested by their mothers’ experiences at their birth, are found elsewhere, for example, in Jacob’s children (Gen_29:32 sq.; 1Sa_30:5 sq.).—The omission of “and she said” is original; the Sept. has clearly again here filled out and explained (against Thenius). Hannah’s saying, introduced without this addition, is thereby characterized as an explanation, historically handed down, of this name in reference to what preceded Samuel’s birth. [This whole incident is discussed in the Talmudical Tract “Berakoth,” fol. 31 b, but the discussion offers nothing of special value.—Tr.].
HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL22
[This is the appropriate place to introduce a brief statement of the chronological relation between the latter part of “Judges” (end of chap. 16) and the beginning of “Samuel.” We shall not attempt to discuss the various schemes of the chronology which have been presented by different writers, but merely give the biblical data for determining the chronological relations of Samson, Eli, and Samuel. The first datum is given in 1Ki_6:1, and, putting the fourth year of Solomon B. C. 1012, fixes the Exodus in B. C. 1492, the entrance into Canaan B. C. 1452, while David’s accession falls B. C. 1056. The second datum is found in Jephthah’s statement, Jdg_11:26, according to which the beginning of his judgeship falls 300 years after the entrance into Canaan, that is, B. C. 1152. From this time to the death of Abdon (Jdg_12:7-15) is thirty-one years, and Abdon’s death is to be put B. C. 1121. We have thus between the death of Abdon and the accession of David a space of sixty-five years in which to put Samson, Eli, Samuel, and Saul. It is clear that their histories must be in part contemporaneous. Eli dies an old man, while Samuel is yet a youth, and Samuel is an old man when Saul is anointed king. The following table may give approximately the periods of these men:
Samson’s Judgeship,B. C. 1120–1100Eli’s Life (98 years)B. C. 1208–1110Eli’s Judgeship (40 years)B. C. 1150–1110Samuel’s LifeB. C. 1120 (or 1130)–1060Saul’s ReignB. C. 1076–1056According to this view the judgeships of Samson and Eli were in part contemporaneous, and Samuel was twenty (or thirty) years old when Samson died, the work of the latter being confined to the west and south-west, while Samuel lived chiefly in the centre of the land. The forty years of Philistine oppression (Jdg_13:1) would then be reckoned B. C.1120–1080, reaching nearly up to Saul’s accession, and the third battle of Ebenezer would fall in B. C. 1080 when Samuel was forty years old. Hannah’s visit to Shiloh occurred about (or, a little before) the time that Samson began to vex the Philistines, but it is probable that the hostilities were confined to the territories of Judah and Dan. Partly for this reason, and partly because the history has been given already in the Book of Judges, our author does not mention Samson, whose life had no point of contact with that of Samuel, who is the theocratic-prophetical centre of the Books of Samuel. On the general subject see Herzog, Art. “Zeitrechnung (biblische”), Smith’s Dict. of Bible, Art. “Chronology,” Comm. on Judges in Lange’s Bible-work, and Smith’s Old Testament Hist., chap. 17, Note (A) and 1 Samuel 19, Note (A). But it is doubtful whether we have sufficient data at present for settling the question.—Tr.].
1. The beginning of the Book of Samuel coincides with a principal turning-point in the history of the kingdom of God in Israel, introducing us into the end of the Period of the Judges, which is to be included with the Mosaic under one point of view, namely, that of the establishment of the Theocracy on its objective foundations. The Mosaic Period of the development of the Israelitish religion—which is based on God’s revelation in the Patriarchal Period in order to the choice of the one people as the bearer of the Theocracy, first in germinal form in the family, and then in its first national development in Egypt—shows us the firm establishment of the Divine Rule, which embraced and shaped the whole life of the people, on the theocratic law-covenant, and on the word of the divine promise. The establishment of the Rule of God in His people, in their outer and inner life, in all things great and small, by means of the institution of the Law, in which His holy will is the norm for the people’s life, is the aim of the whole revelation of God in the Mosaic Period, as it appears in commandments, statutes, holy institutions, and legal principles. The land in which this God-rule in the chosen people was to reach historical form and development, was the object of the promises in the Patriarchal Period, and the period of Joshua and the Judges shows how this promise was fulfilled in the acquisition and division of the land. What sudden changes, from complete defeats to glorious victories in battle against the heathen peoples in and out of the land of promise, from divine deliverances to apparently complete abandonment by God, as a consequence of the vacillation of the people between idolatrous apostasy from the living God, and return to His help forced on them by need and misery, are exhibited in the history of the post-Mosaic times! But through all the gloom shines out continually the goal, the fulfilment of the promise of the complete possession of the land; and in the midst of the people’s sin and misery the Theocracy stands fast unshaken, with its Mosaic law controlling the popular life, and all its great objective institutions which, even in times of most wretched disorder, marked Israel as the chosen people of the living God. The Mosaic period of development of the Theocracy in Israel up to the end of the period of the Judges is therefore the time of its establishment in the chosen people by the institution of the covenant of the law and the geographical-historical realization of the idea of the Theocracy in the permanently acquired land of promise.
But now came the task of bringing the people, they being at rest and permanently fixed in Canaan, face to face with their theocratic destination and their calling (Exo_19:6) in their whole inner and outer life. The content of the revelations, which had produced the covenant of the law and the fulfilling of the promise in the Mosaic Period, was to be inwardly appropriated and become the life of the people in knowledge, heart and will. For this there was needed on God’s side the progressive realization and announcement of His counsel of revelation; and on man’s side there was the unceasing obligation to penetrate with the whole inner life, with understanding and feeling, with mind and will, into God’s revelation in law and promise, and appropriate inwardly its content. This task—the deep, inward implanting of the revelation of God in law and promise in the heart and feeling of individuals and in the life of the whole nation—could be fulfilled neither by the judges, the lives of some of whom corresponded poorly to their theocratic calling, nor by the priesthood, which showed its fall from its original theocratic elevation in the transition from the family of Eleazar to that of Ithamar and in the house of Eli, nor by the mere existence and use of the objective theocratic-historical institutions, national sanctuary, feasts, offerings. This impossibility is vividly set before us in the beginning of the Books of Samuel. But we are there at the same time pointed to the new element in the development of the Theocracy, the prophetic office, which was to be the instrument of fulfilling this task, and of realizing the idea of mediation between God and His people through their living permeation by23 His objective revelation of word and promise; so Moses, as type of prophecy, represented it. The turning-point from the Mosaic to the prophetic period of development of the Theocracy falls in the beginning of the Books of Samuel; that is, in the first years of Samuel’s life. (Comp. Oehler, Prolegom. zur Theol. des A. T., 1845, pp. 87, 88; and W. Hoffmann, Die göttliche Stufenordnung im A. T. in Schneider’s Deutsche Zeitschrift, 1854, Nr. 7, 8.) From Samuel’s time Peter (Act_3:24) dates the prophetic office; from then on the prophets, devoted to the service of the Theocracy, form a separate Order, and, as organs of God’s revelations to His people, a continuous chain. (See Tholuck, Die Propheten und ihre Weissagungen, 2 ed. 1861, p. 26.)
2. The end of the Period of the Judges, like its previous history, reveals a deep disorder of the theocratic life, which neither judges nor priests could help, because they were themselves affected by its corrupting influences, as is shown by the histories of Samson and Eli. The unimportance and weakness to which the Judgeship was fallen may be inferred from its connection with the High-priesthood in the person of Eli, the latter office having evidently passed from Phinehas’ family to Ithamar’s, contrary to the promise in Num_25:11-13, because the condition of “zeal for the Lord” was not fulfilled. And the conduct of Eli and his sons, and especially God’s judgment against his house, show how badly the High-priesthood was represented in him. The political life of the nation was crushed under the constant oppression of external enemies, the heathen nations on the east, and especially the Philistines on the west, and under internal national distraction; the tribes were at enmity with one another, did not unite against foreign foes, and could gather together “as one man” only against one of themselves (Benjamin), and that was the last time (Judges 19-21).24 And though individual men, called of the Lord to be deliverers, exerted a mighty influence on the distracted national life, yet their influence was restricted to particular tribes, and was not permanent—was always followed by a sinking back into the old wretched condition. The cause of this was the deterioration of religious life, which was wide-spread among the people; the worship of the living Covenant-God was mingled with the nature-worship of the Canaanitish nations, not all of whom were completely conquered, and especially with the Baal-worship of the Philistines; or it was suppressed by these heathen worships. Gideon’s ephod-worship (Jdg_8:27) and Micah’s image-worship (Judges 17, 18.) belonged also to this corruption of the religion of Jehovah. With this moral decline and distraction of theocratic life was connected corruption of moral life, such as we see in some parts of Samson’s history (he succumbs morally, as well as physically, to the Philistines), in the crime of the Benjamites (Judges 19), which calls forth all the rest of the nation against them in stubborn, bloody war, and in the unworthy character of the sons of Eli, who disgrace the sanctuary itself with their wickedness. The whole popular life had fallen into an anarchy in which “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Jdg_21:25).
3. The necessity for a reformation of the whole national life from within outward, that is, a renewal of the whole Theocracy on a religious-moral basis meets us at the beginning of the Books of Samuel. The holy institutions, the ordinances of divine worship, and the theocratic legislation of the Mosaic Period are present indeed in the time of the Judges (comp. the exegetical explanations). The people had their national central sanctuary in Shiloh as sign of God’s abode among His people, celebrated their festivals, and brought their offerings there. The priestly service in the sanctuary was arranged; the nazirate and the institution of holy women25 in connection with the sanctuary were the special forms of consecration of life to Jehovah’s service. It is a false view to regard the time of the Judges as a period of fermentation, out of which first arose fixed legal institutions and appointments. Rather the whole Mosaic legislation and the history of the establishment of the Theocracy on the basis of the covenant of law is in many places presupposed in the Book of Judges and in the beginning of the Books of Samuel themselves (comp. Hengst., Beitr. III. 40 sq. [Eng. transl., “Contributions to an Introd. to the Pentateuch,” Clark, Edinb.]). But it is true (as is expressly stated in Jdg_2:10 sq.), that in the religious-moral life of the people there was a general defection from the living God to strange gods. Though in particular circles and families (as Samuel’s, for ex.) there was true service of God and piety, yet the national and political life of the distracted and shattered people was on the whole not in the least in keeping with its priestly calling. The gap between the people’s religious-moral condition on the one hand, and the theocratic institutions and the demands of the divine law on the other was become so wide and deep, that a great reformer was needed, who, by special divine call and in the might of the Spirit of God, should turn the whole national life to the living God again, and make Him its unifying centre. To this need of a reformation of the Theocracy by new revelations of the covenant-God, and by the return of the covenant-people to communion with their God answered the special divine working by which the prophetic office, instead of the priesthood, was united with the true theocratic Judgeship in the mighty God-filled personality of Samuel.
4. The special divine working shows itself in the providential plan by which God chose and prepared the great instrument for leading His people into the path, in which they were to find their holy calling and merge their whole life in the divine rule and communion. The reformer of the Theocracy, the second Moses, sprang from a thoroughly pious family, faithful and obedient to the law of the Lord. In its very commencement his life is specially consecrated by the hearing which God vouchsafed to the prayer of his pious mother for a son. In the same Tribe, whence came the saviour of the people from the bondage of Egypt and the founder of the Theocracy through God’s wonderful working, and which by divine appointment represented the whole people in the Sanctuary-service, was born the man of God, who in the highest sense as Prophet of the Lord, was all his life to do priestly service in renewing the theocratic life, and restore it from its alienation from the living God to communion with Him. Specially also it was the energy and earnestness of his mother’s piety which from the first gave to this great man’s life the direction and determination by which he became God’s instrument for the regeneration of His people. Hannah, in devoting her child to the perpetual service of the Lord (thus giving Him back what her prayer had obtained from Him), did unconsciously and silently, under the guidance of the Spirit of the Lord, a holy deed, which, taken into the plan of the divine wisdom, was the beginning of that series of great God-deeds by which, through this chosen instrument, a new turn of world-historical importance was given to the history of Israel. The name which she gives her son marks him out for the people as an immediate gift of God, through which, as Calvin says, “God in His mercy ordained a reformation of His worship in the people.”
5. In Samuel’s early life we see again the importance (even for the Kingdom of God) of the theocracy of a truly pious family-life in the Old Dispensation. There were still in Israel houses and families in which the children (who, according to the Law, were not usually carried to the great feasts celebrated at the Sanctuary), were introduced to the public religious life, and accustomed to the religious service of the people; and this is a sign that, in spite of the desolation of the theocratic life and the degradation of the religious-moral life, there still lay hidden in domestic life a sound germ of true piety and fear of God. From this uncorrupted vigorous germ which appears religiously in the earnest life of prayer of the parents, and ethically in their tender, considerate conjugal love, Samuel’s life sprouts forth as a plant consecrated from its root directly to the Lord’s special service.
6. Thus the religious-moral life was not so far gone that it could not, by God’s power, produce from the narrow circle of the house and family such a person as Samuel; nor, in spite of the general depravation and disruption of the theocratic-national life, was it impossible for Samuel, as God’s instrument sprung from this soil, to find positive points of connection and a responsive receptivity for his work of reform as Judge and Prophet. The spirit which gave shape to his childhood and youth from the first moments of his life, had shown itself, sporadically it is true, yet living and powerful in individual facts in the time of the Judges (comp. Deborah’s Song, Judges 5; Gideon’s word “Jehovah shall rule over you,” Jdg_8:23; and especially the energetic reaction of the theocratic zeal of the whole people against the Tribe of Benjamin, who, contrary to the command “be ye holy,” had refused to deliver up the offenders, by whose execution evil was to be put away out of the midst of Israel, Judges 20) The prophetic reformer, called by God out of the domain of a deeply pious family-life, found in that theocratical spirit, which was concealed under the general corruption, the receptive ground on which he could plant himself in order to gather the whole people about the living God and His word, and press His revelations into their very heart and soul.
7. The divine name Jehovah Sabaoth (יהוה צְבָאוֹת), which does not occur in the Pentateuch or in the Books of Joshua and Judges, is found here for the first time, and seems to have come into general use particularly in the time of Samuel and David (comp. 1Sa_15:2; 1Sa_17:45; 2Sa_7:8; 2Sa_7:26 sq.; Psa_24:10). It seldom occurs in the Books of Kings, is found most frequently in the Prophets, except Ezekiel and Daniel, and never in Job, Proverbs, the later Psalms and the post-exilian historical books, except in Chronicles in the history of David, where it is to be referred to the original documents.—The word ‘Sabaoth’ is never found in the Old Test, alone. The Sept. sometimes gives it as a proper name, Σαβαώφ, as here, where it has also the full form κυρίῳ τῷ θεῷ (Lord God), which answers to the proper complete expression of this divine name, Jehovah God of Sabaoth (יהוה אֱלֹהֵי צְבָאוֹת comp. Amo_3:13; Amo_4:13; Amo_5:14; or י׳א׳ חַצְּבָאוֹת), of which Jehovah Sabaoth is an abbreviation.26
The signification “God of war”? (see Exo_7:4; Exo_12:41, where Israel is called “the hosts of Jehovah,” צְבָאוֹת יְהוָֹה) cannot be regarded as the original sense of this expression, though the latter includes the glory of God manifested in His victorious power over His enemies. If this were the proper and original signification, it would be inexplicable why the name is wanting precisely in the histories of those wars and battles, which were Jehovah’s own (Num_21:14), though Israel is expressly called His “hosts.” Appeal is made in support of this signification to passages like 1Sa_17:45 (God of the armies of Israel), and Psa_24:8-10, (Jehovah strong and mighty, mighty in battle); but as these phrases are attached to the name “Jehovah of Hosts,” they show (as Hengstenberg, on Psalms 24, and Oehler, ubi sup. point out) that the latter means something different, that “Jehovah of Hosts” means something higher than “Israel’s God of war.” Its meaning must be derived from Gen_2:1, where צְבָאָם “the host of them” refers properly only to “heavens”—and only by zeugma to “earth” (Oehler). Comp. Psa_33:6; Deu_4:19; Neh_9:6, where כָּל־צְבָאָם “all the host of them” refers exclusively to the heavens. “The hosts are always the heavenly hosts, not created things in general” (Hengstenberg). They are of two classes, however, the material, the stars, and the spiritual, the angels. In reference to the stars as the “host of heaven” (Psa_33:6) and the “host of God,” praise is rendered to God’s power and government of the world, by which He controls these glorious objects (Isa_40:26; Isa_45:13), against the Sabian worship of the stars as divine powers, and against the danger to which Israel was exposed of perversion to such star-worship. This danger became great enough in the Period of the Judges and in the beginning of the Kingly Period to make the supposition allowable that the expression, with the sense of opposition to idolatry, came into use at this time. In Isa_24:23 this meaning of Jehovah Sabaoth comes out unmistakably in the reference to God’s creative power which is loftier than the splendor of the stars, and in the contrast between His worship and that of the stars. The reference of the name “God of hosts” in Psa_89:8 sq. to the angels is equally certain. The angels are marshalled around Jehovah in heaven, awaiting His commands, ready to perform His will on earth, especially as His instruments for the execution of His will in grace and judgment, for the protection of His people, for the overthrow of His enemies (1Ki_22:19 sq.; Job_1:2); they go along with God in the revelation of His judicial-kingly power and glory (Deu_33:2; Psa_68:18); they form the Lord’s heavenly battle-host (Gen_32:1-2; Jos_5:14 sq.; 2Ki_6:17). By the reference to the two hosts, of stars and angels, which represent the creation in its loftiest and most glorious aspect, this expression sets forth the living God in His majesty and omnipotence over the highest created powers, who are subject to His control and instruments of the exercise of His royal might and power in the world; But God’s glory, in His majesty and power over the star-world, and in His lordship over the spirit-world which stands ready to do His bidding in the world, exhibits Him of necessity in His royal omnipotent control of the whole world; and so “Jehovah Sabaoth” means in several passages the almighty controlling world-God, who has His throne in heaven, of whose glory the whole world is full, who “is called the God of the whole earth,” who “buildeth His upper-chamber in heaven, and foundeth His arch on the earth.” So Psa_24:8-10; Isa_6:3; Isa_54:5; Amo_9:5-6. In connection with the name “Jehovah” the expression indicates, with special reference to Israel, the almighty and victorious God, who overcomes the enemies of His people and His kingdom, who is the protection and help of His people against all the powers of the world.—The name occurs frequently in connection with wars and victories, in which God helps and protects His people against hostile powers; 1Sa_15:2; 1Sa_17:45; 2Sa_7:8; 2Sa_7:26 sq.; Psa_24:10; Psa_46:8; Psa_80:8; Psa_80:15; Isa_24:21-23; Isa_25:4-6; Isa_31:4-5. This name of God, Lord of Hosts, first appears in the beginning of the Books of Samuel, near the end of the Judges, and just before the kingdom was established, and occurs most frequently in the time of the Kings; and this fact has its deepest ground herein, that during this time God’s royal power as almighty lord and ruler of the world and heavenly king of Israel first unfolded itself in all its fulness and glory—in victories over the enemies of His kingdom in Israel, in the almighty protection which He vouchsafed His people in the land of promise, and in the powerful aid which He gave them in establishing, fixing and extending the theocratic kingly power.27
8. A characteristic mark of Hannah’s sincere piety is the vow (v. 11) which she makes to the Lord. The vow, from the Old Testament-point of view, is the solemn promise by which the pious man binds and pledges himself, in case his prayer is heard or his wish fulfilled, to show his thankfulness for the Lord’s goodness by the performance of some special outward thing. Hence vows are almost always connected with petitions, though never as if they were the ground for God’s fulfilment of the request. The positive vow (נֶדֶר), the promise of a special offering as a sign of gratitude, includes also the negative element of self-denial, so far as it is a relinquishment of one’s own possessions, which are given to the Lord. This custom—namely, by a special promise making a particular act or mode of conduct a moral duty, and basing the obligation of performance not on the divine will, but on a vow made without divine direction—answers to the legal standpoint of the Old Testament and the moral minority founded on it. Forbearing to vow, was however, by no means regarded as sinful (Deu_22:22); thus not only was the moral principle of voluntariness brought out, but the idea that the vow was in itself meritorious, was excluded. The vow, as a custom corresponding to moral weakness and consciousness of untrustworthiness in obedience to the Lord, is never legally commanded, nor even advised (comp. Pro_20:25; Ecc_5:4, with Deu_23:22); but it is required that a vow made freely shall be fulfilled (Num_30:3; Deu_23:21; Deu_23:23; Psa_50:14; Ecc_5:3). But, as the hearing of a prayer is conditioned strictly on true piety, so, that a vow should be well-pleasing to the Lord, presupposes an humble, thankful soul which feels itself pledged and bound to the Lord, to devote everything to Him. The ethical idea of the vow finds its realization and fulfilment, as well as its clear and true apprehension, from the New Testament stand-point also in the vowing and dedicating to the Lord for life in baptism the personality renewed by the Holy Ghost, (who in the Old Testament also is recognized and prayed for as the source of sanctification, Psalms 51). Hannah’s vow is an analogue of Christian baptism in so far as it (the vow) consecrates the life of the child obtained by prayer wholly to the Lord for His property and for permanent service according to the stand-point of Old Testament piety, but this from the New Testament point of view comes to full truth only in the free spiritual devotion of the heart and the whole life to the Lord. [There is no warrant for introducing the lower Old Testament conception into an ordinance of the New Testament. Christian baptism, into the name of the Trinity, sets forth the free and full consecration of the believer to God, as Dr. Erdmann points out, and is no otherwise a vow, is never so spoken of in the New Testament.—Tr.].
