A man of God came to Eli and said to him, “Yahweh says, ‘Did I reveal myself to the house of your father when they were in Egypt in bondage to Pharaoh’s house?
Parallel Translations
-
A man of God came to Eli and said to him, “Yahweh says, ‘Did I reveal myself to the house of your father when they were in Egypt in bondage to Pharaoh’s house?
-
And there came a man of God unto Eli, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Did I plainly appear unto the house of thy father, when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh’s house?
-
And there came a man of God unto Eli, and said unto him: 'Thus saith the LORD: Did I reveal Myself unto the house of thy father, when they were in Egypt in bondage to Pharaoh's house?
Cross-references (11)
Passages linked to 1 Samuel 2:27 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Judges 13:6 Then the woman came and told her husband, saying, “A man of God came to me, and his face was like the face of the angel of God, very awesome. I didn’t ask him where he was from, neither did he tell me his name;
- Exodus 4:14-16 Yahweh’s anger burned against Moses, and he said, “What about Aaron, your brother, the Levite? I know that he can speak well. Also, behold, he is coming out to meet you. When he sees you, he will be glad in his heart. You shall speak to him, and put the words in his mouth. I will be with your mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what you shall do. He will be your spokesman to the people. It will happen that he will be to you a mouth, and you will be to him as God.
- Exodus 4:27 Yahweh said to Aaron, “Go into the wilderness to meet Moses.” He went, and met him on God’s mountain, and kissed him.
- Deuteronomy 33:1 This is the blessing with which Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death.
- 1 Kings 13:1 Behold, a man of God came out of Judah by Yahweh’s word to Bethel; and Jeroboam was standing by the altar to burn incense.
- Exodus 12:1 Yahweh spoke to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying,
- Exodus 12:43 Yahweh said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the ordinance of the Passover. No foreigner shall eat of it,
- Judges 6:8 Yahweh sent a prophet to the children of Israel; and he said to them, “Yahweh, the God of Israel, says, ‘I brought you up from Egypt, and brought you out of the house of bondage.
- 1 Samuel 9:4 He passed through the hill country of Ephraim, and passed through the land of Shalishah, but they didn’t find them. Then they passed through the land of Shaalim, and they weren’t there. Then he passed through the land of the Benjamites, but they didn’t find them.
- 1 Timothy 6:11 But you, man of God, flee these things, and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, perseverance, and gentleness.
- 2 Peter 1:21 For no prophecy ever came by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke, being moved by the Holy Spirit.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (20 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 To wit, Aaron.
To wit, Aaron.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain 1Sa 2:27 And there came a man of God…
1Sa 2:27 And there came a man of God unto Eli, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Did I plainly appear unto the house of thy father, when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh’s house?
Ver. 27. And there came a man of God unto Eli.] This man of God was Samuel, saith Junius: but that is not likely; rather it was Elkanah, as the Hebrews will have it, or some other prophet extraordinarily raised up by God, to show Eli and his sons their ingentia beneficia, flagitia, supplicia. Yet some good divines hold that this prophecy is part of that sent afterwards to Eli by Samuel, {1Sa 3:11-14} and here set down by way of anticipation.
Read full note →
Did I plainly appear unto the house of thy father?] viz., Of Aaron, of whom thou art descended by Ithamar. This referreth, saith Lyra, to Exo 4:27, before which time Aaron was a prophet, say the Hebrews, and prophesied in Egypt, reproving the Hebrews for their idolatry there, and that one of his sermons was recorded by Ezekiel. {a}
{a} Pet. Martyr.
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 A man of God, i.e. a prophet or preacher…
A man of God, i.e. a prophet or preacher sent from God. See 1Ti 6:11; 2Ti 3:17; 2Pe 1:21. Who this was is not revealed by God, and therefore it is vain to inquire, and impossible to determine.
Did I plainly appear? did I indeed show such a favor, and appear so evidently and gloriously to thee, and for thee, and is this thy requital?
Read full note →
unto the house of thy father, i.e. unto Aaron the chief of thy father’s house.
When they were in Egypt: see Exo 4:27. Pharaoh’s house, i.e. either,
1. In Pharaoh’s land; the whole kingdom being, as it were, one great family, whereof Pharaoh was the master. Or,
2. In Pharaoh’s court, where Aaron might probably be at the time of this revelation, either to answer to some accusation against him or his brethren, or to beg some relaxation of the rigour, or for some other occasion.
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 Eli reproved his sons too gently, and did not…
Eli reproved his sons too gently, and did not threaten them as he should, and therefore God sent a prophet to him to reprove him sharply, and to threaten him, because, by his indulgence of them, he had strengthened their hands in their wickedness. If good men be wanting in their duty, and by their carelessness and remissness contribute any thing to the sin of sinners, they must expect both to hear of it and to smart for it. Eli's family was now nearer to God than all the families of the earth, and therefore he will punish them, Amo 3:2. The message is sent to Eli himself, because God would bring him to repentance and save him; not to his sons, whom he had determined to destroy. And it might have been a means of awakening him to do his duty at last, and so to have prevented the judgment, but we do not find it had any great effect upon him. The message this prophet delivers from God is very close.
I. He reminds him of the great things God had done for the house of his fathers and for his family. He appeared to Aaron in Egypt (Exo 4:27), in the house of bondage, as a token of further favour which he designed for him, Sa1 2:27. He advanced him to the priesthood, entailed it upon his family, and thereby dignified it above any of the families of Israel. He entrusted him with honourable work, to offer on God's altar, to burn incense, and to wear that ephod in which was the breast-plate of judgment. He settled upon him an honourable maintenance, a share out of all the offerings made by fire, Sa1 2:28. What could he have done more for them, to engage them to be faithful to him? Note, The distinguishing favours we have received from God, especially those of the spiritual priesthood, are great aggravations of sin, and will be remembered against us in the day of account, if we profane our crown and betray our trusts, Deu 32:6; Sa2 12:7, Sa2 12:8.
Read full note →
II. He exhibits a high charge against him and his family. His children did wickedly, and he connived at it, and thereby involved himself in the guilt; the indictment therefore runs against them all, Sa1 2:29. 1. His sons had impiously profaned the holy things of God: "You kick at my sacrifice which I have commanded; not only trample upon the institution as a mean thing, but spurn at it as a thing you hate to be tied up to." They did the utmost despite imaginable to the offerings of the Lord when they committed all that outrage and rapine about them that we read of, and violently plundered the pots on which, in effect, Holiness to the Lord was written (Zac 14:20), and took that fat to themselves which God had appointed to be burnt on his altar. 2. Eli had bolstered them up in it, by not punishing their insolence and impiety: "Thou for thy part honourest thy sons above me," that is, "thou hadst rather see my offerings disgraced by their profanation of them than see thy sons disgraced by a legal censure upon them for so doing, which ought to have been inflicted, even to suspension and deprivation ab officio et beneficio - of their office and its emoluments." Those that allow and countenance their children in any evil way, and do not use their authority to restrain and punish them, do in effect honour them more than God, being more tender of their reputation than of his glory and more desirous to humour them than to honour him. 3. They had all shared in the gains of the sacrilege. It is to be feared that Eli himself, though he disliked and reproved the abuses they committed, yet did not forbear to eat of the roast meat they sacrilegiously got, Sa1 2:15. He was a fat heavy man (Sa1 4:18), and therefore it is charged upon the whole family (though Hophni and Phinehas were principally guilty), You make yourselves fat with the chief of all the offerings. God gave them sufficient to feed them, but that would not suffice; they made themselves fat, and served their lusts with that which God was to be served with. See Hos 4:8.
III. He declares the cutting off of the entail of the high priesthood from his family (Sa1 2:30): "The Lord God of Israel, who is jealous for his own honour and Israel's, says, and lets thee know it, that thy commission is revoked and superseded." I said, indeed, that thy house, and the house of thy father Ithamar (for from that younger son of Aaron Eli descended), should walk before me for ever. Upon what occasion the dignity of the high priesthood was transferred from the family of Eleazar to that of Ithamar does not appear; but it seems this had been done, and Eli stood fair to have that honour perpetuated to his posterity. But observe, the promise carried its own condition along with it: They shall walk before me forever, that is, "they shall have the honour, provided they faithfully do the service." Walking before God is the great condition of the covenant, Gen 17:1. Let them set me before their face, and I will set them before my face continually (Psa 41:12), otherwise not. But now the Lord says, Be it far from me. "Now that you cast me off you can expect no other than that I should cast you off; you will not walk before me as you should, and therefore you shall not." Such wicked and abusive servants God will discard, and turn out of his service. Some think there is a further reach in this recall of the grant, and that it was not only to be fulfilled shortly in the deposing of the posterity of Eli, when Zadok, who descended from Eleazar, was put in Abiathar's room, but it was to have its complete accomplishment at length in the total abolition of the Levitical priesthood by the priesthood of Christ.
IV. He gives a good reason for this revocation, taken from a settled and standing rule of God's government, according to which all must expect to be dealt with (like that by which Cain was tried, Gen 4:7): Those that honour me I will honour, and those that despise me shall be lightly esteemed.
1. Observe in general, (1.) That God is the fountain of honour and dishonour; he can exalt the meanest and put contempt upon the greatest. (2.) As we deal with God we must expect to be dealt with by him, and yet more favourably than we deserve. See Psa 18:25, Psa 18:26.
2. Particularly, (1.) Be it spoken, to the everlasting reputation of religion or of serious godliness, that it gives honour to God and puts honour upon men. By it we seek and serve the glory of God, and he will be behind-hand with none that do so, but here and hereafter will secure their glory. The way to be truly great is to be truly good. If we humble and deny ourselves in any thing to honour God, and have a single eye to him in it, we may depend upon this promise, he will put the best honour upon us. See Joh 12:26. (2.) Be it spoken, to the everlasting reproach of impiety or profaneness, that this does dishonour to God (despises the greatest and best of beings, whom angels adore) and will bring dishonour upon men, for those that do so shall be lightly esteemed; not only God will lightly esteem them (that perhaps they will not regard, as those that honour him value his honour, of whom therefore it is said, I will honour them), but they shall be lightly esteemed by all the world; the very honour they are proud of shall be laid in the dust; they shall see themselves despised by all mankind, their names a reproach; when they are gone, their memory shall rot, and, when they rise again, it shall be to everlasting shame and contempt. The dishonour which their impotent malice puts upon God and his omnipotent justice will return upon their own heads, Psa 79:12.
V. He foretels the particular judgments which should come upon his family, to its perpetual ignominy. A curse should be entailed upon his posterity, and a terrible curse it is, and shows how jealous God is in the matters of his worship and how ill he takes it when those who are bound by their character and profession to preserve and advance the interests of his glory are false to their trust, and betray them. If God's ministers be vicious and profane, of how much sorer punishment will they be thought worthy, here and for ever, than other sinners! Let such read the doom here passed on Eli's house, and tremble. It is threatened,
1. That their power should be broken (Sa1 2:31): I will cut off thy arm, and the arm of thy father's house. They should be stripped of all their authority, should be deposed, and have no influence upon the people as they had had. God would make them contemptible and base. See Mal 2:8, Mal 2:9. The sons had abused their power to oppress the people and encroach upon their rights, and the father had not used his power, as he ought to have done, to restrain and punish them, and therefore it was justly threatened that the arm should be cut off which was not stretched out as it should have been.
2. That their lives should be shortened. He was himself an old man; but instead of using the wisdom, gravity, experience, and authority of his age, for the service of God and the support of religion, he had suffered the infirmities of age to make him more cool and remiss in his duty, and therefore it is here threatened that none of his posterity should live to be old, Sa1 2:31, Sa1 2:32. It is twice spoken: "There shall not be an old man in thy house for ever;" and again (Sa1 2:33), "All the increase of thy house, from generation to generation, shall die in the flower of their age, when they are in the midst of the years of their service," so that though the family should not be extinct, yet it should never be considerable, nor should any member of it come to be eminent in his day. Bishop Patrick relates, out of some of the Jewish writers, that long after this, there being a family in Jerusalem none of which commonly lived above eighteen years, upon search it was found that they descended from the house of Eli, on which this sentence was passed.
3. That all their comforts should be embittered. (1.) The comfort they had in the sanctuary, in its wealth and prosperity: Thou shalt see an enemy in my habitation. This was fulfilled in the Philistines' invasions and the mischiefs they did to Israel, by which the country was impoverished (Sa1 13:19), and no doubt the priests' incomes were thereby very much impaired. The captivity of the ark was such an act of hostility committed upon God's habitation as broke Eli's heart. As it is a blessing to a family to see peace upon Israel (Psa 128:5, Psa 128:6), so the contrary is a sore judgment upon a family, especially a family of priests. (2.) The comfort of their children: "The man of thine whom I shall not cut off by an untimely death shall live to be a blot and burden to the family, a scandal and vexation to his relations; he shall be to consume thy eyes and grieve thy heart, for his foolishness or his sickliness, his wickedness or his poverty." Grief for a dead child is great, but for a bad child often greater.
4. That their substance should be wasted and they should be reduced to extreme poverty (Sa1 2:36): "He that is left alive in thy house shall have little joy of his life, for want of a livelihood; he shall come and crouch to the succeeding family for a subsistence." (1.) He shall beg for the smallest alms - a piece of silver (and the word signifies the least piece) and a morsel of bread. See how this answered the sin. Eli's sons must have the best pieces of flesh, but their sons will be glad of a morsel of bread. Note, Want is the just punishment of wantonness. Those who could not be content without dainties and varieties are brought, they or theirs, to want necessaries, and the Lord is righteous in thus visiting them. (2.) He shall beg for the meanest office: Put me into somewhat belonging to the priesthood (as it is in the original); make me as one of the hired servants, the fittest place for a prodigal. Plenty and power are forfeited when they are abused. They should not be able to pretend to any good preferment, not to any place at the altar, but should petition for some poor employment, be the work ever so hard and the wages ever so small, so they might but get bread. This, it is probable, was fully accomplished when Abiathar, who was of Eli's race, was deposed by Solomon for treason, and he and his turned out of office in the temple (Kg1 2:26, Kg1 2:27), by which it is easy to think his posterity were reduced to the extremities here described.
