When the people had come into the camp, the elders of Israel said, “Why has Yahweh defeated us today before the Philistines? Let’s get the ark of Yahweh’s covenant out of Shiloh and bring it to us, that it may come among us and save us out of the hand of our enemies.”
So the people sent to Shiloh, and they brought from there the ark of the covenant of Yahweh of Armies, who sits above the cherubim; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there with the ark of the covenant of God. When the ark of Yahweh’s covenant came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great shout, so that the earth resounded. When the Philistines heard the noise of the shout, they said, “What does the noise of this great shout in the camp of the Hebrews mean?” They understood that Yahweh’s ark had come into the camp. The Philistines were afraid, for they said, “God has come into the camp.” They said, “Woe to us! For there has not been such a thing before. Woe to us! Who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty gods? These are the gods that struck the Egyptians with all kinds of plagues in the wilderness. Be strong and behave like men, O you Philistines, that you not be servants to the Hebrews, as they have been to you. Strengthen yourselves like men, and fight!” The Philistines fought, and Israel was defeated, and each man fled to his tent. There was a very great slaughter; for thirty thousand footmen of Israel fell. God’s ark was taken; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were slain.
A man of Benjamin ran out of the army and came to Shiloh the same day, with his clothes torn and with dirt on his head. When he came, behold, Eli was sitting on his seat by the road watching, for his heart trembled for God’s ark. When the man came into the city and told about it, all the city cried out. When Eli heard the noise of the crying, he said, “What does the noise of this tumult mean?” The man hurried, and came and told Eli.
Now Eli was ninety-eight years old. His eyes were set, so that he could not see. The man said to Eli, “I am he who came out of the army, and I fled today out of the army.” He said, “How did the matter go, my son?”
He who brought the news answered, “Israel has fled before the Philistines, and there has been also a great slaughter among the people. Your two sons also, Hophni and Phinehas, are dead, and God’s ark has been captured.”
When he made mention of God’s ark, Eli fell from off his seat backward by the side of the gate; and his neck broke, and he died, for he was an old man and heavy. He had judged Israel forty years.
His daughter-in-law, Phinehas’ wife, was with child, near to giving birth. When she heard the news that God’s ark was taken and that her father-in-law and her husband were dead, she bowed herself and gave birth; for her pains came on her. About the time of her death the women who stood by her said to her, “Don’t be afraid, for you have given birth to a son.” But she didn’t answer, neither did she regard it. She named the child Ichabod, saying, “The glory has departed from Israel!” because God’s ark was taken, and because of her father-in-law and her husband. She said, “The glory has departed from Israel; for God’s ark has been taken.”
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22 For it may seem that this war was undertaken…
For it may seem that this war was undertaken by Samuel’s commandment.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv3–22 1Sa 4:3 And when the people were come into…
1Sa 4:3 And when the people were come into the camp, the elders of Israel said, Wherefore hath the LORD smitten us to day before the Philistines? Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the LORD out of Shiloh unto us, that, when it cometh among us, it may save us out of the hand of our enemies.
Ver. 3. Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us today?] There was cause enough, {Psa 78:58; Psa 78:61-62; Psa 78:64} but they could not see it. Men’s minds are as ill set as their eyes; neither of them look inwards to the plague of their own hearts, to sin, the mother of all their misery. These Isralites mistook the cause of their calamity to be the want of the ark amongst them. This was non causa pro causa. And alike mistaken are the Jews at this day: and those Lutheran ministers who concluded some few years since at Hamburg, that Germany was therefore so embroiled in war, because their images in churches were not adorned enough: which therefore they would procure done. {a} A bad business!
Read full note →
Let us fetch the ark of the covenant.] This was done sometimes with good success, but by such as were upon good terms with God. The ark and the mercy seat were never sundered: but then they sealed up mercy to the penitent and obedient only. Against others God hath a controversy, and sendeth in the enemy to revenge the quarrel of his covenant. He is to be fetched into the field by the suits of his humble suppliants, who shall thereupon do great exploits. But these carnal Israelites trusted in the ark of wood, as a sure pawn of God’s presence and power, likeas the superstitious Philistines used to bring their gods into the field, {2Sa 5:24} and as in the days of King Edward VI the Norfolk rebels brought with them into the battle their breaden god, setting him in a cart: neither was there lacking masses, crosses, banners, candlesticks, &c., all which were taken in the cart, and there lay all in the dust. {b}
{a} Burroughs, on Hosea.