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL28
1Sa_1:2. Holy Scripture lets us see how not merely single sins in disposition, word and deed, but also general conditions and customs which spring from sin—such as polygamy—are the object of God’s patience and long-suffering, and how there is in this no hindrance to the purposes of God’s love and wisdom, but rather all such things are overruled by Him for good. [Hall: Ill customs, where they are once entertained, are not easily discharged: polygamy, besides carnal delight, might now plead age and example; so as even Elkanah, though a Levite, is tainted with the sin of Lamech, like as fashions of attire, which at the first were disliked as uncomely, yet, when they are once grown common, are taken up of the gravest. Yet this sin, as then current with the time, could not make Elkanah not religious.—Tr.]. Cramer: God distributes His gifts in a wonderful manner, to one He gives, the other He suffers to want, Gen_29:31. Temporal gifts God gives not only to the worthy, but also to the unworthy, Mat_5:45.
1Sa_1:3. Starke: Worship stands first, to show with what devoutness and reverence he makes his offering, and at the same time that praying is better than offering. [Comp. Cornelius: “Thy prayers and thine alms,” Act_10:4.—Tr.].—The offering was the deed which established the truthfulness of the praying word. Calvin: This subject-matter of adoration is to be referred to the three following heads: first, that when about to adore God we recognize that we owe all things to Him, and in giving thanks for past blessings we implore a still further increase of His gifts, and help in difficulties and perplexities; secondly, that confessing our sins as suppliant and guilty, we pray Him to grant us true knowledge of our sins and repentance, and to have mercy on us who pray for pardon; thirdly and finally, that denying ourselves and taking His yoke upon our shoulders, we profess ourselves ready to render Him due obedience, and to conform our affections to the rule of His law and to His will alone. [1Sa_1:4. The whole family take part in the feast of the peace-offerings. So as to the idol-worship in Jer_7:18, “The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven.” Both this passage and that, as to true religion and false, may impress upon us the importance of family worship and family religion.—Tr.].
1Sa_1:4-8. Elkanah’s love to Hannah is a model of the true inner love with which husbands should not merely love their wives in general, but as regards their special troubles and sorrows, instead of being worried and vexed at them should rather feel these as their own, and with them bear in patience and gentleness whatever lies heavy upon their heart and weighs them down (1Sa_1:5), and also protect them against provocations and vexations, which in an unrighteous and ill-disposed way are inflicted upon them (1Sa_1:6-7), and refresh them with consolation and encouragement (1Sa_1:8).—[1Sa_1:5. Children were regarded as a blessing, by Hannah and the women of Israel in general (comp. Gen_30:23; Luk_1:25), and the lack of them as a sad deprivation; and the correctness of this view is distinctly confirmed by the inspired writers, Psa_113:9; Psa_127:3-5; Psa_128:3. The contrary feeling which is now so rapidly growing in America is evil, both in its causes and in its consequences. The subject would require delicate handling in public discourse, but is exceedingly important.—Tr.]. When the Lord refuses us a gift which we are begging Him to grant, and the heart is full of mourning at the deprivation, then the temptation lies near to grumble about it against the Lord and quarrel with Him. This temptation comes partly from our own heart, which is a perverse and desponding thing, and will not reconcile itself to the dispensation of the Lord; partly it comes in upon us from without, through men who by their unloving conduct excite and embitter our hearts, and infuse into them the poison of discontent with those leadings of the Lord which contradict our desire and hope (1Sa_1:6-7).—In a devout marriage the love of the one party should not merely be to the other a fountain of consolation and of quieting as to painful dispensations of the Lord, but for whatever by the Lord’s will is lacking in good fortune and joy it should seek to offer all the richer compensation (1Sa_1:8).—Every violation of the holy ordering of God upon which marriage and the family life should rest, has as a necessary consequence—as is true of bigamy here—its punishment in the grievous disorder of conjugal and domestic life, in the destruction of peace in heart and home by all manner of sins, such as envy and jealousy.—Hannah makes no reply to the bad words of her adversary, and bears her hostility with patience.—Starke (1Sa_1:7): A Christian must not requite evil with evil, railing with railing, but bear all patiently and hope in God; for His hand can change every thing (Psa_77:11 [Eng. A.V. 1Sa_1:10. Luther translates it: “But I said, I must suffer that; the right hand of the most High can change everything,” but this rendering is not authorized by the Hebrew.—Tr.]).
1Sa_1:8. Seb. Schmid: For the lack of one good, God knows how to compensate the pious by a greater and more manifest good.—J. Lange: As the marriage-bond is much closer than that between parents and children, it follows that husband and wife must hold each other nearer and dearer than all children. Each must help to bear the other’s burdens, and seek to lighten them, Gal_6:2.
1Sa_1:1-8. The priestly calling of the man in his house: 1) in the close connection of his whole house with the service in the house of the Lord (prayer and offering); 2) in the nurture and admonition of the children for the Lord; 3) in expelling and keeping at a distance the evil spirit of unlovingness and dissension amid the members of the family; 4) in the constant exhibition of faithful, comforting, helping love towards his wife.—A truly pious house is that which 1) is at home in God’s house, 2) diligently performs divine service in prayer and offering, in which 3) tender and true conjugal love dwells, and 4) the sufferings and deprivations imposed by the Lord are borne with patience and resignation.—The preservation of genuine piety amid domestic troubles: 1) in persevering prayer, when the Lord proves faith by not fulfilling particular wishes and hopes; 2) in enduring patience towards vexatious members of the family; 3) in consoling and supporting love towards members of the family who are easily assailed.
1Sa_1:9-14. Amid vexations and assaults, what should impel us to prayer? 1) The certainty that if men do us hurt, it does not occur without Divine permission. 2) The feeling that even the best human consolation cannot satisfy the heart which thirsts to be consoled. 3) Firm confidence in the help of the Lord, who in His faithfulness will help and in His power can help, when men will not help or cannot.—[Chrysostom: When standing to pray she did not remember her adversary, did not speak of her revilings, did not say, “Avenge me of this vile and wicked woman,” as many women do; but not often remembering those reproaches, she prayed only for things profitable to herself. This do thou also do, O man—do not pray against thy enemy, but beseech God to put an end to thy despondency, to quench thy grief. By so doing this woman derived the greatest benefits from her enemy. For her enemy contributed to the bearing of the child. And how, I will tell. When she reproached her and made her distress greater, from the distress her prayer became more intense, the prayer drew God’s favor and made Him consent, and so Samuel was born. So then if we be watchful, not only will our enemies be unable to do us hurt, but they will even bring us the greatest benefits, making us more zealous towards every thing.—TR.].—The prayer of faith in heart-grief and trouble: 1) Its nature is that the heart (a) weeps itself out before the Lord, to whom tears wept before Him are well-pleasing, (b) pours out all its sorrow before the Lord, who wishes us to cast all outward cares upon Him; 2) Its reliance is (a) on the power of the “Lord of Sabaoth” to help, (b) upon His faithfulness, wherein He knows the special grief and woe of His children, and does not forget them; 3) It leads (a) to a firm hope that the request will be heard and granted, (b) to a joyful vow, that what the Lord graciously gives shall be thankfully given back to Him.—What parents, especially mothers, so rear their children as to honor and please the Lord? Those who 1) bear them, from the beginning of their life, prayerfully on the heart, 2) devote them, for their whole life, as an offering to the Lord.—The highest appreciation of children’s souls consists in 1) regarding them as a gracious gift from the Lord, and 2) designing them as a grateful gift to the Lord.—[Hall: The way to obtain any benefit is to devote it, in our hearts, to the glory of that God of whom we ask it: by this means shall God both pleasure His servant, and honor Himself.—Tr.].
1Sa_1:12. Starke: A devout prayer must proceed from the very bottom of the heart, and may be offered without outward words as with them, Psalm 19:15 [Psa_19:14]; Psa_27:8; Psa_62:9 [Psa_62:8], Isa_29:13-14.
1Sa_1:13-14. A Christian should not be too swift in judging, Luk_6:37; 1Co_4:5; Pro_17:27. Even upon pious or innocent people there are often many unjust judgments passed. J. Lange: We must be very careful in deciding from appearances, lest we sin against our neighbor, Act_2:13. Even pious teachers may err and mistake in judging their hearers, and regard some as ungodly who are truly pious.
1Sa_1:15. Cramer: He who is reviled, let him revile not again, but save his innocence with mild words, Rom_12:17. [Chrysostom speaks eloquently of the fact that Hannah did not scornfully neglect, and did not bitterly resent, the unjust accusation.—Tr.].—Prayer serves to lighten the heart; well for thee, O soul, if thou often seekest thus to lighten it, Psa_42:5 [4]; Psa_62:9 [Psa 62:18].
1Sa_1:17. Osiander: God is certain to hear our prayer, proceeding from true faith, and if He does not help us at all according to our will and as seems good to us, yet this is done for our best good, as He knows that it is most profitable for us.—When one has erred he should confess it, and also recall his error.—[Hall: Even the best may err, but not persist in it. When good natures have offended, they are unquiet till they have hastened satisfaction.—Tr.].
1Sa_1:18. J. Lange: It is a property of faith that it makes the heart happy and joyous for everything.
1Sa_1:19. Starke: A Christian must not only pray, but work; both bring blessings, Psa_128:2.—Cramer: Although God never forgets His own, yet He often acts as if a stranger, Psa_13:2 [1]; Jer_14:8; Son_2:9.—Starke: When pious parents receive their children with calling on God and in His fear, then is every child a Samuel.—Osiander: When we have received a benefit from God, we should not forget gratitude to Him.
1Sa_1:12-20. The fervent prayer of troubled souls: 1) measures itself not by time, but exalts the soul above time into eternity; 2) troubles itself not about human observation and judgment, but is a pouring out of the heart before the living God; 3) suffers not itself to sink into grief and sorrow, but has for its fruit a joy given by the Lord.—Defence against unjust accusations: 1) For what purpose? As a tribute to truth, for the honor of the Lord, for the maintenance of our own moral worth; 2) In what manner? In quietness and gentleness without sinful passion, in humility and modesty; 3) By God’s help, with what result? Convincing the accusers of their wrong, changing their bad words into blessings, lightening our own heart of a heavy load.—The naming of children no indifferent matter for pious parents: Thankfully regarding the grace of the Lord, who has given them; 2) Earnestly regarding the destination for the Lord, to whom they are to lead them.
Footnotes:
[1][1Sa_1:1. The ו, being a part of the introductory narrative-formula, and not a connective with some other narrative, is better rendered by the presentative “now” than by the connective “and;” and is best omitted entirely.—Tr.].
[2][1Sa_1:1. Vat. has Σιφά, which points to צוּפִי “a Zuphite;” Targ. renders “of the disciples of the prophets,” Pesh. “from the hill of the watchers,” both of which point to the present text, but are not probable translations.—Tr.].
[3][1Sa_1:3. It is not said that these were the only priests.—Tr.].
[4][1Sa_1:5. See Notes, in loco.—Tr.].
[5][1Sa_1:6. It was over this that the adversary designed to make Hannah fret.—Tr.].
[6][1Sa_1:7. The verb is probably to be pointed יֵעָשֶׂה.—Tr.].
[7]1Sa_1:9. The Infin. refers here rather to Hannah.—Tr.].
[8][1Sa_1:9. חֵיכָל is not necessarily “temple,” but any large structure.—Tr.].
[9][1Sa_1:13. The Heb. inserts the pron. הִיא “she,” but our Eng. does not well permit it.—Tr.].
[10][1Sa_1:16. בְּלִיַעַל “worthlessness” should not be rendered as a proper name in O. T.; Eng. A. V. frequently renders “sons of B.” by “ungodly” or “wicked.”—Tr.].
[11][1Sa_1:18. See Notes.—Tr.].
[12][In the German “exegetische erläuterungen,” “exegetical explanations.”—Tr.].
[13][So Josephus; but the text of Erdmann has Ramathaim.—Tr.].
[14][That is, it was not necessary to drive the animals thither beforehand, since, the distance being so small, they could be sent for when needed.—Tr.].
[15][The difficulties in the way of identifying Ramathaim (-Zophim) on the supposition that it is the same with “this city” (1Sa_9:6) are almost insuperable. The conditions to be met are 1) the place is in Mt. Ephraim; 2) it is apparently south of Rachel’s tomb (1Sa_10:2); 3) it was Samuel’s residence Ramah. They decide the question against Er-Ram, which is north of Rachel’s tomb. The only solution is that which rejects the above supposition. If the city in which Saul was anointed was some other place, or Saul’s residence at that time was not Gibeah, then Er-Ram may be Ramah, and in other respects this answers better than any other place to the circumstances. But the question must be regarded as undecided. See Stanley’s “Sinai and Palestine,” Note to 1 Samuel 4, and Mr.Grove’s Articles (“Ramah,” “Ramathaim”) in Smith’s Dictionary, with Dr. Wolcott’s additional remarks.—Tr.].
[16]The addition of the Sept. ἐξ ’Αρμαθαίμ does not warrant the supposition that the corresponding Heb. expression has fallen out after מִעִירוֹ, but seems to be an explanation of the translator.—מִיָּמים י׳ not “at his usual time” (Luther), nor “statutis diebus” but “from year to year,” yearly (Exo_13:10), comp. 1Sa_2:19; היּמים זֶבַח “the yearly offering.”
[17][The phrase וַיְהִי הַיּוֹם means “once,” or “it happened once,” the Heb. using the Def. Art. (because the day is defined by what follows) where we use an indefinite phrase. See 2Ki_4:8; 2Ki_4:11; 2Ki_4:18.—Tr.].
[18][This local service promised by the mother was afterwards interrupted, chiefly by the call of Samuel to higher duties as prophet. To the mother the Sanctuary-service seemed the best pursuit of life; but God had something better for the son. Yet Hannah’s devout spiritual purpose is maintained in her son’s life.—Tr.]
[19][This word נור in Num_6:7 means “consecration,” not “crown,” or “ornament.” The root (Arab. nadhara) means to “set,” “impose,” and thus is applied to setting apart the Nazir, or to setting a crown on the bead of a priest or king.—Tr.]
[20][Equivalent to the Eng.: “ Like father, like son.”—Tr.]
[21][So the Vss.: Chald. “bad countenance;” Syriac “disturbed count.;” Vulg. “in diversa mutati;” Arab. “changed on account of the reproach of her rival;” Sept. “her countenance no longer fell.”—Tr.]
[22][The German is “Reichsgeschichtliche und biblisch-theologische Ausfilhrungen,” literally “theocratic-historical and biblical-theological developments (or comments”).—Tr.].
[23][Germ: durch das Flüssigwerden seines objectiven Offenbarungswortes, etc.—Tr.]
[24][This civil war occurred, however, soon after Joshua, since Phinehas, grandson of Aaron, was then High-priest (Jdg_20:28); whether there was afterwards a general national uprising, we do not know.—Tr.]
[25][See note on 1Sa_2:22.—Tr.]
[26]And as the combination אֱלֹהִים צְבָאוֹת is not unfrequent (Psa_59:6; Psa_80:5; Psa_80:8; Psa_80:15; Psa_84:9) and in the mas. text the יהוה, when אדני precedes, never has the points of אֲדנָי but always of אֱלֹהִים—and further as the word יהוה as a proper name cannot be construed with a Gen.—the combination יהוה צְבָאוֹת is not to be taken as stat. const., but as a breviloquence or ellipsis, the general notion “God” being supplied from the proper name Jehovah. So (against Gesenius and Ewald) Oehler in Herzog s. v., Hengstenberg, Christologie I. 436 sq. [Eng. tr. I. 375] and Keil, Comm. 16 [Eng. trans. p. 19]. See Smith’s Bib. Dict., Am. ed., Tsebaoth.—Tr.].
[27][For a good exposition of “Jehovah Sabaoth,” see Plumptre’s “Biblical Studies.”—Tr.].
[28][In the German literally “Homiletical Hints.”—Tr.]