5. That God would shortly begin to execute these judgments in the death of Hophni and Phinehas, the sad tidings of which Eli himself should live to hear: This shall be a sign to thee, Sa1 2:34. When thou hearest it, say, "Now the word of God begins to operate; here is one threatening fulfilled, from which I infer that all the rest will be fulfilled in their order." Hophni and Phinehas had many a time sinned together, and it is here foretold that they should die together both in one day. Bind these tares in a bundle for the fire. This was fulfilled, Sa1 4:11.
VI. In the midst of all these threatenings against the house of Eli, here is mercy promised to Israel (v. 35): I will raise me up a faithful priest. 1. This was fulfilled in Zadoc, of the family of Eleazar, who came into Abiathar's place in the beginning of Solomon's reign, and was faithful to his trust; and the high priests were of his posterity as long as the Levitical priesthood continued. Note, The wickedness of ministers, though it destroy themselves, yet it shall not destroy the ministry. How bad soever the officers are, the office shall continue always to the end of the world. If some betray their trust, yet others shall be raised up that will be true to it. God's work shall never fall to the ground for want of hands to carry it on. The high priest is here said to walk before God's anointed (that is, David and his seed) because he wore the breast-plate of judgment, which he was to consult, not in common cases, but for the king, in the affairs of state. Note, Notwithstanding the degeneracy we see and lament in many families, God will secure to himself a succession. If some grow worse than their ancestors, others, to balance that, shall grow better. 2. It has its full accomplishment in the priesthood of Christ, that merciful and faithful high priest whom God raised up when the Levitical priesthood was thrown off, who in all things did his father's mind, and for whom God will build a sure house, build it on a rock, so that the gates of hell cannot prevail against it.
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 And did I choose him out of all the…
And did I choose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest,.... He did; of all the tribes of Israel the Lord chose the tribe of Levi to place the priesthood in, and of all the families of that tribe he chose the house of Aaron, Eli's ancestor, to minister in the priest's office, see Exo 28:1.
to offer upon mine altar; burnt offerings, sin offerings, and peace offerings; this is the altar of burnt offering, which stood in the court of the tabernacle:
Read full note →
to burn incense; on the altar of incense, which was in the holy place, and on which incense was burnt morning and evening:
to wear an ephod before me? in which was the breastplate, with the Urim and Thummim, with which the high priest went into the most holy place, where was the ark, the symbol of the divine Presence, and where he inquired of the Lord by the above things:
and did I give unto the house of thy father all the offerings made by fire of the children of Israel? he did; the priests who were of the house of Aaron had not only the sin offerings, and part of the peace offerings, but even of the offerings made by fire, the burnt offerings; the skin of them was the priest's, and the meat offerings that went along with them, see Lev 6:25 and Lev 8:8 which were given them for their maintenance. Now these instances of God's goodness to the family of Aaron are mentioned to aggravate the sins of Eli and his sons.
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 Man of God - That is, a prophet sent…
Man of God - That is, a prophet sent from God.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 27. There came a man of God] Who…
Verse 27. There came a man of God] Who this was we know not, but the Chaldee terms him נביא דיי nebiya daya, a prophet of Jehovah.
Unto the house of thy father] That is, to Aaron; he was the first high priest; the priesthood descended from him to his eldest son Eleazar, then to Phinehas. It became afterwards established in the younger branch of the family of Aaron; for Eli was a descendant of Ithamar, Aaron's youngest son. From Eli it was transferred back again to the family of Eleazar, because of the profligacy of Eli's sons.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain 1Sa 2:27-28. There came a man of God unto…
1Sa 2:27-28. There came a man of God unto Eli — That is, a prophet, sent from God to deliver the following message to him: Did I plainly appear — Hebrew, Manifestly reveal myself unto the spouse of thy father — Unto Aaron, who was the head of the family of the priests. It is the way of the prophets, when they call men to repentance for their sins, to show them the aggravations of these sins, by enumerating God’s many and great mercies to them. See Isa 1:2, &c.; Mic 6:3-5. All the offerings made by fire — There were none of the sacrifices offered at the altar of which the priest had not some share: see Num 18:8-10. For even of the burnt-offerings, which were wholly consumed on the altar, the skin was, by an express law, given to the priest, Lev 7:8.
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 A man of God - See Jdg 13:6 note.…
A man of God - See Jdg 13:6 note. The sudden appearance of the only prophet of whom mention is made since Deborah, without name, or any notice of his country, is remarkable.
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 A man. His name is unknown. Some say it…
A man. His name is unknown. Some say it was Elcana, Samuel or an angel, &c. The Rabbins suppose that Phinees performed this office. But he was long ago dead, (Calmet) or he would still have enjoyed the high priesthood instead of Heli. --- Father’s. Aaron was the chief both of the house of Eleazar and of Ithamar, and was selected by God to be his ambassador and priest. (Haydock) --- His posterity held the high priesthood till after the reign of Herod. (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 The prophecy of a Man of God of the…
FIFTH SECTION
The prophecy of a Man of God of the divine judgment on Eli’s house and of the calling of a faithful priest
Read full note →
1Sa_2:27-36
27And there came a man of God41 unto [to] Eli and said unto [to] him, Thus saith the Lord [Jehovah], Did I plainly appear [reveal myself] unto [to] the house of thy father when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh’s house [in servitude42 to the house 28of Pharaoh]? And did I choose [I chose43] him [it] out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest [to do priestly service to me], to offer44 upon my altar, to burn incense, to wear an ephod before me? [om.?], and did I give [I gave] unto [to] the house of thy father all the offerings made by fire [the fire-offerings] of the children 29of Israel? [om.?]. Wherefore kick ye at [trample ye under foot] my sacrifice and at [om. at] mine [my] offering which I have commanded in my habitation,45 and honorest thy sons above me to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the 30offerings [the best of every offering] of Israel my people?46 Wherefore [Therefore] the Lord [Jehovah] God of Israel saith, I said indeed47 that thy house and the house of thy father should walk before me for ever; but now the Lord saith [saith Jehovah], Be it far from me; for them that honor me I will honor, and they that 31despise me shall be lightly esteemed. Behold, the days come that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father’s house, [ins. so] that there shall not be an 32old man in thine house. And48 thou shalt see an enemy in my habitation in all the wealth which God shall give Israel [thou shalt see distress of house in all that does 33good to Israel]; and there shall not be an old man in thy house for ever. And the man of thine whom I shall not cut off [And I will not cut off every man of thine49] from my altar shall be [om. shall be], to consume thine eyes, and to grieve thine [thy] heart; and all the increase of thine [thy] house shall die in the flower 34of their age.50 And this shall be a [the] sign unto [to] thee, that [ins. which] shall come upon thy two sons, Hophni and Phinehas: in one day they shall die both of 35them. And I will raise me up a faithful priest, that [who] shall do according to that which is in my heart and in my mind [soul], and I will build him a sure51 36house, and he shall walk before my anointed for ever. And it shall come to pass that every one that is left in thy house shall come and crouch to him for a piece52 of silver and a morsel of bread, and shall say, Put me, I pray thee, into one of the priests’ offices, that I may eat a piece of bread.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1Sa_2:27. The “man of God” (for the expression comp. Deu_33:1; Jdg_13:6) who appears here is undoubtedly to be regarded as a prophet, both from this title, which marks him as standing in a specific relation to God, and from the introduction of his address: “Thus saith the Lord.” This is, however, not the first mention of a prophet after Moses (Thenius); against this are Jdg_4:14; Jdg_6:8.—[Bib. Comm.: “The term (man of God) is applied to Moses in Deu_33:1; Jos_14:6; and to different prophets upwards of forty times in Judg., Sam. and Kings, most-frequently in the latter. In the Prophets it occurs only once (Jer_35:4). It occurs six or seven times in Chron., Ezra and Neh., and in the inscription of Psalms 90, and nowhere else in the Old Testament. The sudden appearance of a man of God, the only prophet of whom mention is made since Jdg_6:8, without name, or any notice of his country, is remarkable.”—Tr.]—Thus saith the Lord.—Called and commissioned hereto by the Lord, he is nothing but His instrument; what he says is the very word of the Lord.—Did I reveal myself?—The interrog. particle (הֲ) stands here to strengthen the reality of the fact treated of, a question being introduced to which an affirmative reply is a matter of course, where in German [and in English] a not must be inserted. Comp. Jer_31:20; Job_20:4; Ges. § 153, 2. The Inf. Abs. (נִגְלֹה) shows the feeling of the question, and strengthens the assurance or assertion contained in it. By Eli’s father’s house we cannot understand Ithamar and his family, since a divine revelation to them in Egypt is out of the question; it is rather the family of Aaron (from whom Eli descended through Ithamar), as the high-priestly house. Aaron and his four sons, Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, when they were in Egypt, “belonged to Pharaoh’s house,” were its subjects, property (לְבֵית פּ׳); the suffix ־ָם (when they were) refers not to the children of Israel, but to “the house of thy father.”
During the Egyptian bondage Aaron received the divine revelations by which he was called along with Moses to be God’s instrument for the redemption of His people; and with Moses he received the command to institute the feast of the Passover (Exo_4:14 sqq., Exo_4:27;Exo_12:1; Exo_12:43). These revelations were the preparation and foundation for the calling of Aaron and his house to the high-priesthood.—[So far as the calling was concerned, the house of Aaron and the house of Eli were identical. Hence Eli is in this discourse identified with Aaron as to his privileges, but distinguished from the whole house as to his sin and its Punishment.—TR.]
1Sa_2:28. [Erdmann renders: “I chose it (the house of thy father) to perform priestly service.”—TR.]53
How that house (Aaron and his sons) were formally called and appointed to the priestly office is circumstantially related in Exodus 28, 29. Comp. especially Exo_28:1; Exo_29:9; Exo_29:30; Exo_29:44, with Lev_8:1 sq. and Numbers 18—The priestly service is described in three grades, corresponding to the three divisions of the Sanctuary: 1) “to offer54 on my altar,” where the altar of burnt-offering with its service is meant; 2) “to burn incense.” Incense had to be burned daily. The incense-offering alone is named, and represents the other offerings as the indication of the priestly service in the Holy Place, Exo_30:8; Exodus 3) “to wear the ephod before me.” The high-priest wore the ephod55 when he went officially into the Most Holy place to represent the people before God, Exo_28:12; Exo_28:29-30.—And I gave to the house of thy father, etc.—The divine wages for these priestly services is the maintenance which the priests derived from the offerings. The “firings” (fire-offerings, אִשֵּׁי ב׳) are the same as “the firing and the firings of the Lord” (Lev_1:9; Lev_2:10; Deu_18:1) in the offerings, and so are the things offered. According to Num_18:20; Deu_10:9; Deu_18:1, the Levites, and therefore the whole priesthood, received no inheritance in land; their support was provided for by the portions of the offerings appointed them by law, that is, all sacrificial gifts, so far as they were not burnt in offering the sacrifice, Lev_6:7; Numbers 18.
1Sa_2:29. In the preceding verses (27, 28) reference is made to the favor which had been shown the family of Eli in their selection and calling to the service of priests in the Sanctuary, and their maintenance with the offerings is mentioned as proof of the Lord’s care for His servants; there the question (1Sa_2:27) was introduced by the simple interrog. sign (הֲ); here the more sharply toned question with “why” (לָמָּה) portrays in distinct contrast the wicked conduct of the priests: Why do ye trample under foot? etc.—“Sacrifice and offering” (זֶבַח וּמִנְחָה) is a “general designation for all altar-offerings” (Keil). בָּעַט “is in Aram. first tread (Heb. דרך), and might thence (as בום ,דרך, Jdg_5:23; Pro_27:7) like ‘tread’ in many languages figuratively mean to treat with contempt” (Böttcher). מָעוֹן, the “dwelling,” in pregnant sense is the Tabernacle, as the Lord’s dwelling-place in the midst of His people. Though the word has not elsewhere in itself this meaning, yet it follows here and in 1Sa_2:32 from the connection, which without difficulty permits the same addition that we find in Psa_26:8, “of thy house.” There is no need therefore here to suppose (with Thenius) either a wrong reading or in general anything superfluous, particularly not the latter, because the Lord’s abode with His people was in fact the scene of the priests’ enormities, and their guilt thus appeared so much the greater. מָעוֹן is Accus. of place “in the dwelling” (= בַּיִת “in the house”). Böttcher proposes as a “faultless text” א׳ צִוִּיתִים עָוֹן, “why do ye trample under foot,… what I commanded them, sinfully,” where the suffix “them” refers to the Israelites (1Sa_2:28), and עָוֹן “sin,” is taken in the sense of בְּעָוֹן, “in sin,” which is found in Psa_51:7. But according to the preceding explanation there is no need for such a change, apart from the fact “that the ‘sinfully’ precisely speaking is already contained in the ‘trample under foot’ ” (Thenius). He says: “why do ye trample,” etc., because Eli was partaker in the guilt of his sons; because he, not only as father towards sons, but also as high-priest towards them as priests, was weakly lacking in the proper chastisement and in the enjoined holy strictness. Eli ought to have opposed his sons as a zealous contender for the Lord’s honor; since he did not do this, he not only made himself partaker of their guilt, but honored his sons before the Lord, more than the Lord, because he spared them, and showed unseasonable paternal gentleness. In the plu. pron. “make yourselves fat,” Eli’s guilt is again referred to; what they did, namely, that they took (1Sa_2:15) the first (רֵאשִׁית) of the offering before the best of the offering (מִנְחָה) was presented to the Lord by burning it in the fire of the altar, that he did along with them; they made themselves fat. The wickedness of Eli and his sons in connection with the offering is also put here in two-fold form, namely, against God (“my offering”), and against the people as the people of the Lord (all the offerings of Israel, my people).56 After the reference to the guilt follows now the judgment, the announcement of punishment, which applies to Eli as well as to his sons and his whole house.