{b} Act. and Mon., fol. 1190.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us today before the…
Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us today before the Philistines, seeing our cause is so just, our own just and necessary defence from God’s and our enemies, and we came not forth to battle by our own motion, but by God’s command delivered by Samuel? This was strange blindness, that when there was so great a corruption in their worship and manners, 1Sa 2, and such a defection to idolatry, 1Sa 7:3; Psa 78:58, they could not see sufficient reason why God should suffer them to fall by their enemies.
The ark of the covenant of the Lord; that great pledge of God’s presence and help, by whose conduct our ancestors obtained success, Num 10:35; 14:44; Jos 6:4. Instead of the performance of moral duties, humbling themselves deeply for and purging themselves speedily and thoroughly from all their sins, for which God was displeased with them, and now had chastised them, they take an easier and cheaper course, and put their trust in their ceremonial observances, not doubting but the very presence of the ark would give them the victory; and therefore it is no wonder they meet with so sad a disappointment.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On vv10, 12, 19 Here is a short account of the issue of…
Here is a short account of the issue of this battle.
I. Israel was smitten, the army dispersed and totally routed, not retiring into the camp, as before (Sa1 4:2) when they hoped to rally again, but returning to their tents, every man shifting for his own safety and making the best of his way home, despairing to make head any more; and 30,000 were slain in the field of battle, Sa1 4:10. Israel was put to the worse, 1. Though they had the better cause, were the people of God and the Philistines were uncircumcised; they stood up in necessary defence of their just rights and liberties against invaders, and yet they failed of success, for their rock had sold them. A good cause often suffers for the sake of the bad men that undertake it. 2. Though they had the greater confidence, and were the more courageous. They shouted, while the Philistines trembled, and yet, when God pleased so to order it, the Philistines' terrors were turned into triumphs, and Israel's shouts into lamentations. 3. Though they had the ark of God with them. External privileges will secure none that abuse them and do not live up to them. The ark in the camp will add nothing to its strength when there is an Achan in it.
Read full note →
II. The ark itself was taken by the Philistines; and Hophni and Phinehas, who it is likely kept close to it, and when it was in danger ventured far in the defense of it, because by it they got their living, were both slain, Sa1 4:11. To this sad even the Psalmist refers, Psa 78:61. 64, He delivered his strength into captivity, and his glory into the enemy's hands. Their priests fell by the sword. 1. The slaughter of the priests, considering their bad character, was no great loss to Israel, but it was a dreadful judgment upon the house of Eli. The word which God had spoken was fulfilled in it (Sa1 2:34): This shall be a sign unto thee, an earnest of the judgments threatened, thy two sons shall die both in one day, and so shall all the increase of thy house die in the flower of their age, v. 33. If Eli had done his duty, and put them, as polluted, from the priesthood (Neh 7:64), they might have lived, though in disgrace; but now God takes the work into his own hands, and chases them out of the world by the sword of the uncircumcised. The Lord is known by those judgments which he executeth. It is true the sword devours one as well as another, but these were waited for of the sword, marked for vengeance. They were out of the place; what had they to do in the camp? When men leave the way of their duty they shut themselves out of God's protection. But this was not all; they had betrayed the ark, by bringing it into danger, without a warrant from God, and this filled the measure of their iniquities. But, 2. The taking of the ark was a very great judgment upon Israel, and a certain token of God's hot displeasure against them. Now they are made to see their folly in trusting to their external privileges which they had by their wickedness forfeited them, and fancying that the ark would save them when God had departed from them. Now they are made to reflect, with the utmost regret, upon their own rashness and presumption in bringing the ark into the camp and so exposing it, and wish a thousand times they had left it where God had fixed it. Now they are convinced that God will not be prescribed to by vain and foolish men, and that though he has bound us to his ark he has not bound himself to it, but will rather deliver it into the hands of his sworn enemies than suffer it to be profaned by his false friends, and countenance their superstition. Let none think to shelter themselves from the wrath of God under the cloak of a visible profession, for there will be those cast into outer darkness that have eaten and drunk in Christ's presence.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv3–22 And when the people came into the camp,.... At…
And when the people came into the camp,.... At Ebenezer, where they pitched their tents, and from whence they went out to battle, and whither they returned after their defeat:
the elders of Israel said, wherefore hath the Lord smitten us today before the Philistines? they were right in ascribing it to the Lord, who had suffered them to be defeated by their enemies, but it is strange they should be so insensible of the cause of it; there was a reason ready at hand, their sins and iniquities were the cause of it, the corruption of manners among them, their neglect of bringing their offerings to the Lord, and the idolatry that many of them were guilty of, at least secretly, Sa1 2:24 to punish them for which, they were brought into this war, and smitten in it; and yet they wonder at it, that so it should be, that they the people of God should be smitten before Heathens and uncircumcised Philistines; and the rather, since they went to battle with them according to the word of the Lord by Samuel; not considering that they went into this war without humiliation for their sins, and without praying to God for success, and that it was intended as a correction of them for their offences against God:
Read full note →
let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of Shiloh unto us; in which the law was, sometimes called the covenant between God and them; and which was a symbol of the divine Presence, for want of which they supposed they had not the presence of God with them, and so had not success; and the rather they were encouraged to take this step and method, because that formerly Israel had success against their enemies when the ark was with them, Num 31:6 though no doubt in this there was an overruling providence of God, by which they were led to take such a step as this, in order to bring the two sons of Eli into the camp, that they might be slain in one day, according to the divine prediction:
that when it cometh among us, it may save us out of the hand of our enemies; foolishly placing their confidence in an external symbol, and not in the Lord himself; ascribing salvation to that, which only belongs to him, whether of a temporal or spiritual kind: and such folly and vanity are men guilty of when they seek to, make use of, and trust in anything short of Christ for salvation; as in carnal descent; in the rituals of the law; in the ordinances of the Gospel; in any religious exercises, private or public; or in any works of righteousness done by them: in Christ alone is salvation from spiritual enemies; and indeed from the Lord only is salvation and deliverance from temporal enemies.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 18, 20, 21, 22 Wherefore, &c. - This was strange blindness, that when…
Wherefore, &c. - This was strange blindness, that when there was so great a corruption in their worship and manners, they could not see sufficient reason why God should suffer them to fall by their enemies. The ark - That great pledge of God's presence and help, by whose conduct our ancestors obtained success. Instead of humbling themselves for, and purging themselves from their sins, for which God was displeased with them, they take an easier and cheaper course, and put their trust in their ceremonial observances, not doubting but the very presence of the ark would give them the victory.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 Verse 3. Let us fetch the ark] They vainly…
Verse 3. Let us fetch the ark] They vainly supposed that the ark could save them, when the God of it had departed from them because of their wickedness. They knew that in former times their fathers had been beaten by their enemies, when they took not the ark with them to battle; as in the case of their wars with the Canaanites, Nu 14:44-45; and that they had conquered when they took this with them, as in the case of the destruction of Jericho, Jos 6:4. From the latter clause they took confidence; but the cause of their miscarriage in the former they laid not to heart. It was customary with all the nations of the earth to take their gods and sacred ensigns with them to war. The Persians, Indians, Greeks, Romans, Germans, Philistines, &c., did so. Consecrated crosses, blessing and hallowing of colours and standards, are the modern remains of those ancient superstitions.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18, 20, 21 1Sa 4:3-4. Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us? —…
1Sa 4:3-4. Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us? — This was strange blindness, that when there was so great a corruption in their worship and manners, they could not see sufficient reason why God should suffer them to fall by their enemies. Let us fetch the ark — That great pledge of God’s presence and help, by whose conduct our ancestors obtained success. Instead of humbling themselves for, and purging themselves from their sins, for which God was displeased with them, they take an easier and cheaper course, and put their trust in their ceremonial observances, not doubting but the very presence of the ark would give them the victory. That they might bring the ark — This they should not have done without asking counsel of God.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 15, 18, 21, 22 In the evening of the defeat of the Israelites…
In the evening of the defeat of the Israelites the elders held a council, and resolved to send for the ark, which is described in full, as implying that in virtue of the covenant God could not but give them the victory (compare Num 10:35; Jos 3:10).