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv1–2 1. Ramathaim-Zophim — The name means, the double height…
1. Ramathaim-Zophim — The name means, the double height of the watchers, and was probably so called because of two heights on which the city stood, or with which it was in some way associated. Some scholars are inclined to identify it with the modern Soba, some seven miles west of Jerusalem; but their opinion is based on the assumption that it is the same city where Saul was anointed, (1Sa_9:6,) an assumption that has no sufficient support. A comparison of this verse and 1Sa_1:3 with 1Sa_1:19 and with 1Sa_2:11, makes it certain that Ramathaim-Zophim is the same as Ramah, but a fuller form of the name. Ramah was situated about five miles north of Jerusalem, and was not only the birthplace of Samuel, but his home through life, (1Sa_7:17,) and the place of his death and burial. 1Sa_25:1. The Hebrew name of this place, as well as its modern Arabic name er-Ram, means the height, and this may explain the appended name Zophim, which means watchers, for the heights of Ramah would afford a fitting station for watchmen, who could from its heights command a wide prospect on every side, and see at a great distance any signal of danger or alarm that might be given. Compare “the field of Zophim on the top of Pisgah.” Num_23:14. Others think that Zophim was the name of the country round Ramah, called after Zuph, one of Elkanah’s ancestors. Hence “land of Zuph” in 1Sa_9:5.
Mount Ephraim — See note on Jdg_17:1.
Read full note →
Son of Jeroham — A comparison of this genealogy with 1Ch_6:34-35, shows that Elkanah (and therefore Samuel) was a descendant of Levi through Kohath. No other special notice is taken of Samuel’s Levitical descent, because his work and authority as Reformer and Judge in Israel were not owing to this fact, but, rather, to his special divine call from the Lord.
An Ephrathite — Grammatically, this word is in apposition with a certain man, that is, Elkanah. He was reckoned as to his civil standing with the tribe of Ephraim, for the Levites, having been set apart to the service of the sanctuary, had no separate portion of the Promised Land assigned to them, (Jos_14:4,) but were reckoned to the tribes in which they had their homes. Ten cities were allotted to the children of Kohath, in the tribes of Ephraim, Dan, and Manasseh. Jos_21:5.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv1–2
THE
FIRST BOOK OF SAMUEL,
Read full note →
OTHERWISE CALLED,
THE FIRST BOOK OF THE KINGS
Ch. 1Sa_1:1-8. Elkanah’s household and devotion
1. Now] And. The conjunction implies that the book of Samuel is a continuation of the history contained in the book of Judges which it immediately follows in the order of the Hebrew Bible, Ruth being placed among the Hagiographa.
Ramathaim-zophim] The name Ramathaim (= “the two heights”) is found here only, and is no doubt another name for Ramah (= “the height”) the birthplace (1Sa_1:19), residence (1Sa_7:17), and burial-place (1Sa_25:1) of the prophet Samuel. Its site “is the most disputed problem of sacred topography.” Probably it is to be placed either (a) at Er-Ram, a conical hill about 5 miles due north of Jerusalem, in which case it will be identical with Ramah of Benjamin (Jos_18:25): or (b) at Neby Samwil (= “the prophet Samuel”) a conspicuous eminence 5 miles N. W. of Jerusalem, on which is still shewn the traditional tomb of Samuel: or (c) at Ram Allah, east of Beth-horon on the western slopes of Mount Ephraim.
The epithet Zophim distinguishes the town from others of similar name, as Ramathaim in Zuph (1Sa_9:5), a district probably named after Elkanah’s ancestor, Zuph or Zophai (1Ch_6:26).
Ramathaim is possibly the same as Arimathaea in the N. T. The form Armathaim in which it appears in the LXX. gives the link of connexion between the names.
of mount Ephraim] The central mountainous district of Palestine, in which the tribe of Ephraim settled (Jos_17:15), was “a good land.” The limestone hills are intersected by fertile valleys, watered by innumerable fountains, and still remarkable for their fertility. See Stanley’s Sinai and Palestine, p. 229, ff. The name extended southwards to the territory of Benjamin in which Ramah lay. Thus Deborah’s palm tree was “between Ramah and Bethel in Mount Ephraim” (Jdg_4:5).
Elkanah] In 1Ch_6:22-28; 1Ch_6:33-38, Samuel’s descent from Kohath the son of Levi is given at length. Shemuel in 1Ch_6:33 is the Hebrew form of the name for which the E. V. usually substitutes the Latinized form Samuel. The discrepancies in these genealogies may be partly due to corruptions of the text, partly to the same individuals bearing different, though in some cases synonymous, names.
an Ephrathite] The Levite Elkanah is called an Ephrathite, i.e. Ephraimite, because his family had originally belonged to the Kohathite settlements in the territory of Ephraim (Jos_21:20). It is suggested in the Speaker’s Commentary, that as Salmon, the 7th from Judah, entered Canaan with Joshua, Zuph, who was the 7th from Levi, according to the genealogy in 1 Chr., may very probably have lived at the time of the settlement of the land. The genealogy would naturally stop with the first settler in Canaan, who gave his name to “the land of Zuph” (1Sa_9:5). If so, we must suppose that he at once migrated from the residence assigned him in the tribe of Ephraim.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv1–2 (1) Now there was a certain man.—Literally, And there…
(1) Now there was a certain man.—Literally, And there was, &c. These introductory words do not signify that this history is the continuation of the Book of Judges or of any preceding writing. It is a common historical introductory formula. We find it at the commencement of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 Kings, Esther, Ezra, Ezekiel, &c. The circumstances under which this record was probably compiled are discussed elsewhere.
Of Ramathaim-zophim.—The name Ramathaim—literally, The Two Ramahs—is the dual of the well-known Ramah, the appellation by which this city is usually known. The old city was, no doubt, built on two hills, which looked one on the other: hence perhaps the name Zophim, the watchers. Possibly at an early date watch-towers or outlooks, to enable the citizens to guard against surprise, were built on the summit of these hills. Either of these suppositions would account for the suggestive name by which Ramah was once known, the “Ramahs of the Watchers.”
Read full note →
Others would connect the appellation “Zophim” with the family of Zuph, from whom Elkanah descended. (See 1Ch_6:35, and 1Sa_9:5, where the land of Zuph is mentioned.) An interesting. though fanciful, derivation refers Zophim, watchers, to the “prophet-watchmen” of the house of Israel, as Ramah in after years was a school of the prophets.
On the whole, the simplest and least strained explanation is the one given above, which refers the name to the hills so placed that they watched one another, or better still, to the watch-towers built at an early date on the two summits.
Ramah lay among the mountains of Ephraim, which extended into the territory of Benjamin, in which tribe the city of Ramah lay.
His name was Elkanah.—Elkanah, the father of the future prophet-judge, was a Levite of the family of Kohath (compare the genealogy given here with 1Ch_6:22). He is here termed an Ephrathite: that is, an Ephraimite, because, as far as his civil standing was concerned, he belonged to the tribe of Ephraim.
Some have found a difficulty in reconciling the Levitical descent of Samuel with his dedication to the Lord by his mother, supposing that in the case of a Levite this would be unnecessary; but the dedication of Samuel, it should be remembered, was a life-long one, whereas the Levitical service only began when the Levite was twenty-five years old; and even then the service was not continuous.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv1–2 THE GENEALOGY AND BIRTHPLACE OF SAMUEL (vers. 1-8)
THE GENEALOGY AND BIRTHPLACE OF SAMUEL (vers. 1-8)
There was a certain man of Ramathaim-Zophim. Though Samuel belonged to the tribe of Levi, yet no special mention is made of the fact, because he owed his importance and rank as a judge not to his Levitical origin, but to the gift of prophecy, which was independent of the accidents of birth and station. In the First Book of Chronicles, ch. 6., his parentage is twice given, that in vers. 22-28 being apparently the family genealogy, while that in vers. 33-38 was probably taken from the records of the temple singers, sprung from Heman, Samuel"s grandson. (1Ch_6:33) His name there appears as Shemuel, our translators not having perceived that it is the same as that for which elsewhere they give the familiar rendering, Samuel. The variations Elkanah, Jeroham, Elihu, Tohu, Zuph; (1Sa_1:1) Elkanah, Jeroham, Eliab, Nahath, Zophai; (1Ch_6:26, 1Ch_6:27) Elkanah, Jeroham, Eliel, Toah, Zuph (ibid. vers. 34, 35), are interesting as showing that the genealogies in Chronicles. were compiled from family documents, in which, as was usual in the case of proper names, there was much diversity of spelling, or possibly of interpreting the cumbrous signs used for letters in those early days. The variations, however, in Elihu (God is he), Eliab (God is Father), and Eliel (God is God) were probably intentional, as were certainly other changes in names, such as that of Ishbaal into Ishbosheth. The name of Samuel"s father, Elkanah (God is owner), is a common one among the Kohathites, to which division of the sons of Levi Samuel belonged.
Read full note →
The prophet"s birthplace was Ramathaim-Zophim, no doubt the Ramah which was Samuel s own head-quarters; (1Sa_7:17 1Sa_15:34 1Sa_16:13 1Sa_19:18-23 1Sa_25:1) the place where he dwelt, wrought, died, and was buried, and the Arimathsea of the Gospels. The Septuagint generally gives the name in full, but this is the only place where it is so written in the Hebrew.
Ramah signifies a height, and the dual Ramathaim the double height, the town being situated on a hill ending in two peaks. But which it was of the many Ramahs, or hill towns, in the Holy Land, is hotly contested; probably it was the Ramah in Benjamin, about two hours" journey northwest of Jerusalem. Its second name, Zophim, is taken from Zuph, Samuel"s remote ancestor, with whom the genealogy here begins. Zuph had apparently emigrated from Ephraim, one of the three tribes (Ephraim, Manasseh, Dan) to which the Kohathites were attached, and was a person of sufficient power and energy to give his name to the whole district; called the land of Zuph in 1Sa_9:5. His descendants, the Zophim, had Ramah as their centre, and Elkanah, as their head, would be a man of wealth and influence. Though actually belonging to the tribe of Benjamin, Ramah is said to be upon Mount Ephraim, because this limestone range extended to and kept its name almost up to Jerusalem (see Jud_1:4:5, and 2Ch_13:4 2Ch_15:8, compared with 13:19). Elkanah too is called an Ephrathite, i.e. an Ephraimite, no doubt because before Zuph emigrated the family had belonged to Ephraim, it being apparently the practice to reckon Levites as pertaining to the tribes to which they were attached. (Jud_1:17:7) The Hebrews Ephrathite is rightly rendered Ephraimite in Jdg_12:5, and should be so translated here, and in 1Ki_11:26. In Rth_1:2; 1Sa_17:12 it means Bethlehemite, that town being also called Ephratah, the fruitful; Ephraim has the same meaning, but being a dual, no adjective can be formed from it.
Vers. 1-3.
Transitions.
The main facts implied or expressed in this section are
1. A state of national degeneracy.
2. A scarcity of spiritual illumination.
3. A family morally imperfect and troubled, yet rigidly observant ofreligious duties.
4. A Divine will using that family for the further unfolding of Messianicpurposes.
I AN UNBROKEN CONTINUITY runs through the revelations of the Old Testament, analogous to that of the physical order and the education of the individual. It is only ignorance of the Bible that can suppose it to be destitute of the unity in variety which is known to characterise the material creation. Separate books, like diverse strata in the crust of the earth, are preliminary to what is to follow; and the character of the events recorded, and the condition of morality and religious light referred to, must be considered as related to the one general purpose. Sometimes the transition seems to be sudden and abrupt, and a totally new set of subjects appears; but, as in the reference here to a "certain man," whose life was chiefly spent during the era covered by the latter part of the Book of Judges, so generally connecting links may be found.
II THE CONSERVATION AND DISCIPLINE OF THE CHOSEN RACE are subservient to the development of the Divine purpose in Christ. History is the basis of revelation. Man is not to be saved by abstract truth, but by an historical Christ. The historical Christ is to appear in the "fulness of time," not from the skies, but from a human line well authenticated. Human factors are the transitory element in the Divine unfolding of salvation in Christ. That God should use men, during a long succession of ages, as the channel through which his mercy should embrace all the world, is as natural and reasonable as that he should perfect his will in the beautiful order of the earth by a long series of changes in crude material elements. God did not make imperfect men perfect in order to use them; but showed his wisdom in training and holding together the chosen race just as they were. Degenerate as they were during the period of the Judges, they were not cut off forever, but chastened and quickened. Thus the process was continued, until the purpose was ripe for the appearing of the Christ, and his proper identification, by the combination of history and prophecy.
III THE FORM AND DEGREE OF REVELATION vouchsafed to an age are largely dependent on the ideas and moral character previously attained to. Man at first entered on life devoid of ancestral literature; and so Adam"s descendants, in succeeding ages, inherited less of knowledge and experience in proportion as they were nearer to the founder of the race. It is not wise to import our modern ideas into the minds of those who, in the days of Jacob, Moses, and the Judges, had not been fashioned by our inheritance of knowledge. The devout men and women of Elkanah"s time, having acquired knowledge of the existence of hosts of intelligent beings, took a wider conception of God"s sovereignty (vers. 3, 11) than was possible to men of an earlier age. God conveyed truth in so far as men were able to bear it. It would be as unnatural for Isaiah"s lofty teachings to follow at once on the scanty illumination of the era of the Judges, as for philosophical conceptions to be set before children. Divine wisdom shines through the graduated teaching of Israel"s history. (Mat_19:7, Mat_19:8)
IV THE EDUCATION OF A PEOPLE, with ulterior view to the world"s instruction, by provisional, not final truth, necessitates eras of transition. All through the ages God was educating a race for the benefit of the world; and, as education means steady development, widening vision, the elements of things would form the staple of early teaching. Times came when a new feature had to be introduced, and early arrangements to give place to something more suited to the wider truth to be taught. The occasional vision and message, suited to patriarchal life, were followed by the systematic symbolism and rigid rules appropriate to national consolidation under Moses. The casual illumination of the Judgeship, also, yields to the more steady teaching and guidance of the prophetic schools inaugurated by Samuel. Later on, the early dawn of the prophetic ages gives place to the "dayspring" which reveals the Sun of righteousness. As in nature, so in revelation, stage succeeds stage; transitions are according to law.
V THE INSTRUMENTS FOR EFFECTING A TRANSITION are duly chosen, and are silently, unconsciously prepared for their work. The world little knew of the germinal Divine purpose working out in an obscure home of Mount Ephraim; nor did the "certain man" know how the conflicting elements in his home were being graciously over ruled to the development of a piety not surpassed in Old Testament history, and the sending forth of one who should be a blessed forerunner of One greater still. Germs of future good lie in undreamed of places and persons. Out of the vast storehouse of the universe the all-gracious God is constantly preparing some new channel of good to his creatures. In the scattered villages and towns of the land there are being nurtured, unconsciously, the lives that in days hence shall be foremost in the Redeemer"s host. "Little Bethlehem," and the lowly Joseph and Mary, were in reserve for the greatest of events. Any new advances to be made by the Church in the future are sure to be provided for by chosen men, possibly unknown to the world, and silently trained by Providence for their work.
VI PERSONS, PLACES, AND EVENTS, IN THEMSELVES OBSCURE, BECOME IMPORTANT when associated with the unfolding of high spiritual purposes. It was the connection of Samuel with Christ"s glorious kingdom that linked a "certain man" and his wife with the same, and so raised them from obscurity. Spiritual uses give real value to things. The frail and insignificant becomes enduring and important when blended with the interests of the "kingdom that cannot be moved." Every member of Christ"s body is precious to him. Names are recorded in heaven which enter on no earthly roll. The life and spirit of every lowly Christian are known by God to exercise a widespread, abiding influence in the invisible sphere. As the kingdom is to be eternal, so, whatever part each one may take in its unfolding, that item will be saved from the transitoriness and oblivion of other toil. Fame in the world is not the criterion and measure of real usefulness. The chief concern should be so to live as to be, in some form, useable by God for advancing the glory of Christ. All are morally great when employed in his service to the full extent of their capacities.
VII A DILIGENT USE OF SUCH LIGHT AS IS BESTOWED, especially in degenerate times, may qualify even obscure men for rendering important service. The family religion of a "certain man" bore its fruit. The moral ground of usefulness lies in character, and character is spiritually strong in so far as improvement is daily made of privileges, however few they may be. Men"s fitness to confer benefits on the world is more connected with a wise use of what they have and know, than with the absolute possession of knowledge. A little goodness, and a humble routine of devotion in a dark age, shines the brighter because of the surrounding gloom. From the ranks of pious men in modern times, who cared for piety at home, there have gone forth many sons distinguished for service in the Church of God. It is worthy of note how fixed ordinances and seasons of Divine worship nourish whatever of piety may be struggling here and there against degenerate manners and official corruption. The usual services of the tabernacle and the recurring festivals, though despised and profaned by many, furnished comfort and cheer to the faithful few. In spite of unworthy priests, God is found in his courts by all who seek him.
HOMILIES BY B. DALE. Vers. 1-8. (RAMAH.)
A Hebrew family.
The family is a Divine institution. It is the most ancient, most needful, and most enduring form of society; and, in proportion as it accords with the plan of its original constitution, it is productive of most beneficent effects, both temporal and spiritual, to the individual and the community. In times of general laxity and anarchy it has been, in many instances, a little sacred islet of purity, order, and peace, and nurtured the elements out of which a better age has grown. The real strength of a nation lies in its domestic life, and Israel was in this respect eminent above all other ancient nations. Even in the days of the judges, when "there was no king in Israel," and "every man did that which was right in his own eyes", (Jud_1:21:25) there were many godly families scattered through the land. One of these was that which gave birth to SAMUEL, the last of the series of the judges, the first of the order of the prophets, and the founder of the Hebrew monarchy. This family is introduced with a brief description (vers. 1, 2). The residence of the family was Ramah (the Height), or, more fully described, Ramathaim (the Two Heights). Here Samuel was born and nurtured; had his permanent abode during the latter portion of his life; died, and was buried. There is not a more sacred spot on earth than the home which is endeared by tender association and religious communion.
A spot of earth supremely blest; A dearer, sweeter spot than all the rest.
"Things are not to be valued on account of places, but places for the good things which they contain" (Bede). "God chooses any common spot for a mighty incident or the home of a mighty spirit." Consider the family as
I ORDERED BY A GODLY HEAD (ver. 3). His piety was shown
1. By his regular attendance on Divine ordinances. He worshipped "the Lord of hosts," not Baalim and Ashtaroth; (1Sa_7:4) in the way of his appointment, at the tabernacle in Shiloh, at the proper season, and with the prescribed sacrifices; not according to his own reason or inclination merely, a will worship which is not acceptable to God.
2. By his sincere and spiritual service, in contrast to the formal, worthless, and hypocritical service of others, especially the sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, (1Sa_2:12) and undeterred by their evil conduct in the priestly office.