1Sa_2:30. אָמַרַתִּי=I had said.—The house of thy father in connection with “thy house,” indicates the whole priestly connection in all its branches from Aaron down, to whom with his sons the same expression in 1Sa_2:27 refers. For this reason, if for no other, because “the house of thy father” must mean the same here as in 1Sa_2:27, we must set aside the view that here only Ithamar’s family is meant, to which the high-priesthood passed from Eleazar’s family, and to which Eli belonged. But also the expression: should walk before me for ever, is in conflict with this view. The “walking before the Lord” would be understood in too narrow a sense, on the one hand, if it were restricted to the entrance of the high-priest into the Holy of Holies, and in too wide a sense, on the other hand, if it were regarded as a general description of a pious walk before God, as in Gen_17:1. Rather it points to the life in priestly service before the Lord promised to the house of Aaron for ever (Exo_29:9). The promise of the “covenant of an everlasting priesthood” was renewed to Phinehas, the son of Eleazar (Num_25:13) for his zeal for the Lord’s honor. This fact and its motive contribute essentially to the explanation of what here follows. The “and now” introduces a declaration opposed to that promise, not in the sense that the latter is annulled, but in reference to its non-fulfilment for those in whom the condition of its fulfilment was lacking.— Far be it from me, that is, this promise shall not be fulfilled unless the condition be fulfilled which is expressed in the words: Those that honor me I will honor.—According to the priests’ attitude towards God the Lord in their whole walk will be His attitude towards them in respect to the fulfilment of His promise.
1Sa_2:31-32. The general truth of the last words in 1Sa_2:30, which emphasize in the distinctest manner the ethical condition of the exercise of the holy sacerdotal office in the priest’s bearing towards God, is applied to Eli and his house in 1Sa_2:31, and contains the standard by which he with his sons is judged. I will cut off thy arm.—The “arm” signifies might, power, Psa_10:15; Job_12:9. “There shall not be an old man in thy house.” Thus will be shown that the strength of the family and the house is broken; for strength is shown in reaching a great age. No one in Eli’s house shall attain a great age. This supposes that sickliness will early consume its members. “On the aged rested the consideration and power of families” (Böttcher). As the house of Eli will perish, so will also the house of God suffer affliction (1Sa_2:32). הִבִּיט always means to look with astonishment or attention (Böttcher, Num_12:8; Isa_38:11; Psa_10:14); צָר is only “oppressor” or “enemy,” and is not to be rendered “rival” or “adversary,” as Aquila (ἀντίζηλος) and Jerome (œmulus), and also Luther and De Wette give it; מַעוֹן “dwelling” is here to be understood of the dwelling-place of God, not of Eli. From these meanings it follows that Samuel cannot be here referred to, since he was not an enemy of Eli, nor the installation of Zadok in Abiathar’s place (1Ki_2:27), for Zadok was not Abiathar’s enemy. Something must be meant which Eli lived to see with astonishment or consternation in the house of the Lord, and it can therefore only be the oppression of the house by the oppressor or enemy who met Israel in the person of the Philistines, carried away the ark, and thus robbed the Lord’s house of its heart. We do not need therefore to alter the text to “rock of refuge” (צֻר סָעוֹז), as Böttcher proposes. “In all which” (בּכֹל אֲשֶׁר) is not to be rendered with De Wette “during the whole time which.” In יִיִלטִיב “shall do good” we must not supply a י as name of Jehovah (Kennicott), nor, as is commonly done, make Jehovah the subject (De Wette, Keil, etc.). “There is no reason why we should not take “all which” itself as unpersonal subject; precisely where י׳ has an unpersonal subject, it has, as here, a simple Acc. after it, Pro_15:13; Pro_15:20; Pro_17:22; Ecc. 20:9, while, with a personal subject, a preposition follows, Exo_1:20; Num_10:32; Jdg_17:13” (Böttcher). The affliction of God’s house from the loss of the Ark remained, while under the lead of Samuel there came blessing to the people. This is the fulfilment of this prophecy in reference to the affliction of God’s dwelling. “Not an old man” is repetition of the threat in 1Sa_2:31, and return of the discourse to the judgment on Eli’s house. “All the days” [Eng. A. V. for ever], for ever, that is, as long as his family existed. [Both text and translation of 1Sa_2:32 offer great difficulties. Vat. Sept. omits it. Al. Sept. and Theod.: “Thou shalt see strength” (κραταίωμα), etc. The Syr. and Arab.: “and (not) one who holds a sceptre in thy dwelling,” which involves a totally different text. Targ. has “thou shalt see the affliction which will come on a man of thy house in the sins which ye have committed in the house of my sanctuary.” The omission in Vat. Sept. was probably occasioned by the similar endings of 1Sa_2:31-32; the other versions and all the MSS. contain the verse, one MS. only of De Rossi giving מָעוֹז, “strength,” instead of מָעוֹן, “dwelling.” We must therefore retain the Heb. text, and explain the repetition of the last clause as intended to give emphasis to the statement in question. But, as צָר frequently means “distress,” and as the course of thought here suggests affliction for Eli’s house rather than for God’s, it is better to render: “thou shalt see distress of dwelling in all that brings prosperity to Israel,” the contrast being between the national prosperity and his personal affliction, which would thus exclude him from the national rejoicing, and so from the evidence of the divine favor. And we may regard the latter clause of the verse: “there shall not be an old man,” etc., as defining the “affliction” which is here brought out as a punishment additional to the “weakness” of 1Sa_2:31.—TR.]
1Sa_2:33. Böttcher declares De Wette’s explanation: “and I will not let thee lack a ingle man,” to be incorrect, and Thenius’ reference to the definite one “Ahitub” (1Sa_14:3; 1Sa_22:20) to be without ground, and then remarks (on וְאִישׁ לֹא): “There remains no other course but to regard it as an infrequent, but not unexampled exceptional case. In Heb., as is well known, a negative in a sentence with אִישׁ (“man”) and בל (“all”), whether it stand before or after, negatives these words not alone, but in connection with the whole sentence, and thus אַל אִישׁ ,לֹא אִישׁ mean not “not every one,” but “no one,” and so too אִישׁ אַל ,אִישׁ לֹא, Exo_16:19; Exo_34:3; Lev_18:6. But when the accent falls on the word expressive of universality by an adversative particle, as here (וְאִישׁ), the following negation may affect this word alone, as in Num_23:13. Accordingly we render here: “Yet I will not cut off every one from thee.” The following words: to consume thine eyes and to grieve thy heart, or “that I may consume,” etc., mark the highest degree of punishment which would befal Eli but for the limitation contained in the words “not every man.” Thenius refers this limitation specially to Ahitub, son of Phinehas, and brother of Ichabod, against which Keil justly remarks that it cannot be proved from 1Sa_14:3 and 1Sa_22:20 that he was the only one who survived of Eli’s house.57—The following words: the great majority or mass shall die as men, not only answer to the repeated threat in 1Sa_2:31-32, that there should be no old man in the house, but at the same time explain the declaration of 1Sa_2:31 : “I will break thine arm;” for “men” (אֲנָשִׁים) indicates the power and strength of the house, and is contrasted with “old man” (Luther: “when they have become men;” Van Ess: “in mature age”).—On מ׳ ב׳, “multitude,” “majority,” not “offspring,” comp. 1Ch_12:29; 2Ch_30:18.—[Sept.: “And every survivor of thy house shall fall by the sword of men.” Vulg.: “and the great part of thy house shall die when they attain the age of men.” Targ.: “and all the multitude of thy house shall be slain young.” Syr.: “and all the pupils (so Castle renders marbith) of thy house shall die men.” Philippson: “and all the increase of thy house shall die as men.” The Eng. A. V. probably gives the sense. The adj. “all” does not suit the rendering “multitude,” which Targ. and Erdmann adopt. In regard to the first clause of the verse, the rendering of Eng. A. V. seems to be possible, that is, the taking לֹא א׳ as indef. rel. clause. Erdmann regards the reservation of the “man” as a limitation of the punishment (“consume, grieve”); Eng. A. V. better, with most expositors, as an element of the punishment. Mendoza (in Poole’s Synopsis): “I will take from thee the high-priesthood, which thou hast by privilege; I will give thee or thy descendants the priesthood of the second order, which thou hadst by hereditary right.” Grotius: “They shall live that they may be the greatest grief to thee.”—Long afterwards this curse was held to cling to the family of Eli. Gill cites a saying of the Talmud that there was a family in Jerusalem the men of which did not live to be more than eighteen years old, and Johanan ben Zacchai being asked the reason of this, replied that they were perhaps of the family of Eli.—Sept. has “his eyes” and “his soul,” instead of thy; but there is no good ground for altering the Heb. text.—TR.]
1Sa_2:34. The fact announced, the death of his two sons in one day (1Sa_4:11), was to be a sign to Eli, who lived to see it, that this threat affecting his whole house should be fulfilled. The realization of this threat began with that event. Not all of Eli’s descendants indeed perished in this judgment, and among his immediate posterity were some who filled the office of priest, namely, Phinehas’ son, Ahitub; Ahitub’s sons, Ahiah (1Sa_14:3; 1Sa_14:18) and Ahimelech (1Sa_22:9; 1Sa_22:11; 1Sa_22:20); Ahimelech’s son, Abiathar (1Sa_22:20). Ahiah and Abiathar filled the high-priestly office. But Ahimelech and “all his father’s house, the priests, who were at Nob,” were hewn off from Eli’s family-tree. And Abiathar, Ahimelech’s son, who escaped that butchery (1Sa_22:19), and as a faithful adherent of David enjoyed the dignity of high-priest, was deposed from his office by Solomon. The office of high-priest passed now forever from Ithamar’s family, and went over to Eleazar’s, to which Zadok belonged; the latter from now on was sole high-priest, while hitherto Abiathar had exercised this office along with him.—Thus was to be fulfilled the negative part of the prophetic announcement (1Sa_2:31-34): gradually Eli’s house went down in respect to the majority of its members [better, in all its increase.—TR.]; the office of high-priest, which the surviving members for some time filled, was at last taken away from it altogether.
1Sa_2:35 sqq. Now follows the positive part of the prophecy.—But I will raise me up a faithful priest.—The priestly office, as a divine institution, remains, though those that fill it perish because they are unworthy, and because their life contradicts its theocratic meaning, and therefore falls under the divine punishment. The “faithful priest” is, in the first place, to be understood in contrast with Eli and his sons, to whom the above declaration of punishment was directed. We may distinguish the following facts in the announcement of this priest of the future, who is to assume the theocratic-priestly position between God and His people in place of Eli and his house: 1) he is to be raised up by God directly, that is, not merely called and chosen, but (according to the exact meaning of the word) set up; his priestly position is to be historically fixed and assigned by God directly and in an extraordinary manner; 2) he will be a faithful priest, that is, will not merely be in keeping with the end and meaning of his calling, but, in order to this, will be and remain personally the Lord’s own in true piety and in firm, living faith, constantly and persistently devoted to the Lord his God, and seeking only His honor; 3) he will do, act, according to the norm of the divine will; as faithful priest of God, he knows what is in God’s heart and soul, he knows His thoughts and counsels; these will be the rule by which (כַּאֲשֶר) he will act as a man of God, as a servant after his heart; 4) and I will build him a sure house, his family will continue as one well-pleasing to me and blessed, and will not perish like thine—this shall be the reward as well as the result of his faithfulness; 5) he shall walk before my anointed for ever. The “anointed” is the theocratic king, whom the Lord will call. Walking before Him denotes the most cordial life-fellowship with Him. In this reference of the prophetic announcement to the “anointed of the Lord” is expressed the same expectation of a theocratic kingdom as in the close of Hannah’s song.
In 1Sa_2:36 is added another feature in the portraiture of the faithful priest: in this close connection with the kingdom, he will occupy so exalted, honorable and mighty a position over against the fallen house of Eli, that the needy and wretched survivors of that house will be dependent on him for existence and support.—On the כּל before הַנּוֹתָר, where, on account of the following Article, it signifies all, whole, comp. Ges., § III., 1 Rem., Ew., § 290 c. “All the rest, all that remains.” The אֲגוֹרַת בֶּסֶף is “a small silver coin collected by begging” (Keil). The lower the remains of Eli’s house sink even to beggary, the higher will the “faithful, approved priest,” of whom the prophet here speaks, stand. In the immediate future of the theocratic kingdom he will see far beneath him those of Eli’s house who are still priests in humble dependence on him.