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 Ancients; the commanders of the respective tribes. Heli was…
Ancients; the commanders of the respective tribes. Heli was not able to lead on the people to battle, on account of his blindness and great age. --- Enemies. All nations attribute much to the exterior marks of religion. The Israelites had witnessed the victories which had been obtained while the ark was present, Josue vi. 4. See Numbers xiv. 45. But they ought to have considered, that their infidelity rendered them unworthy of the divine protection; and that God was more displeased at their profanations, than at the indignity to which the sacred vessels would be exposed. He would know how to vindicate his own honour and glory. The symbols of religion were thus carried in the army, by the Persians, &c. (Herodotus vii.) --- The Romans regarded their standards as so many deities. (Halicar. vi.) See 2 Kings vi. 21., and 2 Paralipomenon xiii. 8. (Calmet) --- The confidence which the Israelites placed in the ark was commendable, but their sins deserved to be punished. (Worthington) (Numbers x. 35.)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v12 II. The Judgment on the House of Eli. 1Sa_4:12-22
II. The Judgment on the House of Eli. 1Sa_4:12-22
12And there ran a man of Benjamin20 out of the army, and came to Shiloh the 13same day with his clothes rent, and with earth upon his head. And when [om. when] he came [ins. and] lo, Eli sat upon a [his21] seat by the wayside22 watching; for his heart trembled for the ark of God. And when [om. when] the man came into the city and told it [came, in order to tell it in the city] [ins. and] all the city 14cried out. And when [om. when] Eli heard the noise of the crying, he [om. he, ins. and] said, What meaneth the noise of this tumult? And the man came in 15hastily [hasted and came] and told Eli. Now Eli was ninety and eight23 years old, 16and his eyes were dim [set] that he could not see. And the man said unto Eli, I am he that came out of the army, and I fled to-day out of the army. And he said, 17What is there done, my son? And the messenger answered and said, Israel is fled before the Philistines, and there hath been also a great slaughter among the people, and thy two sons also, Hophni and Phinehas, are dead, and the ark of God 18is taken. And it came to pass, when he made mention of the ark of God, that he fell from off the seat backward by the side24 of the gate, and his neck brake, and he died; for he was an old man [the man was old], and heavy. And he had judged 19Israel forty25 years. And his daughter-in-law, Phinehas’ wife, was with child, near to be delivered;26 and when she heard the tidings that the ark of God was taken, and that her father-in-law and her husband were dead, she bowed herself and travailed, 20for her pains came upon her. And about the time of her death the women that stood by her said, Fear not; for thou hast borne a son. But she answered 21not, neither did she regard it. And she named the child Ichabod, saying “ The glory is departed from Israel,” because the ark of God was taken, and because of 22her father-in-law and her husband. And she said, The glory is departed from Israel, for the ark of God is taken.