3. By his faithful performance of his vows (ver. 21).
4. By his conversation and prayer in his own house (ver. 23).
5. By his conducting all the members of his family to "the house of the Lord" (ver. 7), in the exercise of his parental authority, accompanied by instruction and example. The words of the Law of Moses were evidently familiar to him, (Deu_6:6-9) and happy is the family in which they are obeyed.
II UNITING IN SOCIAL FESTIVITY (vers. 4, 5). Once a year he took his journey, in company with his family, from Ramah to the central sanctuary of the Divine King of Israel, for the twofold purpose of worshipping (lit., bowing down) and sacrificing before Jehovah. The sacrifice he offered was a peace offering, (Deu_27:7) in which, when the animal was killed, the priest received its breast and right shoulder as his lawful portion, whilst the rest was given back to the worshipper that he and his family might feast on it before the Lord. Their festivity was
1. Religious. It was the festivity of those who were received into communion with God. They were guests at his table, and overshadowed by his presence. It is said of the elders of Israel that they "saw God, and did eat and drink". (Exo_24:11) And if no such visible sign of his glory now appeared, yet their consciousness of his presence (according to his promise, and symbolised by the ark of the covenant) would give solemnity to their repast, and prevent improper indulgence and revelry, which were but too common in this corrupt time (ver. 14; Jud_1:21:19, 21) Itshould ever be the same when Christians join in social festivity.
2. Joyous. (Deu_12:12 Deu_16:11) Its religiousness did not detract from its gladness, but made it pure, elevating, and refreshing. "The joy of the Lord is your strength.
3. Participated in by the whole family, children as well as adults. As the fathers the women and the children took part in idol feasts, (Jer_6:18) so they should take part in "feasting before the Lord.
4. It also called forth expressions of affection (ver. 4). The kindness of God to all should lead to kindness one toward another, and the example of kindness set by the head of the family should be followed by all its members. Even the ordinary family meal may and ought to be such a scene of sacred festivity, but the highest realisation of it on earth is in "the Lord"s Supper". (1Co_11:20) And how great is the blessing which rests upon the family, all the members of which partake together of the "cup of blessing," and are "all partakers of that one Bread.
III DISQUIETED BY DOMESTIC TROUBLE (vers. 5-8). It was natural that Hannah should feel disappointed at being childless. Her condition was deemed a reproach, and a sign of Divine displeasure. But her grief arose chiefly from the conduct of her rival, Peninnah. There was thus an element of discord and trouble in the family. This trouble
1. Existed where it might have been least expected. The family was distinguished by earthly prosperity and genuine piety. But what home is there on earth wholly free from trouble? Beneath the fairest appearances there is seldom wanting a cause of disquiet, to check self-complacency and teach the soul its true rest.
2. Was occasioned by want of conformity to a Divine ordinance. The introduction of a second wife by Elkanah was not according to the Divine appointment "in the beginning" (Gen_2:24; Mal_2:15; Mat_19:4) The violation of that appointment had taken place at an early period; (Gen_4:19) it was sanctioned by long usage; and it was permitted under the Law "for the hardness of their hearts," and until they should be educated up to a higher moral condition. But it was followed by pernicious consequences, (Gen_4:23 Gen_30:8) as it always is in those families and nations where it obtains. Ignorance of the laws of God may mitigate or exempt from guilt; but it does not do away with all the evil consequences of their violation; for those laws are rooted in the fixed relations and tendencies of things.
3. Was immediately caused by the indulgence of improper feeling and unseemly speech. Peninnah may have been jealous of the special love shown to Hannah by her husband (ver. 5). She was proud and haughty on account of her own sons and daughters, and, instead of sympathising with her who had none, she made her defect a ground of insult; and trials ordained by Divine providence are peculiarly severe when they become an occasion of human reproach. Finally, she gave free play to "an unruly evil", (Jam_3:8) especially at those seasons when it should have been held under restraint. Such things are the bane of domestic life.
1. Disturbed the proper performance of sacred duties. Peninnah could have little peace in her own breast, and be little prepared for Divine worship or sacred festivity. As for Hannah, although she did not angrily retaliate, but patiently endured the reproaches cast upon her (affording an admirable example of meekness), yet "she wept and did not eat" (ver. 7), and her joy was turned into mourning. Domestic disturbances tend greatly to hinder prayers. (1Pe_3:7)
2. Was alleviated by affectionate expostulation (ver. 8). "In Elkanah we have an example of a most excellent husband, who patiently tolerated the insulting humour of Peninnah, and comforted dejected Hannah with words full of tender affection, which was truly, in St. Peter"s words, to dwell with them according to knowledge" (Patrick). Let each member of the family endeavour to soothe and alleviate the sorrows of the rest, and all learn to find their own happiness in promoting the happiness of others.
3. Was over ruled by Divine providence for great good. In her trouble Hannah was led to pray fervently, and her prayer was answered; sorrowing gave place to rejoicing; the family was benefited; and the people of God were greatly blessed. So, in his wonderful working, God "turned the curse into a blessing". D. (Neh_13:2)
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On v2 And he had two wives.
1Sa_1:2-7
And he had two wives.
Read full note →
The folly of polygamy
Abrahams domestic peace was embittered, so that he was at length compelled to dismiss Hagar; and Jacob saw much strife arise amongst his household whose interest polygamy had divided. It is probable that the same feeling which operated with Abraham for taking Hagar influenced Elkanah in taking Peninneh, for Hannah seems to have been the first wife. There was doubtless an impatient desire of children; but in this case, as in those already alluded to, Elkanahs deviation from the original law of marriage, though in a manner then tolerated, conduced not at all to his domestic peace and comfort. (T. E. Redwar, M. A.)
Polygamy not primeval
There can have been no polygamy when as yet there was only a single pair, or when there were several single pairs widely separated from each other. The presumption, if not the certainty, therefore, is that primeval man must have been monogamous. It is a presumption supported by the general equality of the sexes in respect to the numbers born, with only just such an excess of the male sex as tends to maintain that equality against the greater risks to life arising out of manly pursuits and duties. Thus the facts of Nature point to polygamy as in all probability a departure from the habits of primeval times. (Argyll, Unity of Nature.)
The name of the one was Hannah.
Hannah the matron
Outraged and disgraced by the crimes of its ministers, religion sank into public contempt, and, almost mortally wounded in the house of its friends, seemed ready to expire. At first indignant, and in the end demoralised, the people deserted the house of God and abandoned the profession of a religion which the crimes of its priests had made to stink in their nostrils. Wherefore, alluding to Hophni and Phinehas, it is said, Wherefore the sin of the young men was great before the Lord, for men abhorred the offering of the Lord. But even in those days God did not leave himself without a witness. There were some who felt that His, like other good causes, has never more need of support than when it is betrayed by its supporters. Such an act closed the life of Colonel Gardener, the grand old Christian soldier, who, deserted by his own regiment on the fatal field of Prestonpans, and seeing a handful of men without an officer bravely maintaining the fight, spurred his horse through a shower of bullets to place himself at their head, and fall a sacrifice to truth and loyalty. Such an act also was the womens who openly followed our Lord with tears when no disciple had the courage to show his face in the streets. We cannot perhaps apply to the father of Samuel and husband of Hannah the saying, Faithful among the faithless only he; yet to Elkanah certainly belongs the honour of resisting the current of popular opinion, and, in an age of all but universal defection, clinging to the cause and the house of God. When its ministers had brought dishonour on the service of God, and their crimes had made the people abhor it, he felt that there was the more need for him to stand by it. He was not the man to desert the ship. To divine grace, his steadfastness to duly against the popular influence and amid almost universal defection was mainly due. Yet I cannot doubt, that in the bold and faithful part he acted, Elkanah owed much to Hannah. When adherence to principle involved painful sacrifices, men have found such support in gentle women as I have seen the green and pliant ivy lend the wall it clothed and clung to, when that, undermined or shaken, was ready to fall. Such was the spirit of Hannah.
I. Her patience--There is a skeleton in every house! The grim monitor that stands in every house to teach us that unmingled pleasures are to be sought in heaven, Hannah found in here. Happier than some that have been unequally yoked with unbelievers, she had a pious husband. Never was wife more prized and more loved than she. In what esteem Elkanah held her, how fondly he cherished her, and how kind he was to her, appears in the very strong and tender terms with which he essays to soothe her grief, saying, Why weepest thou? and why eatest thou not? and why is thy heart grieved? Am not I better to thee than ten sons? As is indicated by that question, her great trial was to be childless. But her trial, like a wound into which cruel hands rub salt, or some other smarting thing, turning ordinary pain into intolerable torture, wan greatly aggravated by the happier fortune and insolent reproaches of a rival. Elkanah was a polygamist. To his own misfortune, not less than to Hannahs, he had another wife besides her. In some kind and gentle women Hannahs misfortune would have excited feelings of sympathy. But the other wife, who had children--a rude, coarse, proud, and vulgar woman--turned it into an occasion for triumphing over her, and embittering all the springs of her life. In these circumstances--circumstances to which the adage, so generally true, applies with peculiar force, Speech is silvern, but silence is golden--Hannah teaches us how to bear our trials, whatever their nature be; and how to seek, and where to find relief.
II. Her meekness--A singular phenomenon has sometimes been noticed at sea. In a gale, when the storm, increasing in violence, has at length risen into a hurricane, the force of the wind has been observed to actually beat down the waves, producing a temporary and comparative calm; and similar is the effect occasionally produced by overwhelming trials--these, by their very power and pressure on the heart, abating both the violence and the expression of its feelings. But what is equally remarkable and still more observable in trials is, that we can more easily bear a heavy blow from Gods hand than a light one from mans. Smarting under the cruel reproaches of her rival, to use the very words of Scripture, in bitterness of soul, she lingers in the temple behind the rest, and there alone, as she supposed, pours out her tears and prayers before the Lord. His eyes dim as well as his head grey with years--Eli--too much accustomed in these evil times to see abandoned women--thought she was drunk; and more ready, like other indulgent fathers, to reprove sin in others than in his own sons, he addresses her sharply, saying, How long wilt thou be drunken? put away thy wine from thee: A very offensive accusation! Under such a charge, and in the rapid alternation with which the mind passes from one passion to another, who would have been astonished had her grief suddenly changed to anger? The meekness of Moses has become a proverb; and justly so. But did he, did any man or woman, ever show a milder, gentler, lovelier spirit, a more magnanimous example of how to suffer wrong, than Hannah? No wonder that Eli, perceiving the wrong he had done, should have turned his reproaches on himself; and touched with Hannahs grief, answered and said, Go in peace: and the God of Israel grant thee thy petition that thou hast asked of Him.
III. Her faith--I know an island that stands crowned by its ancient fortalice in the middle of a lake, some good bow shots from the shore With the walls of the old ruin mantled in ivy, and its tower rising grim and grey above the foliage of hoary elms, it serves no purpose now but to recall old times and ornament a lovely landscape. But once that island and its stronghold were the refuge and life of those whose ordinary residence was the castle that, with gates, and bulwarks, and many a tower, and floating banner rose in baronial pride on the shore. When in the troublous times of old that wait beleaguered, and its defenders could hold out no longer against the force and fury of the siege, they sought their boats, and, escaping by the postern gate over waters too deep to wade and too broad to swim, threw themselves on the island--within the walls of the stout old keep to enjoy peace in the midst of war, and safe beyond the shot of cross bow, to laugh their enemies to scorn. In their hardest plight, and against the greatest numbers, this refuge never failed them. Such a refuge and relief his people find in God. Hence the confidence and bold language of the Psalmist, Truly my soul waiteth upon God; from Him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; He is my salvation: I shall not be greatly moved. Hence, also, in allusion to the security such strongholds offered in the East, as well as here, in olden times, the Bible says, The name of the Lord is a strong tower, into which the righteous runneth, and is safe. And thus, as prayer is our way of access to God, and the means by which we place ourselves under His protection, it is a resource that never fails. There is no burden too heavy for the back of prayer to carry, nor wound too deep for its balm to heal. Hannah sought her comfort in prayer. Let her case teach us that the way to get anything is first to get faith--all things are possible to him that believeth. There are people, who claim to be philosophers, that laugh such hopes to scorn. According to them God leaves all events to the operation of what they call the ordinary laws of nature, without guiding, controlling, or interfering with them in any way whateverse No wonder that with such views the Divine Being is to them neither an object of reverential worship nor of filial affection. How should they fear, or love God? Their God is a Sovereign, who, parting with his sceptre though he retains his crown, is denuded of all authority--a Father who, careless of their fate, casts his children out on the world, like the poor babe a guilty mother exposes, which, though it may perchance be pitied and protected by others, is cruelly forsaken by the author of its being. How dark and dreary such a philosophy! All nature, and every religion, Pagan as well as Christian, revolts against it. Someone has said of prayer, It moves the hand that moves the world. A grand truth! to a poor conscience-stricken sinner, to an alarmed soul, to an anxious, weary, trembling spirit, a truth more precious than all science and philosophy. Hannah behaved it. (T. Guthrie, D. D.)
But Hannah had no children.
Anomalies of Providence
Inside Elkanahs house we see two strange arrangements of Providence, of a kind that often moves our astonishment elsewhere. First, we see a woman eminently fitted to bring up children, but having none to bring up. On the other hand, we see another woman, whose temper and ways are fitted to ruin children, entrusted with the rearing of a family. In the one case a God-fearing woman does not receive the gifts of Providence; in the other case a woman of a selfish and cruel nature seems loaded with His benefits. In looking round us, we often see a similar arrangement of other gifts; we see riches, for example, in the very worst of hands; while those who from their principles and character are fitted to make the best use of them have often difficulty in securing the bare necessaries of life. How it this? Does God really govern, or do time and chance regulate all? If it were Gods purpose to distribute His gifts exactly as men are able to estimate and use them aright, we should doubtless see a very different distribution; but Gods aim in this world is much more to try and to train than to reward and fulfil. All these anomalies of Providence point to a future state. What God does we know not now, but we shall know hereafter. In many cases home affords a refuge from our trials, but in this case home was the very scene of the trial. There is another refuge from trial, which is very grateful to devout hearts--the house of God and the exercises of public worship. (W. G. Blaikie, D. D.)
Childless parents
Abraham and Sarah had no children. Isaac and Rebekah had no children. Jacob and Rachel had no children. Manoah had no children. Hannah had no children. The Shunamite had no children. Zacharias and Elizabeth had no children. Till it came to be nothing short of a mark of a special election, and a high calling, and a great coming service of God in Israel to have no children. Time after time, till it became nothing short of a special Providence, those husbands and wives whose future children were predestinated to be patriarchs, and prophets, and judges, and forerunners of Jesus Christ in the house of Israel, began their married life having no children. Now, why was that? Well, we may make guesses, and we may propose reasons for that perplexing dispensation, but they are only guesses and proposed reasons. All the more--Why is it? Is it to spare and shield them from the preoccupation and the dispersion of affection, and from the coldness and the rudeness and the neglect of one another that so many of their neighbours suffer from? And is it to teach them a far finer tenderness, and a far rarer honour, and a far sweeter solicitude for one another? Or, on the other hand, is it out of pure jealousy on Gods part? Is it that He may be able to say to them, Am I not better to thee than ten sons? Or again, is it in order to make them meet, long before His other sons and daughters around them are made meet, for that life in which they shall neither marry nor be given in marriage? Which of all these reasons, or what other reason, has their God for what He does with so many of His best saints? But all this time we have been intruding into those things of which He says to us--What is that to thee? And, then, those whose concern this is, and those who are deepest down in Gods counsels, they are just the men and the women, they are just the husbands and the wives, who will not once open their mouths to publish abroad to a world that fears not God what all this time God is doing for their souls. (A. Whyte, D. D.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain On v1
CHAPTER I.
HANNAH'S TRIAL AND TRUST.
Read full note →
1Sa_1:1-18.
THE prophet Samuel, like the book which bears his name, comes in as a connecting link between the Judges and the Kings of Israel. He belonged to a transition period. It was appointed to him to pilot the nation between two stages of its history: from a republic to a monarchy; from a condition of somewhat casual and indefinite arrangements to one of more systematic and orderly government. The great object of his life was to secure that this change should be made in the way most beneficial for the nation, and especially most beneficial for its spiritual interests. Care must be taken that while becoming like the nations in having a king, Israel shall not become like them in religion, but shall continue to stand out in hearty and unswerving allegiance to the law and covenant of their fathers' God.
Samuel was the last of the judges, and in a sense the first of the prophets. The last of the judges, but not a military judge; not ruling like Samson by physical strength, but by high spiritual qualities and prayer; not so much wrestling against flesh and blood as against principalities and powers, and the rulers of the darkness of this world, and spiritual wickedness in high places. In this respect his function as judge blended with his work as prophet. Before him, the prophetic office was but a casual illumination; under him it becomes a more steady and systematic light. He was the first of a succession of prophets whom God placed side by side with the kings and priests of Israel to supply that fresh moral and spiritual force which the prevailing worldliness of the one and formalism of the other rendered so necessary for the great ends for which Israel was chosen. With some fine exceptions, the kings and priests would have allowed the seed of Abraham to drift away from the noble purpose for which God had called them; conformity to the world in spirit if not in form was the prevailing tendency; the prophets were raised up to hold the nation firmly to the covenant, to vindicate the claims of its heavenly King, to thunder judgments against idolatry and all rebellion, and pour words of comfort into the hearts of all who were faithful to their God, and who looked for redemption in Israel. Of this order of God's servants Samuel was the first. And called as he was to this office at a transition period, the importance of it was all the greater. It was a work for which no ordinary man was needed, and for which no ordinary man was found.
Very often the finger of God is seen very clearly in connection with the birth and early training of those who are to become His greatest agents. The instances of Moses, Samson, and John the Baptist, to say nothing of our blessed Lord, are familiar to us all. Very often the family from which the great man is raised up is among the obscurest and least distinguished of the country. The ''certain man" who lived in some quiet cottage at Ramathaim-Zophim would never probably have emerged from his native obscurity but for God's purpose to make a chosen vessel of his son. In the case of this family, and in the circumstances of Samuel's birth, we see a remarkable overruling of human infirmity to the purposes of the Divine will. If Peninnah had been kind to Hannah, Samuel might never have been born. It was the unbearable harshness of Peninnah that drove Hannah to the throne of grace, and brought to her wrestling faith the blessing she so eagerly pled for. What must have seemed to Hannah at the time a most painful dispensation became the occasion of a glorious rejoicing. The very element that aggravated her trial was that which led to her triumph. Like many another, Hannah found the beginning of her life intensely painful, and as a godly woman she no doubt wondered why God seemed to care for her so little. But at evening time there was light; like Job, she saw "the end of the Lord;" the mystery cleared away, and to her as to the patriarch it appeared very clearly that "the Lord is very pitiful and of tender mercy."