This prophecy found its fulfillment from the stand-point of historical exposition in Samuel. That the author of our Books had him in view in his account of the man of God’s announcement is clear from the narration immediately following in 1 Samuel 3; here the voice of the divine call comes to the child Samuel at the same time with the revelation imparted to him of the judgment against the house of Eli. He is indeed expressly called by the divine voice to be prophet; his first prophetic duty, which he performs as God’s organ, is the announcement of the judgment on Eli in the name of the Lord; it is true, it is said of him in 1Sa_2:20, that he was known in all Israel to be faithful and confirmed (נֶאֱמָן) as a prophet. But the summary statement of his prophetical vigor and work in 1Sa_2:19-21, in which the epithet “faithful, confirmed,” points back to the same expression in 1Sa_2:35, is connected with the reference to Shiloh and the constant revelations there, which had begun with the one made to Samuel; by the express reference to Shiloh Samuel’s prophetic character and work are at the same time presented under the sacerdotal point of view. An essential element of the calling of priest was instruction in the Law, the announcement of the divine will (Lev_10:11; Deu_33:10), and Mal_2:7, expressly declares the duty of the priest in these words: “the priest’s lips shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law from his mouth, for he is a messenger of heaven;” and so that prophecy of a faithful priest is all the more fulfilled in Samuel (whose words to the people, 1Sa_3:19-21, had the pure and the practical word of God in the Law for their content), because the priesthood of his time had proved itself unworthy and unable to fulfil this calling. The further sacred priestly acts which Samuel performed (1Sa_3:19-21), and the mediating position between God and the people as advocate and intercessor expressly ascribed to him in 1Sa_7:5 characterize him as the faithful, approved priest who is announced here in 1Sa_2:35-36. The other single traits in the picture suit Samuel. In the list of theocratic instruments of the succeeding period there is none that surpasses him; he surpasses them all so far, that our gaze fixes itself on him in seeking for a realization of this announcement in connection with the fulfilment of the threat against Eli and his house. Samuel’s bearing and conduct is everywhere such that the declaration “ he shall do according to what is in my heart and soul,” is verified in no other theocratic-prophetic and priestly person so eminently as in him. A sure house the Lord built him according to 1Ch_6:33; 1Ch_25:4-5. His grandson was Heman “the singer, the king’s seer in the words of God,” father of fourteen sons and three daughters. The intimate relation of Samuel to the theocratic kingdom under Saul and David, the Lord’s anointed kings, is an obvious fulfilment of the prophecy “he shall walk before my anointed for ever.” The raising up of the fore-announced priest was to follow immediately on the punishment of Eli and his house. In point of fact Samuel steps into the gap in the priesthood which that judgment made as priestly and high-priestly mediator between God and the people, as is shown by the passages cited and by the whole character of his work. By the corruption of its traditional representatives the hereditary priesthood had come to be so at variance with its theocratic significance and mission, that the fulfilment of this mission could be attained, in this great crisis in the development of Israel’s history into the theocratic kingdom, only in an extraordinary way, through direct divine calling, by such an instrument as Samuel. The statement, in the concluding words, of the walking of the faithful priest before the Lord’s anointed is fulfilled exactly (according to the above explanation) in Samuel’s relation to this kingdom.—It is held by some that the prophecy in 1Sa_2:30-36, (compared with 1Ki_2:27, and Joseph. V. 11, 5; VIII. 1, 3), refers to the transition of the priestly dignity from the house of Ithamar to the house of Eleazar, and therefore that this prophecy, in whole or in some parts, was composed in or after the time of Solomon, (De Wette, Einl. § 178 b.; Bertholdt, Einl. III. 916, and Ewald, Gesch. I. 190); against which Thenius (p. 15) properly points out that even after this change the high-priesthood remained still in the family of Aaron, while the words “and the house of thy father,” (1Sa_2:30-31), clearly shows that the prophecy does not speak of a change in the family, and that in 1Sa_2:27-36 we have a genuine ancient prediction of a prophet. Against the view that the prophecy of the “faithful priest” was, according to 1Ki_2:27 fulfilled in the complete transference of the high-priesthood, by the deposition of Abiathar, to the family of Eleazar, to which Zadok belonged, we remark: 1) that (if the advocates of this view mean this family and its succeeding line of high-priests) the words of the prophecy speak of a single person, not of several, or collectively of a body; and 2) that, if Zadok is held to be the “faithful priest” in whom the prophetic word was fulfilled, his person and work have no such epoch-making theocratic significance in the history as we should expect from the prophecy; the expectation is satisfied only in Samuel’s priestly-prophetical eminence. For the rest, the words of 1Ki_2:27 give no ground for the opinion that the prophecy in 1Sa_2:35 is in them referred to Zadok (Thenius), since the passage, having in view Abiathar’s deposition, is speaking merely of the fulfilment of the threatened punishment of Eli’s house, and not at all of the fulfilment of the positive part of the prophecy; there is, therefore, no occasion to speak (with Thenius) of a false conception of this prophecy as early as Solomon’s time. The lofty priestly position, which Samuel took in his calling as Judge and Prophet before the Lord and His people, the priestly work, by which (the regular priesthood completely retiring) he stood as mediator between Jehovah and His people in sacrifice, prayer, intercession and advocacy, and the high theocratic-reformatory calling, in which his “important, sacred duty was to walk before the anointed, the king, whom Israel was to receive through him, while the Aaronic priesthood fell for a good time into such contempt, that, in the universal neglect of divine worship, it had to beg honor and support from him, and became dependent on the new order of things begun by Samuel,” (O. v. Gerlach),—these things prove that, from the theocratic-historical point of view, in him is fulfilled the prophecy of the faithful priest.
[Four different interpretations explain the “faithful priest” to be Samuel, Zadok, Christ, or a line of priests, including Samuel and Zadok, and culminating in Christ; the last seems to be the only tenable one. I. We cannot restrict the prophecy to Samuel, for 1) the “established house” promised the faithful priest is clearly a priestly house, as is evident from a comparison of 1Sa_2:35 with 1Sa_2:30-31, where the everlasting official sacerdotal character of this house is contrasted with the fall of Eli’s priestly house; and Samuel founded no such house. 2) Eli’s house was not immediately deprived of the high-priesthood, nor was it at all excluded from the priesthood. Up to Solomon’s time descendants of Eli were high-priests, and the Jews held that his family continued to exist. Nor did Samuel succeed Eli immediately as Priest and Judges 3) It is an important fact that Samuel is nowhere called a priest, and it is an exaggeration of his position to ascribe to him a complete sacerdotal character. His mediatorial work belonged to him largely as a man of God, and similar work was performed by Moses, David, Solomon, none of whom acted as priests. It is doubtful whether Samuel sacrificed at all, still more whether he usually performed this service. The people are said to have sacrificed (1Sa_11:15), where is probably meant that they did it through the priests, and one passage (1Sa_9:13), seems to exclude Samuel from the act of sacrifice. At any rate his performance of sacrificial service may be regarded as extraordinary and unofficial like that of Gideon (Jdg_6:26-27) and Solomon (1Ki_3:4). But it is true that Samuel’s life developed the conception of the theocratically pure and faithful priest in contrast with the self-seeking and immorality of Eli’s sons. He was the first protest against their profane perversion of the holy office, the first exemplification after Eli’s time of pure-hearted service of God. II. Rashi, Abarbanel and the majority of modern commentators suppose the reference to be to Zadok, Christian writers usually adopting also the Messianic interpretation. And, though 1Ki_2:27 mentions only the deposition of Abiathar as the fulfilment of the judgment on Eli’s house, yet this, taken with 1Sa_2:35, can hardly be dissevered from the installation of Zadok as sole high-priest; the final exclusion of Eli’s representative is followed immediately by the elevation of the Zadokite family, which continues in an unbroken line to Christ. That the Zadokites were the true divinely-appointed priests, is assumed throughout the following books of the Old Testament, and especially in such passages as Eze_44:15, (quoted by Keil). Erdmann’s objections to this view do not seem conclusive. He urges: 1) that the prophecy (1Sa_2:27-36) speaks not of a change within the Aaronic family, but of a setting aside of that family in favor of a non-Aaronic priest.—But this is not the declaration of the prophecy, (1Sa_2:30 speaks of the exclusion of unworthy members, and the reference is plainly to Eli’s immediate family), and is contradicted by the facts of history; for the Aaronic priesthood did continue to the end, while the change announced (1Sa_2:36) was to take place in the history of Israel. Samuel founded no priestly family, and the restriction of the prophecy to him alone is not in keeping with the broadness of its declarations. 2) That Zadok was not specially prominent, and does not exhibit a commanding character cannot be urged against this view, since the prophecy promises not intellectual vigor in the “faithful priest” but theocratic official purity and personal godliness, which Zadok and his descendants in the main exhibited. III. Augustine (De Civ. Dei 17, 5) explains the priest here announced to be Christ alone, basing his view on the breadth and fulness of the statements made about Him. The text does not allow this exclusive reference to Christ, looking plainly, as it does, to the then existing order of things (as in 1Sa_2:36, which Augustine interprets of Jewish priests coming to worship Christ), but it may include Him, or rather point to Him as the consummation of the blessedness which it promises; and the remarkable fulness of the terms in 1Sa_2:35 naturally leads us to this explanation. IV. If the prophecy finds a partial fulfilment in Samuel and Zadok, and also points to Christ, then it would seem best to regard it as announcing a line of faithful men who would do God’s will in full official and personal sympathy with His law. First comes Samuel, not indeed an official priest, but a true representative of the spirituality of the divine service (see 1Sa_15:22). He is followed by Zadok, the father of a long line of priests, who (with many defects) in the main preserve among the people and in the presence of the king the fundamental ideas of the sacrificial service, and are a type (Eze_44:15) of the perfect priesthood into which they are finally merged. To this Erdmann objects that the reference is plainly (1Sa_2:35) to one person, and not to a body of men; but he himself understands the “anointed,” in which the expression of singleness is not less distinct, of Saul and David. If the anointed is to be understood of a line of kings, why not the priest of a line of priests?—This last view then seems best to meet the demands of this confessedly difficult passage. See Keil and Wordsworth in loco.—Tr.].
HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL
1. The “man of God” who, by divine commission, predicts the punishment of Eli and his house is a proof that the prophetic gift, which appears sporadically in the Period of the Judges, had in this its gloomy close not yet disappeared. After it had been said: “ there arose not henceforth a prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (Deu_34:10), nevertheless in the time of the Judges, by whose word as spoken according to the divine calling and commission, the people had to govern themselves, we see prophecy reappearing in the following individuals: Judges 2, the messenger of the Lord,58 who comes up from Gilgal to Bochim, and exhorts the Israelites to repentance in the name of the Lord; chap. 4, the Judge Deborah, who, expressly described as “prophetess,” combines the offices of Judge and Prophet, being the organ of Jehovah’s communications; chap. 6, the Prophet who was sent by the Lord as His messenger, to rebuke Israel for their idolatry, and to call Gideon to deliver Israel from the Midianitish bondage. The content of the prophetic declarations, in keeping with the history of the times, is: announcement of divine punishment for the people’s idolatry through the oppression of enemies, exhortation to repentance, promise of help.
2. The internal decline of the theocratic life of God’s people showed itself in the close of the Period of the Judges principally in the corruption of the sacerdotal office as cause and effect. In regard, therefore, to the priestly mediation between God and the people, there was needed a thorough reformation and a re-establishment of the proper inner relation between them by a true priestly mediation. For this reason the prophetic announcement of the “faithful, true priest” stands at the beginning of the new period, and, at the commencement of the new theocratic development, has an epoch-making fulfilment in Samuel’s person and work, in which the priestly side is chiefly prominent.
3. Samuel is in this respect a type of Christ; the idea of the priesthood, as here in 1Sa_2:35 expressed, found in all respects its completest and most universal fulfilment in Christ’s high-priestly office of mediator between God and man.
4. The conception of the honor of God and of knowing Him is impossible, without the idea of the personal living God, and without the existence of a relation, established by Him, between Him, the living God, and man, in which the consciousness of absolute dependence on Him is connected with that of the obligation to be heartily consecrated to Him and in fellowship with Him. The declaration “he who knows Me,” etc. [1Sa_2:30] expresses God’s righteous procedure in regard to the recognition or non-recognition of His honor by men.
5. When the guilt of the corruption and decline of the religious-moral life of the people rests on “the house of the Lord,” “it is time that judgment should begin at the house of God,” 1Pe_4:17.
6. [The walking of the priest before Jehovah’s anointed indicates a definite separation between the sacerdotal and judicial or governing offices, and a certain subordination of the first to the second. This was a condition of the developed Israelitish state, and appears in proper form first under David. Saul seems to have exercised authority over the priesthood, but in David’s time the relation of political subordination was first united with sincere religious unity of heart and purpose, and thus one step taken towards the perfect and complete form (king, prophet, priest), which was to shadow forth the office and work of Christ.—And, as of Hannah’s anticipation of the king, so we may say of the prediction by this man of God of the united king and priest, that it had its root in the felt need of the times, which, as it existed in its distinctest and intensest form in the most spiritual minds of the nation, was guided and elevated and intensified by the Spirit of God into prevision and prophecy.—Tr.].
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
[1Sa_2:27. A man of God. 1) His office is to come to the people with “Thus saith the Lord.” Though inspiration cannot now be expected, he may be “thoroughly furnished” from the Scriptures (2Ti_3:17). 2) When called to give rebukes and warnings, he should do it with faithfulness, solemnity, and tenderness.—Tr.].
1Sa_2:27-36. The prophet’s sermon of censure, [German Strafpredigt] against Levi and his house. 1) Looking back to the past, it recalls the manifold exhibition of the benefits of God’s grace, 1Sa_2:27-28; 1 Samuel 2) Looking around upon the present, it holds before Eli his sins and those of his house, 1Sa_2:29-30; 1 Samuel 3) Looking out upon the future, it proclaims the divine judgment, 1Sa_2:30-36.
1Sa_2:27-30. To what are we bound by the experience of overflowing manifestations of God’s grace? 1) To be always thankfully mindful of them; 2) To proclaim everywhere the praises of God; 3) By a sober and holy walk to promote the honor of His name.