Read full note →
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1Sa_4:12 sq. The persons and events of the following narrative are described with peculiar vividness, so that we may here without doubt suppose the narration to rest on the direct account of an eye-witness. A man of Benjamin.—Thenius: “ This exact statement vouches for a faithful tradition.” That he comes with mournful tidings is shown by his rent garment and the earth strown on his head, as signs of sudden deep grief, in which the heart is rent with sorrow. Comp. Gen_37:29; Gen_37:34; Num_16:6; Jos_7:6; 2Sa_15:32; Eze_27:30.27—To Shiloh the man came straight from the army (מַעֲרָכָה, Vulg. ex acie). According to the Jewish tradition28 this man was Saul, who snatched from Goliath the Tables of the Law, taken out of the ark, in order to save them. Instead of the יַךְ (he slew) of the text, which is unintelligible, we must read יַד (side)1 Samuel 29 : He sat by the side of the way, watching. Thenius remarks: “ What a strange expression !” But the sitting in the way, or on the side of the way by which the first message must come, answers precisely to the intense expectation in which Eli, though blind, had taken this position, so as, if not with the eyes (which, however, had perhaps still a glimmer of light), yet with the sense of hearing to learn straightway the arrival of the first messenger. Eli sits, as in 1Sa_1:9 at the inner, so here at the outer gate of the Sanctuary, on his seat,30 and, as appears from 1Sa_4:18, on the side of the gate, which was also, therefore, the side of the adjacent way.—His heart was heavy, not merely “ from anxiety and care for the ark, which without divine command he had let go from its dwelling-place into the camp” (Berl. Bib.), but also in respect to the issue of the battle itself for the people of Israel.—Eli’s blindness explains the fact that he failed to observe the messenger, who ran hurriedly by31 without noticing him. It is the cry of lamentation, raised by the people of Shiloh at his news, that directs Eli’s attention to the announcement. His question concerning the loud outcry around him, on which the messenger came to inform him, is explained in 1Sa_4:15 by reference to his blindness, the result of old age.—Eli was 98 years old, and his eyes were set. (The Fem. Sing. קמה with עיניו is explained, according to Ewald, § 317 a, by the abstract conception which connects itself with the Plu. of the Subst. by the combination into an abstract idea of the individuals embraced in it, “especially in lifeless objects, beasts, or in co-operating members of one body, in which the action of the individuals is not so prominent—and so in the Dual,” as here). For “were set” comp. 1Ki_16:4, where occurs the same expression for blindness caused by old age. It is the vivid description of the lifeless, motionless appearance of the eye quenched by senile weakness, “a description of the so-called black cataract, amaurosis, which usually ensues in great old age from the feebleness of the optic nerves” (Keil, in loco). In 1Sa_3:2 the process of this blinding is indicated by the word כהה as “waxing dim.”
1Sa_4:16 sq. The sorrowful tidings. The remark in 1Sa_4:15 concerning Eli’s senile weakness and blindness explains both the preceding 1Sa_4:14 and the statement in 1Sa_4:16 as to the way in which the messenger personally announces and introduces himself with the words: I am he that came out of the army.—But he says, “ I am he that came” not merely on account of Eli’s blindness, but also on account of the importance of the announcement with which he approaches the head of the whole people. It is not allowable, therefore, to translate: “I come” (De Wette). At the same time the messenger declares himself a fugitive, and so intimates that the army is completely broken up. Eli’s question refers not to the How (how stood the affair? De Wette, Bunsen), but to the What: “What was the affair?” (Thenius), Vulg.: quid actum est?—The answer of the messenger to Eli’s question (1Sa_4:17) contains nothing but facts in a fourfold grade, each statement more dreadful than the preceding. There is a power in these words which comes out in four sharp sentences, with blow after blow, till its force is crushing: Israel fleeing before the Philistines, a great slaughter among the people, Eli’s sons dead, the ark taken. The double “and also” (וגם) is to be observed here as characteristic of the lapidary style of the words, and the excitement with which they were spoken.—The narrator remarks expressly that the fourth blow, the news of the capture of the ark by the heathen, led to Eli’s death. This is again a sign of the fear of God, which was deeply rooted in his heart; the ark represented the honor and glory of the God who dwelt in His people; the people’s honor and power might perish; the destruction of his house might be irretardable, unavoidable; prepared beforehand for it, he had said: “ It is the Lord, let him do as seemeth him good !” But the loss of the ark to the heathen was his death-blow the more surely, the firmer had been his hope that, as of old in the time of Moses and Joshua, the host of Israel would win the victory over the Philistines under the lead of the ark which he, a weak guardian of the Sacred Vessel, had sent off to the battle without Divine command, weakly yielding to the elders of the people whose trust was not in the living God. His judicial and high-priestly office, lacking as it was in honor and renown, he closed with honor; though the manner of his death was terrible, and bore the mark of a divine judgment, he nevertheless died in the fear of God. Berl. Bib.: “It is besides an honorable and glorious death to die from care for God’s honor.” His judgeship had lasted 40 years. The Sept. reading, 20 years for 40, results, according to Thenius, from the confusion of the numeral letters מ and כ, as the reading 78 (Syr., Arab.) for 98 in 1Sa_4:15, according to the same critic, may be due to the confusion of צ and ע. Further, our text “ is sustained by the fact that Eli hardly became Judge in his 78th year" (Thenius).