The home in which Samuel is born has some points of quiet interest about it; but these are marred by serious defects. It is a religious household, at least in the sense that the outward duties of religion are carefully attended to; but the moral tone is defective. First, there is that radical blemish - want of unity. No doubt it was tacitly permitted to a man in those days to have two wives. But where there were two wives there were two centers of interest and feeling, and discord must ensue.
Elkanah does not seem to have felt that in having two wives he could do justice to neither. And he had but little sympathy for the particular disappointment of Hannah. He calculated that a woman's heart-hunger in one direction ought to be satisfied by copious gifts in another. And as to Peninnah, so little idea had she of the connection of true religion and high moral tone, that the occasion of the most solemn religious service of the nation was her time for pouring out her bitterest passion. Hannah is the only one of the three of whom nothing but what is favourable is recorded.
With regard to the origin of the family, it seems to have been of the tribe of Levi. If so, Elkanah would occasionally have to serve the sanctuary; but no mention is made of such service. For anything that appears, Elkanah may have spent his life in the same occupations as the great bulk of the people. The place of his residence was not many miles from Shiloh, which was at that time the national sanctuary. But the moral influence from that quarter was by no means beneficial; a decrepit high priest, unable to restrain the profligacy of his sons, whose vile character brought religion into contempt, and led men to associate gross wickedness with Divine service, - of such a state of things the influence seemed fitted rather to aggravate than to lessen the defects of Elkanah's household.
Inside Elkanah's house we see two strange arrangements of Providence, of a kind that often moves our astonishment elsewhere. First, we see a woman eminently fitted to bring up children, but having none to bring up. On the other hand, we see another woman, whose temper and ways are fitted to ruin children, entrusted with the rearing of a family. In the one case a God-fearing woman does not receive the gifts of Providence; in the other case a woman of a selfish and cruel nature seems loaded with His benefits. In looking round us, we often see a similar arrangement of other gifts; we see riches, for example, in the very worst of hands; while those who from their principles and character are fitted to make the best use of them have often difficulty in securing the bare necessaries of life. How is this? Does God really govern, or do time and chance regulate all? If it were God's purpose to distribute His gifts exactly as men are able to estimate and use them aright, we should doubtless see a very different distribution; but God's aim in this world is much more to try and to train than to reward and fulfill. All these anomalies of Providence point to a future state. What God does we know not now, but we shall know hereafter. The misuse of God's gifts brings its punishment both here and in the life to come. To whom much is given, of them much shall be required. For those who have shown the capacity to use God's gifts aright, there will be splendid opportunities in another life. To those who have received much, but abused much, there comes a fearful reckoning, and a dismal experience of the "the unprofitable servant's doom."
The trial which Hannah had to bear was peculiarly heavy, as is well known, to a Hebrew woman. To have no child was not only a disappointment, but seemed to mark one out as dishonoured by God, - as unworthy of any part or lot in the means that were to bring about the fulfillment of the promise, "In thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed." In the case of Hannah, the trial was aggravated by the very presence of Peninnah and her children in the same household. Had she been alone, her mind might not have brooded over her want, and she and her husband might have so ordered their life as almost to forget the blank. But with Peninnah and her children constantly before her eyes, such a course was impossible. She could never forget the contrast between the two wives. Like an aching tooth or an aching head, it bred a perpetual pain.
In many cases home affords a refuge from our trials, but in this case home was the very scene of the trial. There is another refuge from trial, which is very grateful to devout hearts - the house of God and the exercises of public worship. A member of Hannah's race, who was afterwards to pass through many a trial, was able even when far away, to find great comfort in the very thought of the house of God, with its songs of joy and praise, and its multitude of happy worshippers, and to rally his desponding feelings into cheerfulness and hope. "Why art thou cast down, O my soul, and why art thou disquieted within me? Hope in God, for I shall yet praise Him for the health of His countenance." But from Hannah this resource likewise was cut off. The days of high festival were her days of bitter prostration.
It was the custom in religious households for the head of the house to give presents at the public festivals. Elkanah, a kind-hearted but not very discriminating man, kept up the custom, and as we suppose, to compensate Hannah for the want of children, he gave her at these times a worthy or double portion. But his kindness was inconsiderate. It only raised the jealousy of Peninnah. For her and her children to get less than the childless Hannah was intolerable. No sense of courtesy restrained her from uttering her feeling. No sisterly compassion urged her to spare the feelings of her rival. No regard for God or His worship kept back the storm of bitterness. With the reckless impetuosity of a bitter heart she took these opportunities to reproach Hannah with her childless condition. She knew the tender spot of her heart, and, instead of sparing it, she selected it as the very spot on which to plant her blows. Her very object was to give Hannah pain, to give her the greatest pain she could. And so the very place that should have been a rebuke to every bitter feeling, the very time which was sacred to joyous festivity, and the very sorrow that should have been kept furthest from Hannah's thoughts, were selected by her bitter rival to poison all her happiness, and overwhelm her with lamentation and woe.
After all, was Hannah or Peninnah the more wretched of the two? To suffer in the tenderest part of one's nature is no doubt a heavy affliction But to have a heart eager to inflict such suffering on another is far more awful. Young people that sting a comrade when out of temper, that call him names, that reproach him with his infirmities, are far more wretched and pitiable creatures than those whom they try to irritate. It has always been regarded as a natural proof of the holiness of God that He has made man so that there is a pleasure in the exercise of his amiable feelings, while his evil passions, in the very play of them, produce pain and misery. Lady Macbeth is miserable over the murdered king, even while exulting in the triumph of her ambition. Torn by her heartless and reckless passions, her bosom is like a hell. The tumult in her raging soul is like the writhing of an evil spirit. Yes, my friends, if you accept the offices of sin, if you make passion the instrument of your purposes, if you make it your business to sting and to stab those who in some way cross your path, you may succeed for the moment, and you may experience whatever of satisfaction can be found in gloated revenge. But know this, that you have been cherishing a viper in your bosom that will not content itself with fulfilling your desire. It will make itself a habitual resident in your heart, and distil its poison over it. It will make it impossible for you to know anything of the sweetness of love, the serenity of a well-ordered heart, the joy of trust, the peace of heaven. You will be like the troubled sea, whose waters cast up mire and dirt. You will find the truth of that solemn word, "There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked."
If the heart of Peninnah was actuated by this infernal desire to make her neighbour fret, it need not surprise us that she chose the most solemn season of religious worship to gratify her desire. What could religion be to such a one but a form? What communion could she have, or care to have, with God? How could she realize what she did in disturbing the communion of another heart? If we could suppose her realizing the presence of God, and holding soul-to-soul communion with Him, she would have received such a withering rebuke to her bitter feelings as would have filled her with shame and contrition. But when religious services are a mere form, there is absolutely nothing in them to prevent, at such times, the outbreak of the heart's worst passions. There are men and women whose visits to the house of God are often the occasions of rousing their worst, or at least very unworthy, passions. Pride, scorn, malice, vanity - how often are they moved by the very sight of others in the house of God! What strange and unworthy conceptions of Divine service such persons must have! What a dishonouring idea of God, if they imagine that the service of their bodies or of their lips is anything to Him. Surely in the house of God, and in the presence of God, men ought to feel that among the things most offensive in His eyes are a foul heart; a fierce temper, and the spirit that hateth a brother. While, on the other hand, if we would serve Him acceptably, we must lay aside all malice and all guile and hypocrisies, envies and all evil speakings. Instead of trying to make others fret, we should try, young and old alike, to make the crooked places of men's hearts straight, and the rough places of their lives plain; try to give the soft answer that turneth away wrath; try to extinguish the flame of passion, to lessen the sum-total of sin, and stimulate all that is lovely and of good report in the world around us.
But to return to Hannah and her trial. Year by year it went on, and her sensitive spirit, instead of feeling it less, seemed to feel it more. It would appear that, on one occasion, her distress reached a climax. She was so overcome that even the sacred feast remained by her untasted. Her husband's attention was now thoroughly roused. "Hannah, why weepest thou? and why eatest thou not? and why is thy heart grieved? am not I better to thee than ten sons?" There was not much comfort in these questions. He did not understand the poor woman's feeling. Possibly his attempts to show her how little cause she had to complain only aggravated her distress. Perhaps she thought, "When my very husband does not understand me, it is time for me to cease from man." With the double feeling - my distress is beyond endurance, and there is no sympathy for me in any fellow-creature - the thought may have come into her mind, "I will arise and go to my Father." However it came about, her trials had the happy effect of sending her to God. Blessed fruit of affliction! Is not this the reason why afflictions are often so severe? If they were of ordinary intensity, then, in the world's phrase, we might "grin and bear them." It is when they become intolerable that men think of God. As Archbishop Leighton has said, God closes up the way to every broken cistern, one after another, that He may induce you, baffled everywhere else, to take the way to the fountain of living waters. "I looked on my right hand and beheld, but there was no man that would know me; refuge failed me, no man cared for my soul. I cried unto thee, O Lord; I said, Thou art my refuge and my portion in the land of the living."
Behold Hannah, then, overwhelmed with distress, in "the temple of the Lord" (as His house at Shiloh was called), transacting solemnly with God. "She vowed a vow." She entered into a transaction with God, as really and as directly as one man transacts with another. It is this directness and distinctness of dealing with God that is so striking a feature in the piety of those early times. She asked God for a man child. But she did not ask this gift merely to gratify her personal wish. In the very act of dealing with God she felt that it was His glory and not her personal feelings that she was called chiefly to respect. No doubt she wished the child, and she asked the child in fulfillment of her own vehement desire. But beyond and above that desire there arose in her soul the sense of God's claim and God's glory, and to these high considerations she desired to subordinate every feeling of her own. If God should give her the man child, he would not be hers, but God's. He would be specially dedicated as a Nazarite to God's service. No razor should come on his head; no drop of strong drink should pass his lips. And this would not be a mere temporary dedication, it would last all: he days of his life. Eagerly though Hannah desired a son, she did not wish him merely for personal gratification. She was not to make herself the end of her child's existence, but would sacrifice even her reasonable and natural claims upon him in order that he might be more thoroughly the servant of God.
Hannah, as she continued praying, must have felt something of that peace of soul whichever comes from conscious communion with a prayer-hearing God. But probably her faith needed the element of strengthening which a kindly and favourable word from one high in God's service would have imparted. It must have been terrible for her to find, when the high priest spoke to her, that it was to insult her, and accuse her of an offence against decency itself from which her very soul would have recoiled. Well meaning, but weak and blundering, Eli never made a more outrageous mistake. With firmness and dignity, and yet m perfect courtesy, Hannah repudiated the charge. Others might try to drown their sorrows with strong drink, but she had poured out her soul before God. The high priest must have felt ashamed of his rude and unworthy charge, as well as rebuked by the dignity and self-possession of this much-tried but upright, godly woman. He sent her away with a hearty benediction, which seemed to convey to her an assurance that her prayer would be fulfilled. As yet it is all a matter of faith; but her "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Her burden is completely removed; her soul has returned to its quiet rest. This chapter of the history has a happy ending - "The woman went her way and did eat, and her countenance was no more sad."
Is not this whole history just like one of the Psalms, expressed not in words but in deeds? First the wail of distress; then the wrestling of the troubled heart with God; then the repose and triumph of faith. What a blessing, amid the multitude of this world's sorrows, that such a process should be practicable I What a blessed thing is faith, faith in God's word, and faith in God's heart, that faith which becomes a bridge to the distressed from the region of desolation and misery to the region of peace and joy? Is there any fact more abundantly verified than this experience is - this passage out of the depths, this way of shaking one's self from the dust, and patting on the garments of praise? Are any of you tired, worried, wearied in the battle of life, and yet ignorant of this blessed process? Do any receive your fresh troubles with nothing better than a growl of irritation - I will not say an angry curse? Alas for your thorny experience I an experience which knows no way of blunting the point of the thorns. Know, my friends, that in Gilead there is a balm for soothing these bitter irritations. There is a peace of God that passeth all understanding, and that keeps the hearts and minds of His people through Christ Jesus. "Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace whose mind is stayed on Thee, because he trusteth in Thee."
But let those who profess to be Christ's see that they are consistent here. A fretful, complaining Christian is a contradiction in terms. How unlike to Christ! How forgetful such a one is of the grand argument, "He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?" "Be patient, brethren, for the coming of the Lord draweth near." Amid the agitations of life often steal away to the green pastures and the still waters, and they will calm your soul. And while "the trial of your faith is much more precious than of gold that perisheth, although it be tried with fire," it shall be "found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ"
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On vv1–2 1Sa_1:1. The site of Ramath-Zophim is declared by Dean…
CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES.—
1Sa_1:1. The site of Ramath-Zophim is declared by Dean Stanley to be “the most disputed problem of sacred topography.” It is universally allowed, and it is implied by Josephus to be the Ramah in which Samuel lived, died, and was buried; but next to nothing of its position can be gathered from the narrative. It is here said to be in Mount Ephraim, but the limits of that district are uncertain. The name Ramathaim—the double eminence—probably points to a city whose site was on two hills. But there were several cities of this name in the land of Israel, and all on more or less elevated sites. No certain explanation has ever been given of the addition Zophim. There was such a place on the east of Jordan (Num_23:14), and “the land of Zuph” is mentioned in chapter 1Sa_9:5. The region may have derived its name from Elkanah’s ancestor. Some regard it as a common noun signifying “watch-towers” from the high position of the city. Elkanah. “The Levitical descent of Elkanah and Samuel is put beyond doubt by a comparison of the genealogy here with those in Chronicles (1Ch_6:22 sq., and 1Ch_1:33 sq.). Samuel is here shown to belong to the Kohathites. Elkanah, i.e., he whom God acquired or purchased, is both in its signification and use a Levite name. All the Elkanahs mentioned in the Old Testament (leaving out the one in 2Ch_28:7, whose tribe is not stated) were demonstrably Levites, and belonged mostly to the family of Korah, from whom Samuel was descended” (Lange’s Commentary).
Read full note →
MAIN HOMILETICS OF 1Sa_1:1
THE VALUE AND USE OF A GENEALOGY
I. The man who possesses a genealogy knows who and what he represents in the world. Every human creature, in fact everything in the world that possesses life, represents more than he or it is. A single corn-seed represents all the grains by which it has come into existence—all the seeds which have lived and germinated and brought forth fruit between itself and the original grain from which it sprung in the beginning. Every man knows that he represents numerically more than he is, and very possibly more intellectual power or moral greatness than belongs to him as an individual, but only he who possesses a genealogy knows certainly who and what he represents. The written pedigree of his ancestors makes him realise his oneness with the ages that are past, and he will feel ennobled or dishonoured by the record according as the lives of his forefathers accord with, or are opposed to, what he considers worth representing. Elkanah knew that he represented a line of ancestors in one of the most remarkable tribes in the Jewish nation—a tribe which had numbered among its members men of great mental power and high moral wealth. Although personally he was inferior to some of these great men, he felt in some degree that he belonged to them—that he represented their worth and greatness. A tree growing in this country may have sprung from the seed of a tropical tree. It may attain to sufficient size and beauty to be a worthy representative of its tropical ancestors, but the difference of climate, as well as some inherent weakness in the tree itself, may prevent it from reaching their gigantic stature—from branching forth into their vast proportions. So it may be with many a man who represents an old and worthily renowned family; circumstances, as well as mental inferiority may prevent them from attaining the renown of their ancestors, although they may be good and true men and worthily fill a small space in the world. Such men represent more than they are—not only in numbers, but in ability and renown. Elkanah was such a representative man. Being able as he was to trace his ancestry, he knew that he belonged to the tribe whence came the most remarkable man of the ancient world—one who has left an impress upon the nations which will last as long as time. Elkanah, by the possession of a genealogy, knew that he had the honour of numbering Moses among his ancestors, and although he knew he could never attain to the renown of his great forefather, he must have felt there was honour in belonging to the same tribe as the Jewish lawgiver. He knew that he belonged to a stock who on one memorable occasion had given proof that they preferred moral right to blood relationship—who had declared themselves on the Lord’s side in the day of Israel’s first idolatry—“who said unto his father and to his mother, I have not seen him, neither acknowledged his brethren, nor knew his own children” (Deu_33:9), in other words, preferred the honour of Jehovah’s name to all human claims (Exo_32:26-28).
II. The value of such a possession, and the teaching it might suggest.
1. The knowledge that those to whom we are related by ties of blood-relationship have been great and noble—have done deeds and spoken words which reflect a lustre upon their descendants long after they have left the world—ought to inspire those descendants with resolution to tread in their footsteps. Although the times in which they live may not demand the same sacrifices—may not admit of the same renown—yet the principles which govern the lives of the truly great and good are the same in all ages, and under all conditions of life. Although Elkanah could not be a Moses, he could emulate his moral excellence; although he was not called to make such a remarkable demonstration of his fidelity to Jehovah as his fathers had made in the wilderness, he could always act upon the principle of preferring duty to God before any human tie or any mere earthly consideration.
2. The knowledge that we belong to the great and good is also a source of lawful comfort and satisfaction, if we ourselves have enough godliness not to disgrace our ancestry. To feel that we are the children of those who have served their generation according to the will of God, and have perhaps been called by Him to some great and special service, cannot fail to afford lawful satisfaction to any man. Doubtless Elkanah, in his humbler and more limited sphere, felt a special gratification that he was linked in tribal relationship with him “whom the Lord knew face to face” (Deu_34:10), and that he was one of that chosen tribe who were elected by God to be the teachers of Israel and the “body-guard of the sacred structure which was the sign of the presence among the people of their unseen King”—Num_1:51; Num_18:22. (See on Levi “Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible.”)
3. A genealogy teaches a man his own mortality and immortality, and the mortality and immortality of his fathers. Every family register proclaims the mortality and the immortality of man. It tells of the body whose dust is still with us, and of the spirit that is “absent from the body.” The life once lived upon the earth made a genealogy possible—linked the individual with the long line of progenitors who had gone before him and with all those who have come and will come after him. This life could not have been lived without the body which was mortal and has returned to the earth, yet that body would never have been more than lifeless clay if it had not been animated by a “living soul,” who was, and is still, the man himself—still living and feeling and acting in another part of God’s universe. To the Old Testament saints a genealogy spoke of those who were “gathered to their fathers” (Gen_49:29, etc.); to us it tells of “just men made perfect” in the city of the living God (Heb_12:23), who died as to bodily life, but who live still as to spiritual life. It teaches also the earthly immortality of the race. The man passes away—the race remains. He leaves the world, but his are left in it. Abraham was long ago called away, but his descendants are with us to this day. Levi had quitted the world long before the days of Elkanah, but he lived still in Canaan in his representatives.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Sermon Bible 1900 · Public Domain On v1 1 Samuel. 1-4
1 Samuel. 1-4
(with Jdg 21:16-25)
Read full note →
I. With all his virtues and natural advantages Eli had one great fault. He was a good man of the easy type; the kind of man who makes an admirable servant, who does his duty to perfection so long as his duty merely troubles himself, but who has not force of character to interfere with others; to command, to regulate the conduct of others, to incur the ill-will of others. An amiable indolence overspread his whole nature. He was one of the men who have great faith in the power of things to right themselves, in the virtue of leaving things alone, of letting nature take its course. Accordingly he let his own life and fortunes drift and become entangled with the wreck of other men’s misdeeds, and so came to the end he did.