1Sa_2:27-36. God’s righteousness and grace in union with each other. 1) Grace in union with righteousness, 1Sa_2:27-32; (a) The actual proofs and gifts of God’s grace (1Sa_2:27-29) contain serious demands by the holy and righteous God; (b) The promises of grace are in respect of their fulfilment conditioned by the conduct of man towards God, which is weighed by his righteousness, 1Sa_2:30; (c) In proportion as man in view of the revelation of divine grace gives God the honor or not, he is requited by God according to his righteousness, 1Sa_2:30. 2) The severity of God’s righteousness does not exclude grace, 1Sa_2:30. (a) It suffers itself to lean upon forbearing, softening grace, in order that justice may not execute complete destruction, 1Sa_2:33; 1Sa_2:36; (b) It does not take away the arrangements which grace has established, but guards and preserves them against the sin of men, 1Sa_2:27-29; (c) It does not cause the promises of grace to fall away, but makes room for their fulfilment in another way, 1Sa_2:35.
1Sa_2:30. God the Lord, according to His righteousness, remains no man’s debtor: 1) Whoever honors Him, will He also honor; 2) He who despises Him shall be despised in return.—To honor God the loftiest task of human life: 1) Wherein it consists; 2) How it is performed; 3) What promise and threatening are here concerned.—[I. Some of the ways in which we may honor God. (1) By speaking His name with reverence. (2) By keeping the Lord’s day holy to Him. (3) By propriety of behaviour in public worship. (4) By practically recognizing our dependence on His Providence. (5) By performing all the duties of life as to the Lord (Col_3:17). II. Some of the ways in which He will honor us. (1) In causing us to be respected by our fellow-men (Pro_3:16). (2) In making us the means of converting others. (3) In receiving us to glory, honor and immortality in heaven (Rom_3:7).—Baxter: Never did man dishonor God, but it proved the greatest dishonor to himself. God will find out ways enough to wipe off any stain upon Him; but you will not so easily remove the shame and dishonor from yourselves.—Tr,].
1Sa_2:35. The exercise of the priestly office, which is well-pleasing to God: 1) Its personal condition and pre-supposition, fidelity, firmness, steadfastness, “I will raise me up a faithful priest;” 2) Its rule and measure, “according to that which is in my heart and in my soul;” 3) Its blessing and reward, “and I will,” etc. [Upon the phrase, “he shall walk before my Anointed forever,” comp. above on 1Sa_2:10, Hom, and Pract.—Tr.].
1Sa_2:27-30. The heavy guilt of neglecting the office of household-priest in the rearing of children: 1) It wrongs the welfare and honor of the house, so far as in earlier times God has in grace and compassion crowned it with blessings, 1Sa_2:27-29; 1 Samuel 2) In indulgent and weak love to the children it robs God of the honor which He demands, 1Sa_2:30; 1 Samuel 3) It thereby prepares for the children a sure destruction, 1Sa_2:34; 1 Samuel 4) It often thereby brings a curse and ruin upon succeeding generations, 1Sa_2:31-33; 1Sa_2:36.
[Hall: Indulgent, parents are cruel to themselves and their posterity. Eli could not have devised which way to have plagued himself and his house so much, as by his kindness to his children’s sins.…… I do not read of any fault Eli had but indulgence; and which of the notorious offenders were plagued more!—Tr.].
Footnotes:
[41][1Sa_2:27. Chald. “a prophet of Jehovah.”—Tr.]
[42][1Sa_2:27. לְ often expresses possession, and is here so rendered by Chald. and Sept.—Tr.]
[43][1Sa_2:28. The following וָאֶתְּנָה makes it better not to carry on the interrogation here. Erdmann: “I chose it (thy house) to perform priestly service.”—Tr.]
[44][1Sa_2:28. The Heb. form here may be Qal (“ascend”) or Hiphil (“offer”) but the sense it the same in both cases.—Tr.]
[45][1Sa_2:29. See Exeg. Notes.—Tr.]
[46][1Sa_2:29. The ל is probably repetition from the last letter of the preceding word; see Jos_10:21 for similar case.—Tr.]
[47][1Sa_2:30. “Indeed” is merely intensive, Heb. Infin. Absol.—Tr.]
[48][1Sa_2:32. On the text of this verse see Exeg. Notes.—Tr.]
[49][1Sa_2:33. See Exeg. Notes.—Tr.]
[50][1Sa_2:33. Lit. “shall die men;”. Sept. “by the sword of men,” which Wellhausen prefers, but see Exeg. Notes.—Tr.]
[51][1Sa_2:35. The Heb. word is the same as that rendered “faithful” just before.—Tr.]
[52][1Sa_2:36. More exactly “a small piece;” Erdmann: eine Bettelmünze, “a beggar’s coin.”—Tr.]
[53]Textual and Grammatical.—The Inf. Abs. בָּהֹר stands for the Verb, fin., as a Verb. fin. has preceded in the same sentence (Ges., § 131, 4 a). But the interrog. הֲ does not extend to this Inf. Abs., which stands for the Perf., and makes the discourse absolute.—אֹתוֹ is better referred to בַּיִת than to אָבִיךָ, on account of the following “tribes.” But then we must read with Böttcher and Thenius לְכַהֵן instead of לְכֹהֵן, “as agreeing better with the preceding בַּיִת and the succeeding Inf.” (Böttcher). So the Sept. ἱερατεύειν. Comp. Exo_31:10.—לַעֲלוֹת is contracted from לְהַעֲלוֹת. See Deu_1:33; 2Sa_18:3; Ecc_5:5.
[54][The Germ. has steigen, “ascend,” error for opfern, “offer.”—Tr.]
[55][Germ. achselkleid, “shoulder-dress,” “amice.”—Tr.]
[56] לְעַמִּי “is periphrasis for the Gen., and is chosen in order to make the ‘my people’ more prominent” (Keil). On this periphrasis of the Gen. see Ew. Gr. § 292, a. 3.—[But this does not apply here. See Textual Notes in loco.—Tr.].
[57]Böttcher: לַאֲדִיב is for לְהַדְאִיב=לַדְאִיב, one of the numerous clerical errors in these books.—[It is by no means clear that there is a clerical error here, since we may suppose a stem דאב=אדב as נאק=אנק.—Tr.]
[58][It is doubtful whether the malak can be considered other than an angel.—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.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain A PROPHECY AGAINST ELI'S HOUSE. (Sa1 2:27-35)
A PROPHECY AGAINST ELI'S HOUSE. (Sa1 2:27-35)
there came a man of God unto Eli, and said . . . that there shall not be an old man in thine house--So much importance has always, in the East, been attached to old age, that it would be felt to be a great calamity, and sensibly to lower the respectability of any family which could boast of few or no old men. The prediction of this prophet was fully confirmed by the afflictions, degradation, poverty, and many untimely deaths with which the house of Eli was visited after its announcement (see Sa1 4:11; Sa1 14:3; Sa1 22:18-23; Kg1 2:27).
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain GOD’S DENUNCIATORY MESSAGE TO ELI, 1Sa_2:27-36.
GOD’S DENUNCIATORY MESSAGE TO ELI, 1Sa_2:27-36.
27. A man of God — Either an angel from heaven, as was the one who appeared to Manoah and his wife, (Jdg_13:8.) or a prophet, (1Ki_13:1,) like unto Shemaiah or Elijah. 1Ki_12:22; 1Ki_12:17-18. The expression is that commonly used of a prophet, an inspired human messenger, and is doubtless to be so understood here. This was before the age of prophets, and this man of God appears in the sacred history, like Melchizedek, without father, without mother, without beginning of days or end of life, and so may be regarded as a permanent type of that prophetic order that subsequently arose in Israel, and, by warnings and threatenings, rebuked the wickedness of the people, even in high places, and zealously guarded the interests of the theocracy. He bears no name, but, otherwise, his sudden appearance and fearful message at a time when prophecy was almost unknown in Israel, (1Sa_3:1, note,) are about as remarkable as the saintly appearance of Melchizedek in Abraham’s day.
Read full note →
Thy father — Aaron.
When they were in Egypt in Pharaoh’s house — God revealed himself to Aaron in Egypt when be sent him in the wilderness to meet Moses, (Exo_4:27,) and as his mother and sister were intimate with members of the royal family, (Exo_2:9-10,) so Aaron himself may have had some particular service or position in Pharaoh’s house. But Pharaoh’s house may mean the nation over whom he ruled.
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 27–36. The doom of Eli’s house
27–36. The doom of Eli’s house
27. a man of God] i.e. a prophet commissioned by God. Even in the general decay of religion (1Sa_3:1) God still had his messengers. The title “man of God” is applied to Moses, Samuel, Elijah, Elisha, and others. It is specially frequent in the Books of Kings.
Read full note →
Did I plainly appear] Better, Did I indeed reveal myself. See Exo_4:14 ff., Exo_4:27; Exo_12:1; Exo_12:43 for revelations made to Aaron.
in Pharaoh’s house] In bondage to Pharaoh’s house.
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 (27) There came a man of God.—Of this messenger…
(27) There came a man of God.—Of this messenger of the Highest, whom, from his peculiar title, and also from the character of his communication, we must regard as one of the order of prophets, we know nothing. He appears suddenly on the scene at Shiloh, nameless and—as far as we know—homeless, delivers his message of doom, and disappears.
The term “man of God” we find applied to Moses and to different prophets some forty or more times in the Books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings. It occurs, though but rarely, in Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, and in the prophetical books only once.
Read full note →
Until the sudden appearance of this “man of God,” no mention of a prophet in the story of Israel had been made since the days of Deborah.
Did I plainly appear . . .—The interrogations in this Divine message do not ask a question with a view to a reply, but simply emphatically appeal to Eli’s conscience. To these questions respecting well-known facts the old man would reply with a silent “Yes.” The “house of thy father” refers to the house of Aaron, the first high priest, from whom, through Ithamar, the fourth son of Aaron, Eli was descended.
The Talmud has a beautiful note on this passage:—Rabbi Shimon ben Yochi said, “Come and see how beloved Israel is by the Holy One! Blessed be He! Wherever they are banished, there the Shekinah is with them; as it is said (1Sa_2:27): ‘Did I (God) plainly appear unto the house of thy fathers when they were in Egypt?’ &c. When they were banished to Babylon, the Shekinah was with them; as it is said (Isa_43:14): ‘For your sakes was I sent to Babylon.’ And when they will be redeemed the Shekinah will be with them; as it is said (Deu_30:3): ‘Then the Lord thy God will return with thy captivity;’ it is not said, He will cause to return (transitively), but He will return (intransitively).”—Treatise Meguillah, fol. 29, Colossians 1.
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 THE DIVINE JUDGMENT UPON ELI AND HIS HOUSE (vers.…
CHAPTER 2:27-36
THE DIVINE JUDGMENT UPON ELI AND HIS HOUSE (vers. 27-36).
Read full note →
There came a man of God. The title man of God is the usual appellation of a prophet in the books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings, and as such is applied by Manoah to the angel who appeared to him. (Jud_1:13:6, 8) Though the recorded interpositions of the Deity in those times were generally by angels, still the readiness with which Manoah gave his visitant this title makes it probable that prophets did appear from time to time; and the mission of one, though, as here, without a name, is recorded Jud_1:6:8. As regards the date of this visitation of the man of God, we find that Eli was ninety-eight years of age when the ark was captured. (1Sa_4:15) At that time Samuel was not merely a man, hut one whose reputation was established throughout the whole land, and who was probably regarded not merely as a prophet, but as Eli"s successor in the office of judge. (1Sa_3:19, 1Sa_3:20) But Eli was "very old" (1Sa_2:22) when he rebuked his sons, probably between seventy and eighty, for Samuel is then called a child (ver. 26); whereas he can scarcely have been much less than thirty years of age when the Philistines destroyed Shiloh. In 1Sa_8:1-3, when the misconduct of Samuel"s own sons led to the revival of the agitation for a king, he is himself described as already "old;" but as he lived on till nearly the end of Saul s reign, he could not at that time have been much more than sixty. Even when God spake by him to Eli he is still described as a boy, na"ar, (1Sa_3:1) though the higher position to which he had attained, as is proved by his duties, would lead to the conclusion that he was then verging on manhood. As some time would naturally elapse between two such solemn warnings, we may feel sure that the visit of the man of God occurred shortly after Samuel s dedication. Then, as Eli neglected the warning, and the wickedness of his sons grew more inveterate, some eight or ten years afterwards the warning was repeated in sharper tones by the voice of his own youthful attendant. Meanwhile Eli seems himself to have grown in personal piety, but he could do nothing now for his sons. Past eighty years of age, the time of activity had gone by, and resignation was the sole virtue that was left for him to practise. And so the warning given by the mouth of Samuel is stern and final. Ten or fifteen more years must elapse before the ruin came. But the gloom was deepening; the Philistines were increasing in power, and the valour of Israel was decaying as its morality declined; then there was a short violent crash, and the house of Eli met its doom.
The prophet begins by enumerating Jehovah"s mercies to "the house of thy father," that is, the whole family of Aaron, in selecting them for the priesthood (on the choice of the house of Aaron, see Exo 28:, Exo_28:29), and in richly endowing the office with so large a portion of every sacrifice. These portions are termed literally firings, or fire sacrifices, but the term soon became general, and in Lev_24:7, 9 is applied even to the shew bread. Added then to the tithes, and to the cities with their suburbs given them to inhabit, this share of every sacrifice gave the house of Aaron great wealth, and with it they had also high rank. There was no one above them in Israel except the kings. In Sparta we find that one of the endowments of the kings was the skins of animals offered in sacrifice (Herod., 6:56). Why then do Eli and his sons, who benefit so greatly by them, "kick at Jehovah"s sacrifices and offerings?" The word is taken from Deu_32:15, and refers to the efforts of a pampered steer violently to shake off the yoke. Eli"s sons treat the ordinances which have raised them to rank, and given them wealth and power, as if they were an injury and wrong. And Eli, instead of removing them from the office which they disgraced, preferred the ties of relationship to his duty to God and the moral welfare of the people.
Vers. 27-36.
Impending retribution.
The facts in this section are
1. A Divine message declares to Eli the coming doom of his house.
2. The justice of the judgment is brought home to him by a reference topast privileges enjoyed and sins committed.
3. A painful sign of the certainty of the whole prediction being ultimatelyfulfilled is given in a reference to the sudden death of his two sons, in due time to be realised.
4. Another faithful servant of God is to be raised up to vindicate thehonour which has been despised. The patience of God in allowing men free scope to develope what is in them has its limits. Eli and his sons, though differing in kind and degree of sin, alike are amenable to a law which must be maintained. Although the sons were in the ordinary sense the most guilty, it is significant that the weight of the doom here indicated is intended to fall on the aged parent, thus showing to all ages the solemn responsibility attached to public conduct, and the certainty of terrible chastisement of official transgressors, even though they be not cut off from the covenant mercies that cover sin and save the soul.
I DUTY NEGLECTED AND TROUBLE EVADED ARE SURE TO REASSERT THEMSELVES. Eli got rid of the pressing duty of punishing his sons by substituting a paternal remonstrance, and thus for the time evaded the pain of suppressing the urgency of personal affection and the distress of a family exposure. But "duty" never dies; and the trouble it entails, always passing away when duty is done, continues in aggravated form when duty is neglected. No safer rule in life than to do duty when it is due. The demands of justice will be asserted sooner or later, and they gather in force the more they are shunned. The whole visible and invisible forces of nature, the undeveloped resources that lie in the womb of the future, are on the side of right, and will converge some day on its maintenance. The first trouble in the path of duty is the least. Embarrassments are born of procrastination; for the rule applicable to imperfect knowledge in the midst of difficult circumstances does not apply to the clear decisions of conscience. No time should ever be lost in vindicating the honour of God, the purity of the sanctuary, and the claims of national righteousness. If we do not execute God"s will because of the personal inconvenience and pain it may cause, he will execute it by other means, and nameless griefs shall follow us. History shows how true this is in national, Church, domestic, and private life.
II Clear INDICATIONS OF COMING RETRIBUTION are sometimes given, and THEY BECOME in their immediate effects PART OF THE RETRIBUTION. Many are the "servants" of God that come visibly or invisibly to the disobedient with intimations of what is in store for them. The "man of God" who came to Eli is representative of the forms of the Divine voice which comes to the guilty to disturb the ease they had hoped for in neglecting onerous duties. To the fraudulent, the sensual, the unrighteous ruler, the unfaithful parent and pastor, conscience, leading events, and converging circumstances tell the sad tale of coming woe. The lines of justice are straight, and the wicked are compelled to look along them far ahead. Two important elements enter into the forebodings of coming retribution.
1. A revived power of conscience. The privileges and favours conferred on the house of Eli are brought home to the dormant conscience in contrast with his personal and official conduct. So likewise, by the interaction of the laws of thought, or by converging of painful events, or by some strong passage of Scripture, or by a faithful friend, or by the silent, reflected light of some holy Christian life, the privileges and favours of bygone years are flashed before the spirit, to the sudden terror and quickened action of conscience. Past mercies cannot be thought of in isolation; by a well known mental law they raise up the ghosts of former sins committed in the face of mercies. As the aged Eli saw the truth of the words of the "man of God," so do others see their former selves, and feet their inward condemnation.
2. A conviction of the fixed character of coming events. "Behold, the days COME." The guilty man sees the dismal train of events, and knows, on highest authority, that the decree is fixed. To the prophetic eye the future is as the present; events that are to be are recorded on the spirit as done, with all their natural effects realised by the discerning mind. Nature, with her usual quiet certainty, was at work elaborating events out of the sins perpetrated by father and sons; and therefore to the Hebrew mind that recognises nature only as the dumb instrument of the Eternal, the coming disasters are recognised properly as the fixed elements of the deserved retribution. There is the same conviction in others who have sinned. The human mind, in spite of its sins, answers to the course of nature. It mirrors in its conviction of certain punishment the regularity and fixity with which the laws of nature are at work. In the instance of many a man, powers have been set at work by his sins in virtue of the operation of which family reputation will fade and perish; premature decay will fall to the lot of descendants; sorrow and trouble will cast shadows over their pathway; and life generally will be marred. Yes; and he knows it now. The committal of sin is as the unloosing of forces of ill which enter of necessity into all the ramifications of subsequent life. The sorrow and pain consequent on this certain knowledge is no slight element in the retribution experienced.
III RETRIBUTION AFFECTS THE LIVING THROUGH THE UNBORN, AND THE UNBORN THROUGH THE LIVING. Sin injures and degrades the sinner, but does not end in himself. Every being is related to every other being. Interactions are as real and constant in the moral sphere as in the sphere of physics. An act of sin is an act of will, and therefore the production of a wave of influence which moves on and modifies the totality of life. Wisely and beautifully, then, does the Bible teach truth in harmony with the usual order of things when it represents Eli"s sin as cutting off the arm (strength) of his father"s house, shortening the clays of his children, lowering their position in the world, and causing them to bear the sorrow of seeing a culmination of their ancestor"s sin in the "presence of an enemy" to mar the wealth of blessing properly enjoyed by Israel.
1. A general law is exemplified in Eli"s punishment. The Bible teaches that the sins of the fathers bring woe on children. The course of nature establishes the fact. No man can give out from himself any influence above what his real constitution and character are fitted to produce. A defective moral courage works detrimentally on descendants by example as truly as do imperfect manners. Social laws insure that a lost reputation modifies the relative position of offspring. The degenerate habits of a Hophni and a Phinehas cannot but lessen the years and enfeeble the moral and physical vigour of several generations. God"s laws are uniform in all ages and climes. The experience of Eli"s family is repeated in the home of the drunkard, the sensual, the educationally neglected, the morally weak, and in the effects of wicked statesmanship. But the law has two aspects. The living affect the unborn, but also the known future condition of the unborn affects the condition of the living. Wisely men are constituted so as to be deeply affected by what may happen to their future reputation and their descendants. That the good fame of his house should perish; that his descendants should be reduced in social position, and variously injured in consequence of the guilt of himself and sons, was a bitter element in Eli"s punishment. Nor is this a rare case, for as a rule men are more influenced by what comes to their children than by what personal pain they themselves suffer. In his descendants man sees himself repeated in multiplied form.
1. The general law is subject to limitations. The evil that comes to posterity through sin of ancestors does not shut out from the mercy that
2. saves the soul. Disgrace, loss of health, early death, poverty may be part of the curse of a father"s sin; but through the mercy of God in Christ these sufferers may find renewal of spirit, pardon, and eternal life. "By one man"s disobedience" we all have suffered physically and spiritually; but by one Redeemer we may find power to become the true children of God. It is true Eli"s descendants, if renewed, would not become so good and physically perfect men as though the ancestors had not sinned; and we on earth, though saved in Christ, cannot be so physically perfect as though the curse had never fallen on us; yet the spirit will at length be set free from the bondage of corruption, and be perfect before God.
3. This law is a great and beneficent power in life. Those who rail against these Biblical announcements of retribution, because they affect descendants, are profoundly ignorant or perverse. The Bible tells only what is in nature, with the additional information that God vindicates his holiness by what occurs in nature. Any objection to the Biblical doctrine is therefore, this fact being admitted, the result of a perverse spirit. Human experience testifies how beneficially the law of retribution works in ordinary affairs. No arithmetic can calculate the amount of woe escaped by the restraining action of a knowledge of this law on human tendencies. On the other hand, the reverse side of the law the reward of goodness in the happiness of a posterity is one of the most healthful stimulants and guides of human exertion. It is only the morally indisposed that do not like law. Did we but know the whole intricate relationships of a moral universe stretching through all time, even the severest laws would then be seen to be an expression of broadest benevolence.
IV RETRIBUTION ON THE INSTRUMENTS OF ACCOMPLISHING AN ULTIMATE PURPOSE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE REALISATION OF THAT PURPOSE. As factors in the development of the Jewish economy, both Eli and his sons were instruments in preparing the way for the coming Messiah and the final supremacy of his kingdom. The house of Ithamar inherited, in common with others, the promise made to the Aaronic house. As long as there was need for an earthly high priest to shadow forth the enduring high priesthood of Christ, the promise (ver. 30) to Aaron would hold good. But the completion of that purpose was not frustrated by the disgrace and displacement of the section of the house represented by Eli in consequence of unfaithfulness. God has, in his foreknowledge of what will be required, as also in his resources to provide for the erratic action of human wills according to that foreknowledge, legions awaiting his creative call to come forth and prepare the way for the Christ. He who could "of these stones raise up children to Abraham" was at no loss to dispense with the leadership in his ancient Church of a degenerate family. If the old injured instruments are judicially confined to lower forms of service, as in the case of Ahiah, grandson of Phinehas, (1Sa_14:3) a holy Samuel is raised up for the emergency till a Zadok assumes the orderly high priestly functions; thus teaching us that in spite of all sins and their punishment the kingdom of God must advance. Men may rise and fall, dark seasons of priestly corruption may afflict the Church, apostates may spread consternation; but, foreseeing all, the Eternal has in reserve, and is quietly sending forth, men like Samuel and David and Paul and Luther, men who shall not cease to be employed in the high service of the "Anointed" even when they cease to speak by words.
General suggestions.
1. It is worth considering how much is lost to the world of mental and physical power by the indwelling of sin, and what a valuable contribution to the sum total of a nation"s welfare is a righteous life, by conserving and improving and making the most of all the powers of body and mind.
2. The essential folly of all sin is capable of being illustrated in what itentails, fails to avoid, and also takes away from the elements of individual and public well being.
3. There is a philosophical argument in support of the claims of Christianityin the fact that, as it seeks, and is proved by numerous facts to have the power of perfecting, the moral life, it thereby contains the solution of all our physical and economical difficulties, and needs only to become actual in individual life to constitute a real millennium.
4. There is ample ground in history for confidence in the vindication ofright, even though rulers may for a season avoid disaster.
5. In the lives of most men there must be seasons when they are visited bya messenger from God; and it is a question whether, if that messenger be disregarded, another may not come bringing tidings of more terrible things.
6. In any case, where by former sins physical and social evils have come onothers, it is an encouragement to know that we may labour to bring those so suffering to the great Physician for spiritual healing, and that the spiritual health will in some measure counteract the inherited evils.
7. The comforting aspect of retribution lies in that forevery one who suffers from it, possibly thousands and millions indirectly gain permanent good in the influence it exerts on existing evils and on otherwise forthcoming evils; and also that the same purpose which thus works out deserved judgment insures the fulfilment of all the promises.
HOMILIES BY B. DALE. Vers. 27-36. (SHILOH.)
A message of approaching judgment
1. This message came from God, who observed, as he ever does, the sinsof his people, and especially his ministers, with much displeasure, and after long forbearance resolved to punish them. (Amo_3:2 1Pe_4:17)
2. It came through a man whose name has not been recorded, and who wasprobably unknown to him to whom he was sent. When God sends a message it matters little by whom it is brought. He often makes his most important communications in a way the world does not expect, and by men who are unknown to fame. The authority of the Lord invests his messengers with dignity and power. And their best credentials are that they "commend themselves to the conscience". (2Co_4:2)
3. It came through a "man of God," a seer, a prophet, and not directly fromGod to Eli, the high priest. He chooses for special service men who live near to him, and are in sympathy with his purposes, in preference to those who occupy official positions, but are possessed of little personal worth. For a long season no prophet had spoken; (Jud_1:4:4 6:8 13:6) andwhen the silence of heaven is suddenly broken, it is an intimation that great changes are impending.
4. It came some time before the events which it announced actuallytranspired. "The Lord is slow to anger", (Nah_1:3) and executes judgment only after repeated warnings. Predictions which are absolute in form must often be understood as in their fulfilment conditioned by the moral state of those whom they concern (Jer_18:7; Jon_3:4, Jon_3:9, Jon_3:10) The purpose for which this message was sent was to lead to repentance, and it was not until all hope of it had disappeared that the blow fell. In substance the message contains
I A REMINDER OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGES bestowed by the favour of God, and shown
1. By the revelation of himself to those who were in a condition of abject servitude (ver. 27).
2. By his selection of some, in preference to others, for exalted and honourable service (ver. 28).
3. By his liberal provision for them out of the offerings made by the people to himself. Religious privileges always involve responsibilities, and should be faithfully used out of gratitude for their bestowment.
II A CHARGE OF GROSS UNFAITHFULNESS (ver. 29). The purpose for which the priests were endowed with these privileges was not the promotion of their own honour and interest, but the honour of God and the welfare of his people. But they acted in opposition to that purpose.
1. By irreverence and self-will in his service. "Wherefore do ye trample under foot my sacrifice?
2. By disobedience to his will. "Which I have commanded.
3. By pleasing others in preference to him. "And honourest thy sons above me." Eli"s toleration of the conduct of his sons, from regard to their interest and his own ease, involved him in their guilt.
4. By self-enrichment out of the religious offerings of the people. "The idol which man in sin sets up in the place of God can be none other than himself. He makes self and self-satisfaction the highest aim of life. To self his efforts ultimately tend, however the modes and directions of sin may vary. The innermost essence of sin, the ruling and penetrating principle, in all its forms, is selfishness" (Muller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin"). When men use the gifts of God for selfish ends they render themselves liable to be deprived of those gifts, and to be punished for their misuse.