The character of Eli is far from uncommon, and a far larger amount of disaster is produced in the world by such softness than by deliberate wickedness. There are times in most lives when the current of circumstances sets strongly towards sin, and when a man will certainly sin if his rule of life has been to avoid all that is painful and to choose what will for the time give him security and ease.
II. The vices which Eli suffered in his sons did not terminate in themselves, but had the effect of making the worship of God abhorrent and despicable in the country. This may be done not only by the sensuality and greed of the clergy, but in other ways as well. The carelessness about truth, which merely preaches traditionary opinions, brings God’s service into contempt; the indolent formality which accepts stereotyped phrases of devotion or of sentiment and puts no meaning into them; the wrangling and hastiness in discussion which show that love of party is stronger than love of truth; the preaching of doctrine which lowers men’s ideas of God and righteousness; these and many such things make the worship of God contemptible.
III. While God punishes the existing priesthood, He adds a promise of raising Himself up a faithful priest. This promise was fulfilled, first of all, in Samuel, who, though not of the priestly line, did serve in the house of God, and offered sacrifice by an exceptional and special consecration. In Samuel, the asked of God, there is a type of the readiness with which God can provide men for His service; men different from and unaffected by the times in. which they live; men who can grow up pure amidst corruption, who can shake off the ignorance of their teachers and rise above all their contemporaries, who are as truly sent by God as if they were sons of a Virgin or of a Hannah.
M. Dods, Israel’s Iron Age, p. 149.
References: 1Sam 1-3.—S. K. Hocking, Contemporary Pulpit, vol. v., p. 26; E. Conder, Drops, and Rocks, p. 103. 1Sa 1:3.—Sermons for the Christian Seasons, 2nd series, vol. ii., p. 669. 1Sa 1:5.—Expositor, 3rd series, vol. v., p. 55. 1Sa 1:9-28.—F. Langbridge, Sunday Magazine, 1885, p. 670. 1Sa 1:15.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxvi., No. 1515. 1Sa 1:20.—Parker, vol. vi., p. 218; Expositor, 3rd series, vol. v., p. 57; I.Williams, Characters of the Old Testament, p. 160. 1Sa 1:27.—J. Van Oosterzee, The Year of Salvation, vol. ii., p. 417; Spurgeon, Evening by Evening, p. 265. 1Sa 1:27, 1Sa 1:28.—J. Vaughan, Sermons to Children, 4th series, p. 331. 1Sam 1-4.—R. S. Candlish, Scripture Characters, p. 299. 1Sa 2:1.—H. Thompson, Concionalia: Outlines of Sermons for Parochial use, vol. i., p. 216. 1Sa 2:1-27.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iv., p. 283. 1Sa 2:2.—Parker, vol. vii., p. 56.
The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
F. W. Grant 1903 · Public Domain On v1 Division 1. (1Sa 1:1-28; 1Sa 2:1-36; 1Sa 3:1-21; 1Sa…
Notes.
Division 1. (1Sa 1:1-28; 1Sa 2:1-36; 1Sa 3:1-21; 1Sa 4:1-22; 1Sa 5:1-12; 1Sa 6:1-21; 1Sa 7:1-17.)
Read full note →
Samuel: the Representative of the Divine Sovereignty.
Samuel the prophet fittingly introduces the story of the kings, -fittingly crowns the first kings himself. He is the representative of the higher throne from which alone they derive their authority. The prophet (see Deu 18:15, sq., notes), as such, chosen from any class among the people, raised up of God as needed, not deriving his office from any of his predecessors, but from God alone, necessarily expresses the sovereign will of God. Samuel, in the circumstances of his birth, peculiarly does this; still more, under those in which he is brought forward by the Spirit of God, when the priesthood has failed, and the ark is no more sought after, and he has alone to stand in the terrible gap thus made.
But he is also thus the witness of the divine sufficiency. All else has failed, but God has not failed. In the very lowest estate, the Ichabod of the nation Samuel, with nothing to help or accredit him except that God who spike into his ear, lifts up the nation into triumph and blessing.
And here a new title of God is found, which, in connection with those related and contrasted "kingdoms," which in the Septuagint give such fitting title to the books, claims for the divine not merely supremacy but totality of power. This is "Jehovah of Hosts," or "Jehovah, God of Hosts": where there is no need to speculate whether stars or angels, or even the hosts of Israel, are intended. "The God of Hosts" claims all these for Him. In this title the divine kingdom reveals itself in contrast with all others, which are sustained or confounded as they move in subjection to it or not. Thus the moral of the book is given at the opening of it.
1. Samuel’s origin and birth are carefully given to us: we may be sure, not as matters of simply historical interest. What importance, in this case, can we attach to this genealogy of unknown names? Let us remind ourselves that we are in the kingdom of God, where wheel is adjusted to wheel in His chariot of progress. How good it is to be permitted to escape from the babble of the unmeaning into a world like this, where everything is significant! There may be, no doubt, here depths and heights which we cannot explore. Still we are encouraged onward, and at every step gain something in view. How wonderful are these Scripture histories in this way, as making us aware everywhere of the pervasive presence of the Almighty and All-wise!
(1) Nothing, in fact, could be much simpler than is Samuel’s genealogy here, or the steps by which we reach the Nazarite prophet. Reading the five names in reverse order, and remembering that we have thus to read the numerical order also backwards, we find in the fifth place, under the number of responsibility, Zuph, "the watcher," or "observer." It is the only name of which the meaning is at all doubtful. Most, perhaps, would render it "honeycomb," the Hebrew word standing for this. On the other hand, the derivation is as simple for the other meaning; and the alternative reading in Chronicles (Zophai in 1Ch 6:26, and Zuph or Ziph in verse 35), with its presumed connection with Ramathaim-zophim, leads us back to the former, also. In its spiritual connection, certainly, to be an "observer" in the sphere of responsibility is the beginning of all blessings. Zuph is an Ephrathite, therefore "fruitful"; and we cannot wonder that his son Tohu, under the number of experience, speaks of being "low, sunk down," -humiliation; and this being ever the way of blessing and of the knowledge of the Lord, the next name, under the number of manifestation, is Elihu, "my God" -or my Mighty One -"is He." Still, in the way of progress, and under the salvation number, we have then Jeroham, "he is tenderly loved"; and we end here, under that of obedience and divine sovereignty, with Elkanah, whom "God has purchased," or "acquired." How easily, of such a stock as this, comes forth a Samuel!
Elkanah’s town is that of Samuel afterwards, -Ramah, or ha-Ramah, "the height." The name we have had elsewhere, but not the place, which here we find in its full title to have been Ramathaim-zophim, "the two heights of the watchers." The prophet’s place was always that of a watcher, and the prophet’s face always toward the slowly coming dawn; and the "height" is in natural connection with the place: those who are in it are, by that very fact, lifted up out of the world. All this is in perfect keeping with Samuel’s association with Ramah. For us, also, the connection of the dawn with the kingdom for which still we wait is necessary and obvious: but why "two heights"? May it not be that there is the positional height of our place in Christ, of which other Ramahs have already spoken to us (pp. 133, 150), and the spiritual elevation answering to this? Certainly God has thus provided for the Elkanahs, His "purchased" ones today; and this is the place for a Samuel -should there be any now to exercise the judge’s office in Israel. For any right judgment of things at large, the coming of the Lord must be before us, we must be watchers for Him! Is not the state of Christendom, and the cause of that state also, depicted in His own words, -"but if that evil servant shall say, in his heart, My Lord delayeth his coming, and shall begin to smite his fellow-servants, and to eat and drink with the drunken" (Mat 24:48-49)? How unutterably solemn the warning that follows!
We are next told of Elkanah’s two wives, who repeat in some respects the story of Sarah and Hagar. If Sarah be, as we have seen in its place, the principle of grace, the very name of Hannah is "grace." And she, too, is naturally a barren woman. Peninnah differs, however, in many ways, from Hagar. She is no bondwoman, and would not seem to stand for the principle of law; but is, on the other hand, the "adversary" of her rival, which could not in the same way be said of Hagar. Similarly she flourishes while Hannah is barren, but grows feeble after she has become fruitful. Her name, Peninnah, is of doubtful meaning, but probably signifies "shining, glittering"; and she may represent the earthly objects which so easily distract the heart even of Christians from that which should alone hold it. Would that Elkanah’s bigamy were less easily to be applied to Christians! That it was openly indulged as lawful, instead of marring, this does in fact only make the lesson more forcible: "happy is he who condemneth not himself in that which he alloweth." After all, Elkanah did love Hannah: but grace cannot be reconciled to a barren love without fruit.
(2) No wonder if the going up to worship the Lord always provokes afresh this sorrow. But now she can bear it no longer: out it bursts in a vow of Nazariteship -of separation to the Lord of the child she covets. Would that all brought forth from us, even by grace, had thus the sign of consecration to God upon its head, the confession of entire dependence upon Him attached to that which is brought forth!
The last of the judges, Samson, who had "begun" to deliver Israel from the Philistines, had been, as we know, a Nazarite also; and we have seen (p. 239) the meaning of this. Here that alone is particularized in which Samson had so signally ailed. How easily the strong man fails in this grace of dependence just by reason of his strength! Samuel is, in fact, the very opposite of Samson. If anything more than another characterizes him it is the spirit of prayer. Was he not himself the fruit of it? Is not that which is brought forth from us all naturally the incarnation, so to speak, of the spirit in which it has been conceived?
The first glimpse of the priest here is already a sad one. Eli, meaning "high," or exalted," expresses the moral condition of the priesthood, as we are shortly to be made to see. Personally he had a heart for the Lord, but not sufficiently to stand for Him; and with him the whole order to which he belongs is becoming decrepit. His spiritual sense is blunt, as is his nature. He cannot discern the character of the sorrowing woman before him; sees, indeed, but the moving of lips, and misconstrues it; pronounces a judgment which has speedily to be recalled. Yet this awakens in him no self-judgment, no discernment of his own levity: and this we shall find in Eli all the way through.
The ordered way of blessing is being closed up, and God is finding new channels for His grace to be poured into. Such is His way; for His grace must not lack expression while the need is there that demands it. The cry of distress may be misinterpreted, even by His people; but His own ear cannot be stopped.
(3) We come immediately, therefore, to the realization of this: Samuel is born, and named by his mother "heard of God." What she says is evidently not the interpretation of the name, but the reason for her giving it him. The name speaks of God as El, the Mighty One, who in might has answered her; the reason speaks of Jehovah. Indeed, how much beyond her prayer has been the answer! For she does not appear to have looked on to this child becoming, as he does, the deliverer of Israel. Perhaps she never lives to see him in this character. God acts in the fullness of His own love and wisdom; and what a light will eternity throw upon the issue of our prayers!
Samuel is born to be in a peculiar way the servant of the Lord; but he must be weaned before he can become this, and we cannot refrain from thinking upon the one hundred and thirty-first psalm here: "Surely I have behaved and quieted myself, even as a child is weaned from his mother; yea, my soul is even as a weaned child." That is says Perowne, "As a weaned child no longer cries, frets, and longs for the breast, but lies still and is content, because it is with its mother, so my soul is weaned from all discontented thoughts, from all fretful desires of earthly good, waiting in stillness upon God, finding its satisfaction in His presence, resting peacefully in His arms." This surely is what is required for proper service: the childlike spirit, but the spirit of a weaned child. Alas, how few, proportionately, of the professed servants of Christ have attained to this!
The weaning accomplished, Samuel is taken and presented to the Lord, with a bullock for a burnt-offering. The type of whole-hearted consecration in service is easily to be read in this; but it is Christ of whom it speaks, in whom alone servant and service can be accepted of God. He who serves best will be most conscious of this. The servant, too, to serve aright, must be trained up in the sanctuary. There alone we can get clear eyes for it, and the light of heaven. So, as we will remember, the Levites were given to the priests; and the book of the Sanctuary, Leviticus, precedes the wayside service of the book of Numbers. The last words of the Chapter refer, I suppose, and as the connection would imply, to Samuel. He would be, according to the commentators, about three years old, which in Palestine would be, however, proportionately older than with us.
Hannah’s heart is full, and bursts out in prophetic song, in which God’s ways with her are expanded into general principles, which, in the end, are applied to the purification and blessing of the earth under God’s King -Messiah. The king and the kingdom thus are introduced at the beginning of the book, and yet go beyond David or any successor of his in the days that immediately follow, and take in the whole breadth of the earth, and the final rule of Christ over it.
The song has four parts, -the first of which celebrates as the God of her salvation the faithful, omnipotent, and omniscient God (verses 1-3). Her heart is joyful, her strength is raised up, her mouth utters boldly her challenge to all enemies. Jehovah is her joy and exultation: for it is He who has become her Saviour. None is holy as He; nay, none can be put beside Him: the rock is a faint image of His faithfulness, who is not simply her -but "our" -God. Well may man’s pride be abased, and the loose ungoverned speech hushed before Him: for all knowledge is His, and actions are weighed by Him.
The second is the salvation part (verses 4, 5), -which includes in it, also, the bumbling of the adversaries. The bows of the mighty are broken: their weapons of war are no more; they that stumbled for very weakness, are, on the other hand, given a strength that girds or braces them up for activity. They that were full to satiety with bread have now to hire themselves out to obtain it, while the hungry now are in turn filled. Now she comes to her own case, though not, of course, in the details: the barren has borne seven, and she that has borne many is grown feeble.
These, of course, are simply specimen deliverances; but we have to go further to find the full thought, and that resurrection is a principle of the Lord’s ways: he is the God of resurrection. That He should abase pride and destroy the wicked, that is easy to understand; but resurrection means that for the righteous also the way of life must be first of all a way of death. Pride in them, also, must be abased: they must learn in themselves what man is, and the righteous penalty for what he is; in the prostration of human strength they must learn the power and grace that consist with holiness in the Lord’s salvation. So now the third part (verses 6-8 a): —
Jehovah kills and makes alive, too: He brings down to Hades, and brings up out of it. And from the poor and needy -from the dunghill itself -He lifts up those that He makes His princes, and sets on a throne of glory.
These principles are of the widest application, and will receive the widest application in a coming day, when the strife between good and evil shall be coming to a final end: and this is the thought of the fourth part (verses 8b-10)
For the pillars of the earth belong to Jehovah: that is, the foundations of the dry land which are set up in the deep, and upon which the world that men inhabit stands. All that sustains the present condition of things, she tells us, depends upon the will of Jehovah, unchangeably holy as He is. Thus these principles will finally and everywhere prevail. He keepeth the feet of His saints, and the wicked are silent in darkness [such is the day that is rapidly drawing near]: for by strength shall no man prevail. They that strive with Jehovah shall be broken in pieces; out of heaven shall He thunder upon them; [now we see the day in its broad features]: Jehovah shall judge the ends of the earth; and shall give strength unto His King, and exalt the horn of His Anointed."
Here is plainly the day of Christ; and the regeneration of the earth will exhibit fully all these principles. Israel must herself go down into the depths, and come up in resurrection. All the pride of man shall be abased, and the Lord alone exalted in that day. To this Hannah, with her prophetic eyes, looks on, and the whole of the "books of the kingdoms." How clearly is their character marked by the song of this Israelite woman!
2. We have now put before us, in manifestly contrasted paragraphs, the degradation of the priesthood and the rise of the prophet that is soon to be. God has thus provided that the link between Himself and His people should not be snapped even in the awful disaster that is about to overtake them. How good is He, and how righteous in His goodness! Yet how easily may we mistake Him, too! He who would judge with God must not judge by the appearance: the moral and spiritual are the only means of it; and this must seem a thing so evident as to need no enforcement; yet the apostle did not think so, and the history of Christianity in every generation shows abundantly the need.
The moral degradation of the priesthood is here shown as complete. The mercy of God warns repeatedly, in vain, of impending judgment. Eli is morally weak; his sons utterly profane; and alas, the people, save a small remnant, are away from God. Many are the lessons of such a contrast as is here presented to us.
(1) This one verse, with its simple statement, may seem too insignificant altogether to form even the smallest section. But even this may serve to point a moral in such a connection as this. God concerns Himself with what is little: yea, there is nothing that is too little for Him. And here was a fresh affirmation in this new beginning, -His power to exalt and to abase, His refusal of evil wherever found, and the individuality also of each soul with Him. What a gospel in the Old Testament for children is in the notice and acceptance of this little child! A little child this, that ministered not to Eli merely but to Jehovah, and finding his record in the inspired Word!
(2) In contrast with Samuel’s service is now shown us the sin of the priests, a profanity which, in its essential features, has been often enough repeated since. External nearness to God, without the knowledge of Him, has ever been the occasion of the worst departures from Him. To one away from the sanctuary some sense of the divine would naturally more attach to it, which in the daily intercourse with sacred things tends more and more to pass away. Eli’s sons are thus practisers and preachers of a godlessness which at first shocks and then communicates itself to the people round. A holiness that is but external is the worst unholiness. Here nothing but the rites remained to speak of God; but even these were impiously violated by the rude hands of those whose duty it was to lead men in obedience. Shamelessly and openly they made themselves fat with the offerings of Jehovah’s people, and that with violence which defied Him to His face.
(3) The narrative returns, after this recital, which has shown the moral state leading to the collapse of the priesthood shortly in Israel, to show us Samuel, clothed anticipatively with the priestly ephod. This was, as we have seen (Exo 28:5-14, n.), essentially the shoulder-piece, and which held (in the case of the high-priest) the breastplate also. Girt about the person, it was the expression of a service whereby the people of God were sustained before God in a love which never forgot that which was due to Him. It was the mediator’s robe, and the priests were thus characterized as those who "wore a linen ephod." (ch. 22: 18.) No other did this besides the priest,* except here Samuel, and upon one great occasion (2Sa 6:14) David, and these two cases are strictly parallel: in each it showed that the burden of Israel’s maintenance before God had devolved upon the person wearing the ephod.
{*Samuel is shown, in the book of Chronicles, to have been, by descent, a Levite (1Ch 6:8-35); and thus, it has been asserted, could wear the ephod; but we have no hint in Scripture of the Levites doing this, but the opposite.}
It is true that the materials were different: there was here no beauty of various color, nor gold, as in the high-priest’s dress, the full blossom of the priestly. But on the other hand, the simple white linen* was that in which the priest went on the day of atonement into the holiest of all, and speaks of the absolute purity fit for the presence of Him who dwells in the sanctuary. Thus, while it points to Christ, the antitype all through here, -priest, prophet, king, alike, -it clearly marks the contrast between the man of God’s choice and the licentious priesthood that gives way to him.