III A STATEMENT OF AN EQUITABLE PRINCIPLE, according to which God acts in his procedure with men (ver. 30). They have been apt to suppose that privileges bestowed upon themselves or inherited from their ancestors were absolutely their own, and would be certainly continued. But it is far otherwise; for
1. The fulfilment of the promises of God and the continuance of religiousprivileges depend on the ethical relation in which men stand toward him. His covenant with Levi was "for the fear with which he feared me"; (Mal_2:6, Mal_2:7) but when his descendants lost that fear they "corrupted the covenant," and ceased to have any claim upon its promised blessings. It was the same with the Jews who in after ages vainly boasted that they were "the children of Abraham." In the sight of the Holy One righteousness is everything, hereditary descent nothing, except in so far as it is promotive of righteousness.
2. Faithful service is rewarded. HONOUR FOR HONOUR. "Them that honour me I will honour." Consider
(1) The ground: not merely his relationship as moral Governor, but his beneficence in bestowing the gifts of nature, providence, and grace.
(2) The method: in thought, word, and deed.
(3) The reward: his approbation, continued service, extended usefulness, etc.
3. Unfaithful conduct is punished. "Promises and threatenings are made to individuals because they are in a particular state of character; but they belong to all who are in that state, for "God is no respecter of persons (Robertson). "He will give to every man according to his works.
IV A PROCLAMATION OF SEVERE RETRIBUTION upon the house of Eli (vers. 31-34). Consisting of
1. The deprivation of strength, which had been abused. Their power would be broken. (Zec_11:17)
2. The shortening of life, the prolonging of which in the case of Eli had been an occasion of evil rather than of good. "There shall not be an old man in thine house forever;" the result of weakness; repeated in ver. 32.
3. The loss of prosperity; the temporal benefits that would otherwise have been received. "Thou shalt see distress of dwelling in all that brings prosperity to Israel" (Ed. of Erdmann).
4. The infliction of misery on those who continue, for a while, to minister at the altar, and of violent death (ver. 33; 22:18).
5. Although these things would not take place at once, theircommencement, as a sign of what would follow, would be witnessed by Eli himself in the sudden death of the two chief offenders "in one day". (1Sa_4:11) If anything could rouse the house of Eli to "flee from the wrath to come," surely such a fearful message as this was adapted to do so. Fear of coming wrath, although it never makes men truly religious, may, and often does, arouse and restrain them, and bring them under the influence of other and higher motives. The closing sentences contain
V A PREDICTION OF A FAITHFUL PRIESTHOOD in the place of that which had proved faithless (vers. 35, 36). "I will raise up a faithful priest," etc., i.e. a line of faithful men to accomplish the work for which the priesthood has been appointed, and to enjoy the privileges which the house of Eli has forfeited. In contrast with that house, it will do my will, and I will cause it to endure; and it will continue to live in intimate fellowship and cooperation with the anointed kings of Israel. It will also be so exalted, that the surviving members of the fallen house will be entirely dependent upon it for a "piece of bread." The prediction was first of all fulfilled in Samuel, who by express commission from God acted habitually as a priest; and afterwards in Zadok, in whom the line of Eleazar was restored; but the true underlying idea of a priest, like that of a king, has its full realisation in Jesus Christ alone. The gloomiest of prophetic messages generally conclude with words of promise and hope. D.
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 And there came a man of God unto Eli.
1Sa_2:27
And there came a man of God unto Eli.
Read full note →
Elis two messengers
That was a terrible speech to make to an old man whose life was all behind him, who was now tottering on the last edge! Ministers of God are required to come up to this point of faithfulness, now and again; to have to say these words, terrible as lightning at midnight, right to an old man, when nobody else is there to hear--to thunder to one man--to shake the universe round one poor old man! It is nothing to preach to a crowd. But when the man of God comes and talks to one auditor--and when that auditor feels, by reason of his solitude, that every syllable is meant for him alone--you go far to test the strength of a mans character and the extent of a mans moral capacity. Eli was a priest, the speaker was a man of God. Man first, priest second; life original, office secondary. Eli was high priest, and the man who confronted him was a man of God. There is something deeper in the human than the sacerdotal. Let us have faith in people, in humanity; not in ephods and mitres and staves of office--but in that divine, living, imperishable spirit which God has put into redeemed and sanctified beings. Surely this message was enough for one day. Who can bear such thunder from the morning even until the evening? The next messenger that came was a little child. This is how God educates us, by putting tutors on both sides, behind and before. You hear a man who tells you what to you may be evil tidings--sharp, startling messages to your judgment and to your conscience--and you say, The man is a fanatic. You walk away, and before you have got a mile further a little child gets up and smiles at you the same message--says it in smiles, in tender looks, in trembling child-like tone--and you begin to think there is something in it. You go further, and the atmosphere seems to be charged with Divine reproaches and Divine messages. So you go on, until the oldest, best., and stateliest men tremble under subtle, impalpable, all-encompassing, irresistible influences. (J. Parker, D. D.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain 1Sa_2:27. “A man of God.” A prophet, as in…
CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES—
1Sa_2:27. “A man of God.” A prophet, as in 1Ki_13:1, etc. “The only one mentioned since Deborah.” (Biblical Commentary.) “Thy Father.” “Eli was a descendant of Ithamar, the youngest son of Aaron” (1Ch_24:3).… “The transfer of the high-priesthood to him must have taken place, because at the death of the last high-priest of the family of Eleazer Aaron’s eldest son), the remaining son was too young and inexperienced to take his place.” (Keil.)
Read full note →
1Sa_2:28. “Did I not give,” etc. The bountiful provision made by God for His priests is mentioned as the great aggravation of the sins of Eli’s sons. (Biblical Commentary.)
1Sa_2:31. “The judgment did not fall upon Eli’s house immediately. His grandson Ahitub (1Sa_14:3), and Abiathar, Ahitub’s grandson (1Ki_1:25; 1Ki_2:26), successively held the office of high priest. So much importance in the East has always been attached to old age that it would be felt to be a great calamity, and sensibly lower the respectability of any family which could boast of few old men.” (Fausset.) Abiathar, the last high priest of Eli’s family, was deposed by Solomon, and the high-priesthood reverted to that of Eleazar, to whose family Zadok belonged (2Sa_15:24; 2Sa_17:15; 2Sa_19:12; 2Sa_20:25; 1Ki_2:27).
1Sa_2:32. “This was the captivity mentioned in Jdg_18:30. (Wordsworth.)
1Sa_2:35. “A faithful priest.” This probably refers, in the first instance, to Samuel, who was evidently called by God to perform priestly acts; and, secondly, to Zadok, the father of a long line of priests. It is also generally regarded as pointing on to the Messiah. “It would then seem best to regard it as announcing a line of faithful men.” (Tr. of Lange’s Commentary.)
1Sa_2:36. “A piece of silver.” The word is used only here. It signifies a small piece of money, and has been rendered “a beggar’s coin.” “Commentators are divided in their opinion as to the historical allusions contained in this prophecy.” (Keil.)
MAIN HOMILETICS OF 1Sa_2:27
A DIVINE MESSENGER
I. This remarkable messenger was a nameless person. “There came a man of God unto Eli.” All the prominent stars that stud our skies, and contribute their portion of light to the inhabitants of earth, are known to astronomers by name, but there are others that are so far off as not to admit of distinction, and we group them under some general designation: yet each one of these far-off bodies sheds some light upon us, nameless as it is. There are records in the holy Scriptures of many nameless persons, who, notwithstanding the little that is told about them, have been used by God to shed upon men the light of His truth. We group them together, like a cluster of far-off stars, under the general title of “men of God,” and all we know of their individual character or history we gather from the message which they delivered, and which has been left upon record to shed a permanent light upon the world. But although we cannot tabulate and name all the myriad stars of heaven, those which are left unnamed by men are known by name to their Creator. “He calleth them all by names” (Isa_40:26). And so it is with those human light-givers whose names are not known to their fellow-men. Although this man of God remains unknown by name to all who read his words, yet he was and is known and named by His Divine Master, who called him to His work, and has long since rewarded him for it. And as those nameless stars may excel in magnitude and glory many of those which, from their nearer position to us, seem to be stars of the first magnitude, so these unnamed prophets may be as great in God’s kingdom, and may have done as great a work in His estimation as those whose names are left recorded upon the Divine page. And so it may be now with many a God-sent messenger, whose name is unknown to the world, or even to the Church—he may be more highly esteemed by Him whose name is above every name, and stand in much closer fellowship with Him than many a one whose name stands high in the estimation of his fellow-Christians. But, after all the general name includes the particular—the greater name includes all lesser names. “A man of God” includes all that can be said in honour of either Isaiah the prophet or Paul the apostle. For “a man of God,” when the designation is not a misnomer, signifies—
1. A man who has got his character from God. An Englishman when he is a true representation of his country and nation, has the disposition and tendencies which generally characterize his people. A child generally has some of the characteristics of his parent, because he is of his parent. So a man of God is one who possesses, in some degree, a God-like disposition, is one who is in sympathy with God, who loves what He loves, and hates what He hates. No particular name can express more concerning a man’s relation to God than does this general one. “We are of God” (1Jn_4:6), is as much as can be said of any human creature, for these four words include all the blessedness of Divine sonship—all the glory of the life everlasting.
2. In the Scripture, a man of God is one who bears a message from God. This is a title given both to Old Testament prophets and to New Testament ministers. “But thou, O man of God, flee these things” (1Ti_6:11). “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.… that the man of God may be perfected,” etc. (2Ti_3:16-17). In both these passages the general name includes and means more than the particular. A “man of God” is more than Paul or Timothy—it is one who is entrusted with a message from the Eternal for his fellow-man—one who has “received” from God “the things which he speaks” (1Co_2:12-13). He speaks to men of God and for God—his life-work is that of beseeching men to be “reconciled to God” (2Co_5:20)—his one business in the world is to declare the “message” which he “has heard of Him,” viz., that “God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all” (1Jn_1:5).
II. This messenger, though nameless, has been held in much greater honour by men than has the well known house whose doom he declared. Character is much more important than name, and the better the deed or the word the more easily we can dispense with the doer or the speaker. The names of Eli, of Hophni and Phinehas stand out prominently upon the page of Hebrew history, but what is recorded of the high-priest and judge himself is not calculated to set him very high in the estimation of men—he has left little more than his name behind him—while those of his sons are associated only with the memory of their crimes. The nameless prophet passes before us like a ship upon the horizon making for her destined port. We know not whence she came or whither she is going, but she leaves a pleasing impression upon the mind. But Eli and his sons remain like wrecks upon the shore, whose only use is to warn others to shun the rocks upon which they were broken.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—1Sa_2:27-36
A DIVINE MESSAGE
I. The charge. The house of Eli is charged with ingratitude. Perhaps no greater crime is chargeable upon human nature. The slave who has been freed from the tyranny of a cruel master by the putting forth on his behalf of a strong arm, and who has not only been thus made a partaker of liberty but who has been clothed, and fed, and educated by the same benefactor, is expected to manifest gratitude to him to whom he owes all that makes life worth having. Gratitude ought to well up in his spirit like water from a living spring, and if such a man proves ungrateful it indicates that he is destitute of all right feeling, for he sins, not against law but against love. Eli’s family, in common with all the other families of Israel, had dwelt in the “house of bondage.” They had been for many years in “the iron furnace, even in Egypt,” and God had delivered them from their degraded condition and made them “a people of inheritance unto Himself” (Deu_4:20). To be ungrateful to such a deliverer shows them to be without natural feeling. But their ingratitude was aggravated by their elevation above all the other families of the nation. “Did I plainly appear unto the house of thy father, when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh’s house? And did I choose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest?” This is the head and front of their crime. When a number of homeless children are taken from the streets, and housed and cared for, those who rescue them have a claim upon the gratitude of all. But if out of this number, one is made the object of special care and is selected to fill a higher position than the rest, the ingratitude of this one will be so much greater than the ingratitude of the others, as the benefits bestowed upon the one have been greater than those bestowed upon the rest. Ingratitude in any would be a sin; but ingratitude in the one who has been especially favoured would be a sin of deeper die. The house of Aaron, of which Eli was a member, was bound to God by the common ties of gratitude by which all Israel was bound; but God had claims upon them which far exceeded those of any other family of the nation. The members of Aaron’s family had been elected by God to the highest possible honour, they had been set apart to the most sacred office, and they had been sustained at the command of God by the offerings of the people. It was demanded of them in return that they should show their gratitude for such unparalleled favours by reverent obedience to God. But the conduct of those who now represented them was of the very opposite nature. There had been the blackest profanity instead of reverence, and those who ought to have been examples of holiness had been promoters of vice. Ingratitude has been called a monster in nature, and a comparison between the privileges enjoyed by those men, and the returns they made, convicts them of being guilty of this monstrous crime in an aggravated form.
II. The sentence. The authority and influence of Eli’s house was to cease in Israel. That men by misdeeds entail a tendency to sin upon their posterity is a fact plainly written in the history of families and the oracles of God. A bad father generally leaves behind him bad children. This law must work unless God reconstitutes the present order of nature and makes each man’s power to work good or ill to end with himself. But while there is the relationship of parent and child this cannot be. Wherever we look we find instances in which children are born to an inheritance of good or evil influences, and the after-life of the greater number takes its moral tone from the character of their parents. Hence it is that families as well as individuals merit the blessing or the punishment of God. Eli had not used his own authority and influence to much purpose, and his sons had shamefully abused that which had been entrusted to them by God. Such men were very unlikely to be the founders of a house which would be a blessing to Israel, therefore the sentence is directed not against Eli and his sons only, but against their posterity. As they had dishonoured God, so God would bring their house to dishonour. As Eli had not used his power and authority to prevent the defilement of the house of the Lord, he shall have no power to hold back the desolation of his own. As he and his sons had not fulfilled the conditions laid down for the observance of the priests, their sons shall have no conditions to observe, for the priesthood shall be transferred to others. As is generally the case in the judgments of God, the nature of the punishment bears some resemblance to the nature of the transgression. “He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity; he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword” (Rev_13:10).