{*As here, bad is the word for linen.}
The coat, which year by year his mother brings to him, is in harmony with this. It is the meil, which was also part of the high-priest’s dress, the "robe" of the ephod, although kings, nobles, and others wore it also. The robe of the high-priest, like the ephod, had its distinctive characters; as to that of Samuel we have nothing told us: the connection, however, cannot well be doubted. The ephod must have been furnished by the sanctuary; and thus two witnesses united here their testimony to him. The higher kingdom was thus already manifesting itself.
Hannah also, significant in her name and history, as we have seen, now becomes fruitful. She has three more sons, -four sons, therefore, and two daughters, the presage of the triumph of divine grace. None the less must the holiness of God’s ways be affirmed, and the corruption of the priesthood have its answer in judgment. But "Samuel grew before Jehovah."
(4) The further fact is now developed that, the priesthood being such as we have seen, there is no power over them to stand for God, and restrain the evil. Eli is in the threefold relation to these wanton transgressors of father, high-priest, and judge in Israel; but he does nothing but expose his incapacity. Nor is it mere age that can account for this. It is significant that for the contempt of Jehovah’s ordinances, which has been already before us, we do not even hear of a rebuke. When to this is added the immorality so naturally connecting itself with it, Eli argues with them and protests, but that is all. He uses not the rod which is put into his hands, and which might have even saved his sons themselves. He leaves them to go unchecked to the divine judgment which he foresees, but does nothing effective to avert; and, in fact, the judgment comes upon them.
Again Samuel is noticed, briefly but in comprehensive contrast. The record anticipates what, long after, is said of the Lord in His childhood, that he grew up in favor both with Jehovah and with men. He is thus every way the opposite of the God-forsaken priests. Though but a child, he is uncontaminated with the evil in the presence of which he grows up, a witness of the individuality that belongs to us, though amid a multitude, and apart even from the restraint and discipline of home. He is a child, but thus with his inheritance in the future, while the priesthood is failing and passing away.
(5) The sentence upon Eli and his house is now pronounced. Of "the man of God" who now comes forward to utter it we know nothing more, -not even his name. The sentence is a decree of degradation for degradation, with the cutting off of Hophni and Phinehas, the chief offenders. God would raise up for Himself a faithful priest to walk before His anointed, -a second intimation of the coming kingdom. Joshua had stood before Eleazar (Num 27:21); and, for the time, the high priest had had the foremost place in Israel. This is to be changed, and even the "faithful priest" is to walk before the king. Priesthood has failed to maintain the link between God and His people. Now the king is to be the link, although he, too, will fail and pass: only the "threefold cord" of prophet, priest, and king, as found in Christ, will not be broken; and power put into His hand cannot fail or be forfeited any more. Toward this all these types point, though Christ is not directly spoken of here. The "faithful priest" was raised up in Zadok, as the representative of the line of Phinehas and Eleazar: Eli was a descendant of Ithamar, Aaron’s fourth son, and not of Eleazar, who thus for a time had lost the high-priesthood promised to Phinehas forever (Num 25:13.) Phinehas has thus the promise fulfilled to him, as it were, in resurrection and abidingly: in the kingdom yet to come, the sons of Zadok will again keep charge of the sanctuary. (Eze 44:15.)
Through all, the typical meaning distinctly shines: for God throughout is thinking of His Son. Eleazar, as we have seen fully elsewhere, is as Aaron’s third son, -in whom, also, after the death of Nadab and Abihu, the priesthood revives, -the distinct type of Christ as a risen Priest, whose intercessory place is the fruit of His work accomplished. His resurrection means the acceptance of His atoning death; and thus He is Eleazar, the true "help of God" for His dependent people.
Ithamar, the fourth son of Aaron, as that, and according to his name, "where the palm is," implies a practical righteousness, which is connected with practical walk. Now as long as Eleazar retained the high priesthood, Ithamar could serve in his lower place well and acceptably, for "to do good and to communicate," and thus the whole Christian life, are "sacrifices," which, as priests, we are called to offer up to God. But these are entirely dependent upon that one only propitiatory sacrifice which Eleazar, the risen priest, reminds us of. Let Ithamar displace Eleazar, then Ithamar himself loses himself hopelessly. Eli, the "exalted," Hophni, "my fist," and quite another Phinehas, "mouth of brass," from the one of the higher line, sufficiently characterize the history here; while the line of Eleazar, when it revives revives in Zadok, "the righteous one," -righteousness in the right line and Person, "Jesus Christ, the righteous," -and all is again secured.
Precious it is to see Israel’s sorrowful history written in golden letters such as these! Thus the higher kingdom is in action all through the book, not merely in the lives of individuals, but in the ordering of the state at large. Unto it the lower, when it comes, must be in complete subjection, representing it in character truly among men, or pay the forfeit.
3. The priesthood being thus adjudged, we now find the prophet openly brought forward, God thus providing that there should be no lapse on His side, fail as all else may. Samuel is therefore now called, and established before all Israel as the mouthpiece of Jehovah to them, before the predicted judgment falls upon Eli’s house.
(1) The call comes suddenly at night, when men are asleep, but not the Shepherd of Israel. The dim eyes of the priest, the suggested near failure of the tabernacle-lamp, are no mere embellishments of the picture. Such was the state of things which necessitated the new interposition of the Lord. Eli was there in his place, but the Voice addresses not Eli, -not even though the message concerns him intimately and sadly. For the face of God is averted from him.
To Samuel we find the Voice is something audible, -not a simple intimation or impression on the heart. It is, at the same time, very human: the youth imagines it is Eli that is speaking; and that three times over, for he has not yet learned to recognize Jehovah. Eli himself is thus made also to understand that He is speaking, before the subject of the communication is made known to him, -though his heart, as we see afterwards, presages but too well.
Yet this divine-human Voice, how sweet it is! In all dispensations it is the same. Calling one, too, by one’s name, for by name He knows His sheep. But may we not also, like Samuel here, mistake the voice divine because it is so human, -expect it as afar off, miss it because it is nigh?
(2) The message confirms the previously announced doom of Eli’s house. But what need to repeat again what had already been so fully said? Is not once said enough for God? Does it not imply that God yet waits, even though the thing is said, upon man’s repentance? expects men to cry to Him, to give Him, as it were, opportunity to repent? Why should He warn at all, if not for this?
But Eli, though he bows under God’s hand, does not turn to Him after this fashion. His spiritual sense is dulled, so that he cannot discern the undertone of pity in the threatening wrath; nor has he energy to take up the authority entrusted to him, and act for Him whom he has so long ignored. Thus judgment takes its course.
Samuel, though with a natural fear in which different elements would unite together, approves himself as able to stand for God, and tells him all. His first message is of evil, and to those with whom he has grown up. It is needed, perhaps, for himself, in view of the place that he is to take in the crisis at hand. And though he fears, he does not listen to his fears, nor refuse the burden laid upon him, but bears it faithfully.
(3) Thus Jehovah is with him, and his prophecy finds a wider field. Jehovah reveals himself through Samuel; and thus, on the very eve of judgment, appeal is made anew to the hearts and consciences of the people. It did not avail to prevent disaster; but it did surely to maintain faith in a remnant, and bring some hearts to the living God. But whatever might be the result as to the people, God at least glorified Himself in goodness, as He ever does, and has left us as witnesses of a love, which to us, indeed, has been how much more wonderfully displayed!
4. (1) But now the day of inevitable ruin comes, and Israel is smitten before the Philistines. It would seem by the language as if Israel had provoked the conflict. In striking contrast, and yet in as plain congruity, with what takes place afterward, we are told that they encamped beside Ebenezer, doubly emphasized by two articles, "the stone of the help." Samuel, we know, actually set up the stone afterwards in commemoration of victory; and this makes the anticipative mention of the name so significant. According to the unchanging nature of God occurred the victory then, the defeat now. Self-confidence goes along with departure of heart from Him, as generally is the case, and insures the issue. Once more smitten with considerable loss, they ask indeed why Jehovah has done this. They realize it to be from Him, and yet do not seriously inquire of Him, nor humble themselves in His presence. Stranger than all, they would bring this God who has smitten them, unappeased, into the camp to fight in their behalf! Perhaps their thought is that this very reliance upon the ark will propitiate Him. How vain, in any case, is such a hope! True, it is the "ark of the covenant of Jehovah"; and, as such, they appeal to it. But was there not the "vengeance of the covenant" as faithfully promised as the blessing for obedience? What a sign of disaster that, as it is written, "Hophni and Phinehas," with their already predicted doom hanging over them, "were there with the ark of the covenant of God"!
On the other hand, it is no wonder that the Philistines are as much disconcerted, for the moment, by the presence of the ark, as Israel are encouraged. With them the deity was inseparably connected with the symbols of His worship, and they remembered yet the power displayed in Egypt. Jehovah’s witness to Himself there had not been in vain, though men might, after all, refuse it. Alas, they did! Alas, not they alone have done so! So they stiffen themselves in pride, and will be men, -yes, indeed, too surely, "men," -and are unexpectedly successful: they gain a great victory, slay thirty thousand men, and capture the ark of God itself, -little imagining that they are but fulfilling His word, and instruments in His hand, after all: a lesson in "evidences," which should at least make us careful. Hophni and Phinehas are slain, and the priesthood necessarily collapses, and is for the time set aside.
(2) Eli’s death ensues upon the news of the disaster. The circumstantial detail fixes the attention and impresses the heart, and is designed to do so. The old man, who has left the glory of God in the hands of his profligate sons, and let the ark go from him at the will of the people, yet manifests at the last the good that is in him, and is taken away from the evil to come. Shiloh passes also out of the history, and the sanctuary of God from Ephraim, the lesson of which has been already suggested (Jos 18:1, n.)
(3) A woman’s voice pronounces the word of distress, stamping it upon the fruit of her womb, Ichabod, "no glory." This was, indeed, what Israel had brought forth, the fruit of her departure from God: His glory had, in turn, been removed out of their midst. "For they provoked Him to anger with their high places, and moved Him to jealousy with their graven images. When God heard this, He was wroth, and greatly abhorred Israel, so that He forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent which He placed among men; and delivered His strength into captivity, His glory into the enemy’s hand." (Psa 78:58-61.) All dooms presage the final doom, and so it is here. The "outer darkness" will be when those who have said to God, "Depart from us, for we desire not the knowledge of Thy ways," shall have their awful prayer fulfilled! And who can imagine what this means? But "there," we are told, "shall be the wailing and gnashing of teeth."
5. The history goes with the ark into the Philistines’ land. Their victory becomes their own defeat; which yet, as a testimony to them, might be mercy, -the only mercy that their hostility permitted. They themselves would find, and would have to own, the powerlessness and folly of their idols in the presence of God, with whom they also had to do; although we know of no permanent effect of it, except their restoration of the ark, with offerings for the trespass they had committed.
(1) The ark is taken to the city of Ashdod, the "spoiler," and put as spoil into the temple of Dagon, the chief Philistine god. Though they know Jehovah’s power as a reality, they look at Him as now subdued by the great might of Dagon: for the gods of polytheism could war against one another, as we know. In thus placing it beside their deity, there seems intimated, however, a certain respect. All the more would be their confusion on finding, the next morning, Dagon prostrate upon his face, as if worshipping before the ark. But they are willing to think it an accident, and they replace the idol in its old position. Next morning it is prostrate again, but not to be so easily replaced, for the human parts -the head and hands -of the composite fish-god are cut off, and lying on the threshold, and only the Dagon, the fish-part, is left him. The confusion man has made is thus undone; the human joined to the bestial is seen to be but contemptible and to be trodden under foot, and the creature is prostrate in the presence of the Creator. How well for them, if they had learnt these lessons! Instead of this, where the desecrated head and hands have lain, the worshipers in Ashdod no more dare to step! So little is idolatry a thing of the mind merely, that, face to face with God, they will pick up and reverence their mutilated idol. "When they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened; professing themselves wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things." This is the spiritual genealogy of idolatry, wherever it is found. And such is man!
(2) The Lord’s hand falls, therefore, next upon the Philistines themselves; and they are smitten with boils or tumors, which cannot be, apparently, more clearly defined. As with the similar plague in Egypt (Exo 9:8-12, n.), the external plague may naturally symbolize and lay bare the inward condition, the corruption which consumes the sinner, and underlies all his departure from God. Unwilling to humble themselves fully under Jehovah’s hand, they send the ark about from one place to another, only spreading the evil wherever it goes, until they end the unequal conflict by its restoration to the Israelite territory.
(3) Seven months the ark had been in the Philistines’ land. At last they call together the priests and diviners, and inquire how they are to send it back. Their advice is to send back with it a trespass-offering, after their heathen fashion, five golden images of their boils, and five golden mice, which were at the same time ravaging their fields. But, after all, they speak somewhat doubtfully, for where will not unbelief find an argument? -and propose an expedient by which it may be tested whether possibly yet it might be a chance that had happened to them. In result it is proved conclusively that Jehovah is the God. of Creation, supreme above all the natural instincts: the kine, though unaccustomed to a yoke, take the cart with its sacred burden directly away from where their calves are shut up, even while lowing after them, and take the straight road to Bethshemesh, a priestly city near the Israelite border. There, at the border, they stop, still under the eyes of the Philistine lords, at a great stone upon which the Levites place the ark, and where the kine are offered up a burnt-offering to Jehovah.
Thus the Philistines have Jehovah’s sovereignty demonstrated to them in the precise terms which they have themselves chosen, -the goodness of God thus meeting them with what should have turned them from idolatry forever, and brought them to His feet. But they go back, after all, to worship instead the humbled Dagon.
But the men of Bethshemesh also incur divine judgment for their profane treatment of Jehovah’s ark, and follow the example of the Philistines in sending it elsewhere. The men of Kirjath-jearim respond to their invitation, and there it abides for long in the house of Abinadab, kept by Eleazar his son. There David found it afterwards "in the fields of the wood (jaar)" (Psa 132:6). Yet the long-suffering of the Lord endured. He had already provided, as we know, the instrument of deliverance.
{*1Sa 6:14; 1Sa 6:18. The Septuagint reads, "the great stone," eben for abet. This is probable, though others think abet, "mourning," to be intended, from the mourning connected with the judgment which follows.}
{*1Sa 6:19. It is impossible to suppose that Bethshemesh had 50,000 inhabitants, still less "men"; and the Hebrew text shows signs of interpolation. Literally it reads, "seventy men, fifty thousand men." Josephus, and a few of Kennicott’s MSS., omit the larger number, with the approbation of Thenius, Keil, Erdmann, and others. Fausset would read, "seventy men, fifty out of a thousand men."}
6. (1) Twenty years now elapse. A long discipline of sorrow is required before the humbled people turn with their heart to God. During all this time Samuel is patiently laboring for Him, urging upon them whole-hearted return, and the absolute putting away of all strange gods, the necessary hindrance to their deliverance. At last the Baals and Ashtoreths are put away, and throughout the land Jehovah alone is served. Then the deliverance, which would have been else but a letting loose for evil, is ready to be accomplished.
(2) Samuel now distinctly takes the place of mediator. He is, of course, ideally the prophet, not the priest; but in every type of Christ something of His full place is seen. In connection with the prophet, who brings the message of God, the subjective side of salvation is emphasized -repentance and turning to God; but Samuel turns to God also for the people, and offers even the priestly sacrifice. There is not a hint of what some imagine -the intervention of a priest in this latter case; and in the case of Gideon and others, though not so formally, we have had already the performance of priestly acts. Samuel is the child of prayer, and he is ever also the man of prayer. The repentance of the people enables him confidently to take the place of intercession for them: "Gather all Israel to Mizpah," he says, (the outward manifestation of the heart-unity now existing among the people), "and I will pray Jehovah for you." He is, like Samson, the Nazarite, set apart from the womb to Jehovah, and in whom, as not in Samson, the spiritual side of this is shown. He is thus victorious in a strife in which Samson fails, and "not by might, nor by power," but through the Lord in whom he trusts. All Israel are gathered to Mizpah, and draw water and pour it out before Jehovah, acting out the piteous plea of the woman of Tekoah afterwards (2Sa 14:14): "We must needs die, and are as water spilt upon the ground, which cannot be gathered up again." But here they own that the dissolution of their lives in vanity and misery is the consequence of their sin: "We have sinned against Jehovah"; and now, according to the principle which has been before announced as to the Lord’s deliverances, that when He delivered He raised up a judge, the judge appears again: "Samuel judged the children of Israel in Mizpah."
This brings about the inevitable conflict. They had not gathered for battle; and were, in fact, in the extreme opposite condition to their former self-confidence in which they had provoked the Philistine attack. On the other hand, nothing more surely provokes the attack of the enemy than united Israel suppliant before the Lord. Accordingly, at once we hear of them in movement, while Israel, scarcely armed and helpless, can only urge on Samuel to cry ceaselessly to God for their deliverance. Happily they can say now, with truth of heart, "Jehovah our God": when did He fail to appear for those who could say so?
Samuel’s reliance is not on spear or shield. He takes one sucking lamb, and offers it as a whole burnt-offering to Jehovah. This is his plea, and thus he cries to God for the people; and Jehovah answers. The offering does not, as most commentators say, represent the newly pledged obedience of the people, -poor ground of confidence as it would be in such a strait: but Christ, from his birth, the absolutely devoted One, the "Lamb," as in the perfect youth of glorious manhood. How blessed a Substitute for the tardy and spotted obedience of our best performances! While Samuel offers, the Philistines draw nigh. Who shall convert the crowd of feeble and affrighted people into warriors? All the more shall the Lord, therefore, Himself be seen: Jehovah thundered with a great voice on that day against the Philistines": how would all His former witness in their land interpret to them this voice! "And they were smitten before Israel."
No great victory, after all, for Israel to boast of; except they will boast themselves in the Lord: a victory, therefore, safe and glorious, -the very best that could be. "And the men of Israel went out of Mizpah, and pursued the Philistines, and smote them as far as below Beth-car," -the "house of the [skipping] lamb": Israel, seen now as identified with the lamb sacrificed in their behalf, housed and happy.
So Ebenezer at last gains its name -the "stone of help." "The Philistines were humbled, and came no more into the border of Israel." The cities taken by them are restored; and Jehovah’s hand is against them all the days of Samuel. With the rise of the king, matters assume, as we know, another aspect.
(3) Samuel is now the prophet-judge in Israel. The judge shadows the king, although not that; and thus we see in Samuel, as a type of Christ, the intimation of what in Him are united in full reality, -priest, prophet, king. It is only an intimation, not the reality, and thus points, as does the whole Old Testament, beyond itself. All types must, for this reason, be imperfect: the "shadow, and not the very image." (Heb 10:1.) Yet the shadow has its proportional completeness: the high priest, as answering by Urim, became in so far the prophet and judge, -two things which naturally come together; the king, as we see him in David, is fully the prophet, while he orders the priestly service, and brings the ark to Zion. But here, for reasons we may see afterward, the type cannot be so complete.
There are four stations at which, in yearly circuit, Samuel judges the people. Let us notice, as illustrative of the exact method of Scripture, that three of the places are distinguished from the fourth, which is his own abode. They should thus stand the numerical test throughout; and being in circuit, show, perhaps, an orderly connection in their meanings also. Let us see if this hope be justified.
Naturally, as judicial stations, they will speak of different points of view, according to which judgment will be exercised; according to which Christ, as Son of man (for all judgment is committed to him as that) views the people He has redeemed. This will probably show us, also, why it is the fourth place at which he abides, -Ramah.
Bethel is the first station. It is a name which we are well acquainted with, as with what it stands for. Bethel is the "house of God" (El, the Mighty One), and we see in Jacob the discipline connected with it, as well as the mighty work that is done by this -the transformation of Jacob into Israel. In the order of the Genesis-histories Jacob follows Isaac, in whom we have, as Paul in Galatians teaches us, the children of the free woman, born into the liberty of the sons of God. Bethel is thus a keynote word, which tells of the rule of God as Father over His house, with the blessed consequences of this.
But Christ is "Son over the house of God,"* and this character of judgment must belong to Him. We begin, therefore, first with that which is first of all our place. Children of God, and with the Spirit of adoption, we must be His children (Mat 5:45), acting in character, and showing likeness to Him, as "partakers of the divine nature" (2Pe 1:4). The Father’s judgment is to develop and maintain this in us; and this, therefore, is plainly the first judicial station of our Samuel.
{*Heb 3:6. where we must read, with the Revised Version, "over his house," -God’s, -not "his own," as in the common version.}
The second is Gilgal, where the reproach of Egypt was rolled off Israel; and this, as we have elsewhere seen (p. 43), was the reproach of slavery. In what we have just now considered, we have already had implied for us the liberty of sons (and this is the connection with the present); but it is circumcision that at Gilgal brings into practical liberty. Circumcision it is that makes Gilgal; and circumcision is the "putting off the body of the flesh" (Col 2:11, R.V.), "having no confidence in it." (Php 3:3.) This goes with what is the positive side for the Christian, the worship of God in the Spirit, and glorying in Christ Jesus; and thus the free, holy, happy service of love is maintained.
The negative attainment without the positive is impossible; but it is the negative that is here insisted on: as the second place implies, the deliverance, the setting free. The judgment here is thus the complement of what Bethel has shown us.
The third station is one more difficult to realize in its exact meaning. Mizpah (or Mizpeh) means simply the "watchtower," and the general thought is susceptible of different applications. (See pp. 104, 134.) The third place, which naturally connects itself with the sanctuary and the presence of God, would suggest, however, that the watching is to be taken as in Hab 2:1, "I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what He will say unto me." The gatherings to Mizpah in the book of Judges (Jdg 20:1-48), and just now, according to the word of Samuel, have both, more or less, this character. It would appear, therefore, that what is implied in it is the watchfulness of one to whom the path of faith is a reality, and thus the positive guidance of God from day to day. So were Israel guided, as we know; and even more does the promise on His part speak the need of it, "I will guide thee with mine eye." (Psa 32:8.) For this there must be patient and steady watching; and the whole difference between a right path and a wrong is implied in it. Abstract right and wrong are by no means the whole question, and do not settle the matter for us. Beyond this lies all the will of God, personally, for each one of His own, with which is involved His whole right over them, but also the display of His wisdom and goodness abidingly in their behalf. Here, then, is a distinct ground of judgment from either of the former, a third station for our Prophet-Judge.
The fourth is Samuel’s own city, Ramah, the "height." The name is, in its full length, Ramathaim-zophim, the "two heights of the watchers." Here we are in connection clearly with the last thought. The meaning and application we have already had. It suggests the place in Christ, linked with his appearance as Man in the presence of God for us, the dwelling-place of the Son of man, that it is His as Man being emphasized by the fourth place here. Yet we have traveled, in fact, in circuit, as Samuel did: for this we cannot disconnect from His own saying, "My Father, and your Father; my God, and your God;" or from the end designed by God, "that He should be the first-born among many brethren." We are looking, therefore, toward Bethel again.
But here is the abiding ground of judgment, even as "walk ye in Him" is our peculiar responsibility as Christians. With this the circle of responsibility is complete. Here, too, is the altar to Jehovah, our place of acceptance and worship. The Lord make us realize in all this the fullness and depth of His precious word!
The Books of the Kings.
F. W. Grant.
F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible (4th ed., 1903) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain On v1 The Birth of Samuel
The Birth of Samuel
Hannah, the childless wife of Elkanah, is. grieved by her childlessness, and prays for a son. Her prayer is heard, and in gratitude she consecrates her child to the service of Jehovah.
Read full note →
1. Ramathaim-zophim] Ramathaim ('double height') probably denotes the district in which Ramah ('height') was the chief town. It was at Ramah that Samuel was born, lived, laboured, died, and was buried. As Ramah was a common name in a hilly country like Palestine, Zophim is here added to denote that this Ramah was in the land of Zuph (1Sa_9:5). But even so, the exact position of Ramah has not been determined with certainty. Mount Ephraim] RV 'the hill country of Ephraim.' Ephrathite] RV 'Ephraimite.'
2. Two wives] The reason was probably the barrenness of Hannah, which Elkanah would consider a disgrace. Thomson states that at the present day in the East it is considered sufficient reason for a divorce. But here, as elsewhere in OT., we find evidence of the unhappiness which polygamy often produced.
3. Yearly] lit. 'from time to time.' The Law commanded every male to appear before God three times in the year, and there are strong reasons for assigning a very early date to the practice. Of course, the phrase 'from time to time' can mean 'from year to year,' when the context so defines it (as in Exo_13:10); but otherwise there is no justification for so limiting it. lord of hosts] This title of God occurs here for the first time, and its use was probably occasioned by the warlike character of the book. As used in the books of Samuel, 'the hosts' are the armies of Israel (1Sa_17:45), but afterwards the idea was extended to the hosts of angels (Psa_103:20-21). Shiloh] Joshua set up the Tabernacle there (Jos_18:1), as being central and in the territory of his own tribe. For its position, see Jdg_21:19. And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, the priests of the Lord, were there] rather, 'and there the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were priests to the Lord.'
5. A worthy portion] LXX reads 'But unto Hannah he gave a single portion.' Elkanah gave portions to Peninnah and to each of her sons and daughters. But in spite of his love for Hannah, he only gave her a single portion, because she had neither son nor daughter. The Heb. text, as it stands, cannot be translated. The portion was the part of the sacrifice consumed by the offerer and his family: see Leviticus 7.
6. Her adversary] i.e. Peninnah. The word is a common one in Arabic to denote a rival, or fellow-wife.
7. As he did so] Probably the true text is 'So it happened.' Did not eat] refused to take any part in the festival, of which the sacrificial meal was a principal feature (cp. 1 Samuel 9).
9. Eli the priest] i.e. the chief priest. How Eli had attained this rank we do not know, for he was descended from Ithamar the younger son of Aaron, and not from Eleazar the elder son. It has been supposed that in those troublous times the office was bestowed upon him on account of his ability and piety. Upon a seat by a post] RV 'upon his seat by the door post,' where he could see all who went in or out: cp. 1Sa_4:13.
11. See Numbers 6 respecting the Nazirite vow.
16. A daughter of Belial] lit. 'a daughter of worthlessness,' i.e. a worthless woman. 'Belial' came to be used as a name for Satan (2Co_6:15). Grief] RV 'provocation.'
20. Samuel] The name Samuel is here connected with the verb saal, 'to ask'; but this seems only to have been a popular etymology. Most probably Samuel means 'name of God': cp. 1Sa_1:28.
21. His vow] Perhaps Elkanah had vowed an offering to God if Hannah had a son, which he now fulfilled: cp. Lev_7:16.
22. Until the child be weaned] After this the ordinary attendants at the Tabernacle would be able to take charge of him. In the Koran the usual time for weaning is stated to be the age of two years.
23. His word] LXX 'thy word.' No mention has been made in the preceding account of any promise of God.
24. Three bullocks] Probably one bullock was for the burnt-offering, which accompanied the dedication of Samuel, another was for Elkanah's usual sacrifice, while the third was the thank-offering he had vowed (1Sa_1:21).
28. Lent] RV 'granted,' as in Exo_12:36. And he worshipped the Lord there] These words interrupt the connexion and are rightly omitted by LXX.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain On v1 Analysis and Annotations
Analysis and Annotations
I. SAMUEL THE PROPHET AND JUDGE
Read full note →
1. The Birth and Childhood of Samuel
CHAPTER 1
1. Elkanah and his wives (1Sa 1:1-8)
2. Hannah’s prayer and vow (1Sa 1:9-18)
3. The prayer answered and Samuel born (1Sa 1:19-20)
4. The child weaned and presented unto the Lord (1Sa 1:21-28)
The descent of Samuel opens the book. The names are of striking significance. Elkanah means “acquired of God.” He was the son of Jeroham (tenderly loved), the son of Elihu (my God is He), the son of Tohu (prostration), the son of Zuph (honeycomb). They were pious generations from which the great man came. Elkanah had two wives. Hannah (grace) the much beloved was barren; Peninnah (pearl) had children. The fact that Hannah’s name stands first makes it probable that her barren condition led Elkanah to marry a second wife. (See Deu 21:15.) Elkanah was an Ephraimite. But from 1Ch 6:20-28 we learn that Samuel and his father were of levitical descent. This has been pointed out as a discrepancy. It is however not at all inconsistent with the statement that Samuel’s father was of Ephraim. He was one of those Levites to whom cities were assigned in the portion given to the tribe of Ephraim (Jos 21:20).
Each year Elkanah went to Shiloh to sacrifice unto the LORD of Hosts. It is noteworthy that the name of God as “LORD of Hosts” (Jehovah Zebaoth) appears here for the first time in the Bible. (It is found 281 times in the Bible. It is not found in the Pentateuch; it occurs some 80 times in Jeremiah and 50 times in Zechariah.) It is the name of God as the Lord of power, the Lord of all the hosts of heaven and earth. That it is used the first time in the book which reveals the Kingdom is especially appropriate.
Hannah in her visits to Shiloh presents a sorrowful picture. She is beloved and receives a double portion from Elkanah, while Peninnah, her adversary, provoked her on account of her childless condition, so that she wept and did not eat at the feast. Then she arose from the sacrificial feast which she had not tasted and sought the presence of the Lord. There she wept and vowed a vow that if the Lord of hosts would grant her a man-child she would give him back to the Lord and he should be a Nazarite. She cast herself upon the Lord and laid hold on Him. Samuel therefore was the child of prayer, asked of the Lord; his whole life afterwards manifests the spirit of prayer and dependence.
Then Eli the priest is mentioned for the first time. He was astonished seeing her thus engaged in silent prayer and accused her of drunkenness. His astonishment and accusation are a witness to the sad state of Israel. Evidently few ever sought the presence of the Lord, and his reproof makes it evident that it was not an uncommon thing that drunkenness prevailed during the feasts at Shiloh.
Hannah’s prayer was answered. The son is born and was called Samuel, which means “heard of God.” Little did she know of the mighty work her son was called to do; her prayer was answered far beyond her thought. She did not go up again to Shiloh till the child was weaned. Then she went up to fulfill her vow and presented him unto the Lord. Before Samuel could begin to serve the Lord he had to be weaned. “As a weaned child no longer cries, frets, and longs for the breast, but lies still and is content, because it is with its mother, so the soul must be weaned from all discontented thoughts, from all fretful desires of earthly good, waiting in stillness upon God, finding its satisfaction in His presence, resting peacefully in His arms.” (Perowne, The Psalm.) He began to minister at once unto the Lord before Eli the priest (2:11). He was brought up in the sanctuary and became that solid, earnest, prayerful man of God. It is the weaning and the sanctuary every servant of Christ still needs. And Hannah had given back to the Lord what He so graciously had bestowed upon her. This should be the case with all our prayer-answers.
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v1 The Unhappiness and the Prayer of Hannah
The Unhappiness and the Prayer of Hannah
v. 1. Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim, of Mount Ephraim, usually called Ramah, some six miles northwest of Jerusalem, in the territory of Benjamin, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, after whom this special region was named, an Ephrathite, Cf 1Ch 6:22-27, belonging to the tribe of Levi;
Read full note →
v. 2. and he had two wives: the name of the one was Hannah (charm, grace), and the name of the other Peninnah (coral, pearl); and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children. The bigamy of Elkanah, though tolerated by God among the Jews, was opposed to the original divine institution of monogamy, and the misfortune which attached to this relation appeared in Elkanah’s married and family life.
v. 3. And this man went up out of his city yearly, year after year, to worship and to sacrifice unto the Lord of hosts in Shiloh, evidently at the Feast of Passover and of Unleavened Bread, since he took his whole household along. And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, the priests of the Lord, were there. This notice is here inserted by the author to prepare for the subsequent history. Elkanah, as a true Israelite, worshiped the great Lord of hosts, the one true God, and be brought his sacrifices of peace offerings in order to strengthen his fellowship with this God.
v. 4. And when the time was that Elkanah offered, it happened on the day that he brought his sacrifice, he gave to Peninnah, his wife, and to all her sons and her daughters, portions, as their part of the sacrificial feast, Deu 12:11-13;
v. 5. but unto Hannah he gave a worthy portion, a double portion; for he loved Hannah, she was his favorite wife, as Rachel had been Jacob’s; but the Lord had shut up her womb, He had given her no children, and childlessness was rightly held to be a great misfortune, a reproach, even a divine punishment, Gen 19:31; Gen 30:1-23.
v. 6. And her adversary, Peninnah, who was jealous of Elkanah’s special love for Hannah, also provoked her sore for to make her fret, to make her worried and excited, because the Lord had shut up her womb, while Peninnah, more fortunate in child-bearing and therefore boastful, made it a point to vex her with her childlessness.
v. 7. And as he, Elkanah, did so year by year, followed the same custom, when she went up to the house of the Lord, so she, Peninnah, provoked her, for she had her flock of children about her and made use of the occasion to sneer at lonely Hannah; therefore she wept and did not eat, she was too deeply hurt to have any appetite.
v. 8. Then said Elkanah, her husband, to her, Hannah, why weepest thou, and why eatest thou not, and why is thy heart grieved? This is a climax showing his deep anxiety and solicitude for her. Am I not better to thee than ten sons? The deep and tender love of the husband tried to console her in her great disappointment.
v. 9. So Hannah rose up after they had eaten in Shiloh, and after they had drunk, at the conclusion of the sacrificial meal. Now Eli, the priest, the high priest at that time, sat upon a seat by a post of the Temple of the Lord, at the entrance to the Tabernacle of Jehovah, the palace of the Lord.
v. 10. And she was in bitterness of soul, on account of the continuance of her hopelessness and of the vexations which she suffered from her adversary, and prayed unto the Lord, and wept sore, her many tears being an expression of her grief because all her petitions up to that time had been unheard.
v. 11. And she vowed a vow and said, O Lord of hosts, Jehovah of Sabbath, if Thou wilt indeed look on the affiliation of Thine handmaid, the misery of her childlessness, and remember me, and not forget Thine handmaid, but wilt give unto Thine handmaid a man child, then I will give him unto the Lord all the days of his life, consecrate him for lifelong service in the Tabernacle, to which the Levites were not pledged otherwise; and there shall no razor come upon his head, he was to be a perpetual Nazarite, Num 6:2 ff.
v. 12. And it came to pass, as she continued praying before the Lord, in a long and urgent prayer, that Ell marked her mouth, for she was evidently out in the court of the Tabernacle, not far from the altar of burnt offerings.
v. 13. Now Hannah, she spake in her heart, literally, "to her heart"; she was so deeply engrossed with her trouble that she forgot her surroundings. Her face was full of expressive eagerness and emotion, but her communing with the Lord was all in her heart. Only her lips moved, in the intensity of her fervor, but her voice was not heard. Therefore Ell, drawing a. rash and profane conclusion, thought she had been drunken, having partaken of too much wine at the sacrificial meal.
v. 14. And Eli said unto her, How long wilt thou be drunken? Put away thy wine from thee, namely, by sleeping off its effects in secret, where her supposed condition would offend no one.
v. 15. And Hannah answered and said, No, my lord; I am a Woman. of a sorrowful spirit, in deep trouble, this being an emphatic and indignant denial of Eli’s suspicions; I have drunk neither wine nor strong drink, a very intoxicating beverage made of barley, dates, and honey, but have poured out my soul before the Lord. Cf Psa 42:5.
v. 16. Count not thine handmaid for a daughter of Belial, be was not to place her on a level with worthless bad women; for out of the abundance of my complaint and grief have I spoken hitherto, while Eli had observed her.
v. 17. Then Eli answered and said, not only retracting his accusation, but remembering the dignity of his office, Go in peace; and the God of Israel grant thee thy petition that thou hast asked of Him. not a prophecy, but a sincere wish and prayer.
v. 18. And she said, Let thine handmaid find grace in thy sight, she showed her modesty, reverence, and humility in accepting the kind wishes of the high priest. so the woman went her way and did eat, her heart was eased, so she could partake of food, and her countenance was no more sad. The right conclusion of a prayer is a confident Amen, which testifies that we are sure of the hearing of our prayer by God in advance.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On v1 This is the name of a small village possibly…
Ramathaim
This is the name of a small village possibly located eight kilometers northwest of Jerusalem. (See: How to Translate Names)
Read full note →
the Zuphites
This is the name of a people group that descended from Zuph. (See: How to Translate Names)
Elkanah ... Jeroham ... Elihu ... Tohu ... Zuph
These are the names of men. (See: How to Translate Names)
Peninnah
This is the name of a woman. (See: How to Translate Names)
translationWords
Ephraim
Hannah
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv1–2 1:1 Elkanah was a Levite (1 Chr 6:22-27). After…
1:1 Elkanah was a Levite (1 Chr 6:22-27). After the conquest of the Promised Land, the Levites were given towns in the territories of the other Israelite tribes, including Ephraim (Josh 21:20). • Elkanah’s hometown was Ramah (1 Sam 2:11). This location should not be confused with the Ramah in the tribal area of Benjamin (see Josh 18:25; Judg 19:13; Matt 2:18). • The region of Zuph was named after one of Elkanah’s ancestors, a Levite of the clan of Kohath (1 Chr 6:35). Saul first met Samuel in Zuph while searching for his father’s donkeys (1 Sam 9:5). • Elkanah’s lengthy genealogy suggests he was socially prominent.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.