III. The authority for the sentence. “Thus saith the Lord.” God’s authority to pronounce this doom upon the house of Eli springs—
1. From the relation which He sustains to men in general. God was the absolute proprietor of the lives of these men, as He is of the life of every human creature. He, as we have seen (see on 1Sa_2:6), is the giver of life to men; to Him also belongs the world, which He has “given to the children of men” (Psa_115:16) for a dwelling-place, and, if men abuse His good gifts, He has an absolute right to deprive them of that which He has bestowed.
2. But God had a special right to judge the house of Eli, a right springing from the special relation to Himself in which He had placed them. As we have before seen, in considering the charge, as Israelites they had been objects of His special favour, as men of the house of Aaron they were brought into a closer relationship to God, and this threefold obligation gave to Jehovah a threefold authority to pronounce upon them and theirs this terrible yet deserved sentence.
IV. The principle upon which God exercises this authority over all men. “For them that honour me I will honour,” etc. God can be known so as to be honoured. God must be known, not only as to His existence, but as to His character, in order to be honoured. Eli and his sons had enough knowledge of the character of Jehovah to make it possible for them to honour Him, they had enough knowledge to make their “lightly esteeming” Him a black transgression. Wherever men find moral excellence they are bound to honour it, their consciences call upon them to reverence goodness wherever it is found, and God here lays down a law of His government that He will not hold them guiltless who withhold from His perfect character the honour which is His due.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
1Sa_2:29. “And honourest thy sons above me.” Choosing rather to gratify them than to glorify me, by abdicating them from the priesthood. But it may be Eli feared lest the high-priesthood should by this means go from his family, as it had before from Eleazar’s for misdemeanour, which also afterwards befell him, and he by seeking to prevent it hastened it.—Trapp.
The well-fed beast becomes unmanageable and refractory, and refuses the yoke, and bursts the bonds (Jer_5:5; Jer_5:7-8). So the priests, instead of being grateful for the provision made for them, in their pampered pride became dissatisfied, wantonly broke the laws of God which regulated their share of the offerings, and gave themselves up to an unbridled indulgence of their passions and their covetousness.—Biblical Commentary.
It is often easy to be exposed to this reproach of God without being aware of it. Those who labour to spread the light of Divine truth by publicly declaring it to the people certainly offer a sacrifice which may be very acceptable to God. But if they nourish in their hearts a secret pride, and if they seek in these holy services their own glory rather than the glory of God, they take for themselves the first-fruits of the sacrifice. They become the end of their action, and God is only the means. They put the creature before the Creator, and this is the greatest of all misplacements.—De Sacy.
1Sa_2:30. “Them that honour Me, I will honour.” This is a bargain of God’s own making; you may bind upon it. “And they that despise Me.” God’s visitation is like chequer-work, black and white.—Trapp.
Never did man dishonour God but it proved the greatest dishonour to himself. God will find out ways enough to wipe off any stain upon Him; but you will not so easily remove the shame and dishonour from yourselves.—Baxter.
There are three sorts of men to be considered with respect to the honour due to God.
I. Such as despise Him instead of honouring Him. Such were the sons of Eli who knew not the Lord. Those do not know God who despise His services. It is impossible to despise infinite goodness, and power, and wisdom, for those are things which all that know them cannot but reverence and esteem. For a poor creature to despise his Creator, or one that lives upon the bounty of another to despise his benefactor, seems to be such an inconsistency in morality, as if human nature were incapable of it.… But although God cannot be despised for His glorious perfections, yet His authority may be despised when men presumptuously break His laws—when “they profess to know God, but in works deny Him” (Tit_1:16), when they own a God, and yet live as if there were none.
II. There are such as pretend to honour God, but do not. Men may be guilty of dishonouring God under a pretence of honouring Him, by worshipping their imaginations instead of Him, or by doing honour to Him according to their own imaginations, and not according to His will. Persons form false conceptions of God, and so give their worship to an idol of their own fancy, and they pretend to honour Him not according to His will, but according to their own fancy. There are some things practised and defended in the Christian world, which one would hardly think possible to have ever prevailed, had it not been that men thought to do honour to God by them.
III. But there is a way left to give God that honour which is due unto Him. I shall not take in all the ways of honouring God, but consider that which is most proper to the design of these words.… It was not for Eli’s personal miscarriages that God thought Himself so dishonoured by him, but for want of taking due care in suppressing profaneness and corruption in others. And this shows the true way in which God may be honoured by those who are bound to take care of others.
1. By an universal discountenancing of all sorts of vices and profaneness.
2. By an even, steady, and impartial execution of the laws against vice and debauchery.
3. By a wise choice of fit instruments to pursue so good an end.—Stillingfleet.
Outwardly, we see nothing to blame in the personal conduct of Eli. All that can be expected is found; all due respect for his office, all proper solemnity in the discharge of it. He is just the character who would have been eulogised by the men of his day as doing honour to the post which he filled; who, as the saying is, would have been respected in his life and lamented at his death.… But we presently see that he had been only up to, not beyond the mark, for what was expected of him. He had sense enough of propriety and decency, creditably to discharge an office, to the capability of filling which this same sense alone raised him. He had never lived above his office. That God had delighted in burnt offerings and sacrifices he had impressed upon himself, and these things were the summit of his estimate. He had never learned that there are things better than sacrifices and more acceptable than the fat of rams.… He knew not that in order to do good a man must live above, not up to, his outward duties; that influence with others is found not where life is raised up to the routine of duty, but where that routine of duty is quickened and inspired by a life led in higher places and guided by nobler motives. This sense of decency, this fine conservative feeling, may get one man creditably through his work, but it has no power over those who grow up around him; it has no deep springs, no living and sparkling eye, no winning to something above itself; all its motives are secondary; what others did before, others will think now.… Eli found, as men ever find, that all this system of secondary motive is nothing to curb the bounding heart of the young, or to win the guidance of their strong and precipitous course. He who dwells in the circumference of his life gains no sympathy from those who dwell in its centre.… Such a state in the individual, the family, or the community, contains of necessity the elements of decay and of downward progress.… What will be the effect on a community of the prevalence of a lifeless and conventional religion? First, and necessarily, a low standard of duty, up to that which is required by man, not beyond it. Next, a false estimate of realities; a substitution of primary objects for secondary ones; a growing conviction that this world is real, and another world visionary; that words and ceremonies will serve for religion; but that deeds all belong to self and the world.… As Israel became acted upon by the system which prevailed under Eli, superstition succeeded to the fear of God.… Who taught his people to trust to the ark to save them, and to forget Him … To what must a people have been degraded, who could look on that ark, accompanied with two ministers of such iniquity and profligacy, and greet its arrival with shouts of triumph?… Where life is lived as unto God, and in His sight and His revelation of Himself held as a living present truth, there is the seed of all true happiness, of all true success, of all genuine honour. Such men, whether they prosper or fall, alone win the real prizes of life: solid usefulness, firm stability, inward peace. Such families alone are the nurseries for worthy future generations, where God’s name is known and loved; where, if there be no glittering armour, no nicely jointed harness for the youthful warrior to go forth in, the young arm is at least familiar with the use of the simple sling, and knows where to cull the smooth stones from the river of the water of life. Such nations alone contain in them the pledges for sound and honourable progress, where the national religion is not a system upheld for venerable association’s sake, but is a genuine portion of the people’s life, a living seed expanding through its history … On the other hand, the man of mere proprieties gets to his grave in peace; the man of selfish views wins his prize, and becomes great and fills a space in the world, and passes away, but who cares for either?… The family where God was not, we have already followed in the same downward path; but who can tell, till the last dread day, the shame and misery and ruin which have overwhelmed men in generation after generation, for want of God as the guide of their youth? And if we ask respecting the fate of nations that have despised God—read it in the desolations of Nineveh and Babylon: read it in the history of the ancient people of God, scattered over the nations.—Alford.
God is honoured in general by avowed obedience to His holy will, but there are some acts which more signally conduce to God’s glory.
1. The frequent and constant performance (in a reverent manner) of devotions immediately addressed to His name (Psa_29:2).
2. Using all things peculiarly related to God, His holy name, His holy word, His holy places, with especial respect (Isa_58:13).
3. Yielding due observance to the deputies and ministers of God, as such (Rom_13:4; Mal_2:7, etc.).
4. Freely spending what God hath given us in works of piety, charity, and mercy (2Co_9:13; Pro_3:9; Pro_14:31).
5. A11 penitential acts, by which we submit to God, and humble ourselves before Him (Jos_7:19; Rev_16:9).
6. Cheerfully undergoing afflictions, losses, disgraces, for the profession of God’s truth (Joh_21:19).
7. By discharging faithfully those offices which God hath entrusted us with, and diligently improving those talents which God hath committed to us.—Barrow.
1Sa_2:33. The posterity of Eli possessed the high-priesthood in the time of Solomon, and even when that dynasty was preserved to another family, God preserved that of Eli; not to render it more happy, but to punish it by seeing the prosperity of its enemies, to the end that it might see itself destitute and despised. This shows the depth of the judgments of God, and the grandeur of His justice, which extends even to distant generations, and manifests itself to sinners both in life and death—both in their own disgrace and in the prosperity of their enemies.—Calmet.
1Sa_2:35. The exercise of the priestly office, which is well-pleasing to God:
1. Its personal condition and pre-sup-position, fidelity, firmness, steadfastness, “I will raise Thee up a faithful priest.”
2. Its rule and measure. “According to that which is in my heart and soul.”
3. Its blessing and reward. “And I will build him a sure house,” etc.—Lange’s Commentary.
Of the priests under the law it might be generally said that they walked before the Lord’s Anointed; or, in other words, they were appointed by His authority—they acted by His direction, and as his servants and representatives, till He should come personally to offer the one sacrifice on the strength of which their offerings had been made available on behalf of His believing people. And, in this view of the subject, the last clause of the verse conveyed another and more explicit assurance that the priesthood should be perpetuated during the Old Testament dispensation, notwithstanding all the calamities which might from time to time befall Israel. But it implied more. It contained a promise of blessing on that priesthood. To walk before the Lord’s Anointed must, I think, have implied not only walking by His directions as servants, but walking in the light of His countenance as their approving Lord and Master, in so far as His Church was dependent on their services for her edification and comfort. And how frequently then must the people of God, in Old Testament times, have been comforted and refreshed in seasons of perplexity and trouble when they called to mind this gracious assurance. But it is to the New Testament Church that this passage has opened up, in all its fulness, the inexhaustible fountain of consolation which it contains.… It is impossible for us to read the words without at least having Christ brought before us, and without feeling that to Him alone can the words be applied in their full, literal, and absolute sense.… Christ is exalted to the throne of the universe, but He has not forgotten His priestly office. He regards it with complacency, and still executes it with delight; for “He is a priest upon His throne.”—Dr. R. Gordon.
1Sa_2:36. See the sin and its punishment. They formerly pampered themselves, and fed to the full on the Lord’s sacrifices, and now they are reduced to a morsel of bread. They wasted the Lord’s heritage, and now they beg their bread.… In religious establishments vile persons, who have no higher motive, may and do get into the priest’s office, that they may clothe themselves with the wool, and feed themselves with the fat, while they starve the flock. But where there is no law to back the claims of the worthless and the wicked, men of piety and solid merit only can find support, for they must live on the free-will offerings of the people. Where religion is established by law the strictest ecclesiastical discipline should be kept up, and all hireling priests and drones should be expelled from the Lord’s vineyard.—A. Clarke.
1Sa_2:27-36. Indulgent parents are cruel to themselves and their posterity Eli could not have devised which way to have plagued himself and his house so much as by his kindness to his children’s sins. What variety of judgments does he now hear from the messenger of God! First, because his old age, which uses to be subject to choler, inclined now to misfavour his sons, therefore there shall not be an old man left of his house for ever; and because it vexed him not enough to see his sons enemies to God in their profession, therefore he shall see his enemy in the habitation of the Lord; and because himself forebore to take vengeance of his sons, and esteemed their life above the glory of his Master, therefore God will revenge Himself by killing them both in one day; and because he abused his sovereignty by conniving at sin, therefore shall his house be stripped of this honour, and see it translated to another; and lastly, because he suffered his sons to please their own wanton appetite, in taking meat off from God’s trencher, therefore those which remain of his house shall come to his successor to beg a piece of silver and a morsel of bread.… I do not read of any fault Eli had but indulgence; and which of the notorious offenders were plagued more? Parents need no other means to make them miserable, than sparing the rod.—Bishop Hall.
God often contents himself with a single example of the estimation in which He holds the violation of certain duties. But one lesson so terrible ought to be sufficient to instruct every age, and unhappy is he who does not profit by it.—Duguet.
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.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 man of God
man of God
This phrase usually means a prophet of Yahweh. AT: "a man who hears and tells words from God"
Read full note →
Did I not reveal myself ... house?
This rhetorical question can be translated as a statement. AT: "You should know that I revealed myself ... house." (See: Rhetorical Question)
the house of your ancestor
The word "house" is a metonym for the people who lived in the house. AT: "the family of your ancestor" (See: Metonymy)
your ancestor
Aaron
to go up to my altar, and to burn incense
This refers to making an offering to Yahweh.
to wear an ephod before me
The words "wear an ephod" are a metonym for the work of the priests who wear the ephod. AT: "to do what I had commanded the priests to do" (See: Metonymy)
translationWords
Yahweh
house
Egypt
enslave
Pharaoh
chosen one
tribe
Israel
priest
altar
incense
ephod
sacrifice
fire
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 2:27 Man of God is another name for a…
2:27 Man of God is another name for a prophet (9:6; 1 Kgs 13:1; 2 Kgs 1:9).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.