1Sa_4:19 sq. Here follows the pathetic narrative of Eli’s daughter-in-law, in which is shown how the judgment on Eli’s house is still farther fulfilled in his family.32 The wife of Phinehas was so violently affected by the horror and sorrow that her pains came prematurely on her. Literally it reads: “ her pains turned upon her,” or “ began to turn themselves within her.” This expression is suggested by the ground-meaning of the word (צִירִים), “something turning, winding, circling.”
1Sa_4:20. The comforting word of the women who stood by: “ thou hast borne a son ” does not rouse the mother’s joy in her heart, and cannot overcome or soften its sorrow at the loss of the ark, which is more to her than the loss of husband and father-in-law—and this is set forth by two expressions in the narration: “ she gave no answer, and laid it not to heart,” did not set her mind on it. Comp. Psa_62:11 שׂוּם לֵב. What is commonly for a mother’s heart at such a time the greatest joy (Joh_16:21), was for her as if it were not; so is her soul occupied and taken up with sorrow for the lost ark. This shows the earnest, sincere piety, in which she is like her father-in-law. Eli’s house, made ripe by his weakness for so frightful a judgment, was not in all its members personally a partaker of the godlessness and immorality of those who certainly, before the Lord and the whole nation, stamped it as ripe for God’s righteous punishment. “ The wife of this deeply corrupt man shows how penetrated the whole people then was with the sense of the value of its covenant with God ” (O. v. Gerlach).33
1Sa_4:21. She gives expression to what fills her heart by naming the child Ichabod. This name is not ” where is glory?” (אֵי כ׳) that is, nowhere, but it = “not glory.”34 She explains the name Not-glory, Un-glory by saying (לֵאמֹר): “the glory of Israel is carried into captivity.” (The אֵל, as in verse 19, is “ in reference to,” “ having regard to,” and belongs to לֵאמֹר as the continuation of the words of the narrator, not of the dying woman). The narrator has in mind her words, on which she based that ejaculation, but does not state them as hers till afterwards; here he states beforehand the fact contained in them as a historical explanation. We must note, however, the difference between his explanation and her reason for that exclamation in 1Sa_4:22. While he mentions the reference (אֶל) to the two dead, she bases the name (כִּי) on the one thing only, the capture of the ark. The honor or glory is the divine majesty, the glory of God, which is enthroned above the ark. Grotius: “ The ark above which God was accustomed to appear in glory.” With the capture of the ark “Israel’s glory is carried into captivity;” “with the abandonment of the earthly throne of His glory, the Lord seemed to have annulled His covenant of grace with Israel; for the ark, with the tables of the law and the kapporeth [mercy-seat], was the visible pledge of the covenant of grace which Jehovah had made with Israel” (Keil). Eli’s son’s wife dies, as Eli himself, in consuming sorrow over what was the core of this national and domestic misfortune, over the judgment of the turning away of the almighty living God from the covenant-people, the outward sign of which was the removal of the ark, on which, in accordance with His promise given in the law, He would sit as Israel’s God and dwell in the midst of His people. Comp. Exo_25:22; Exo_30:6; Exo_30:36; Exo_40:35 (“the glory of the Lord filled the dwelling”), 1Ki_8:10-11. [Bib. Comm. refers to Psa_78:61; Psa_78:64 as containing allusions to this incident. Wordsworth: “With God there is no Ichabod.”—Tr.] “The necessary result of this national view of the ark is that there was only one sanctuary, so that all those passages which affirm it may be cited as direct testimony to the fact that there was only one sanctuary.” (Hengst. Beit. [Contrib.] 3:55.)
HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL
1. In the history of His kingdom on earth God the Lord often permits times to come, when it seems as if the victory had been forever borne away from His people by the hostile world, and the holy ordinances of His kingdom, and its gracious benefits forever abandoned to the power of unbelief. Such times are times of judgment on the house of the Lord, the purpose of which is to make manifest all who truly belong to the Lord’s people, to put an end to the hypocrisy of dead belief and of the unbelief which is concealed under outward forms and the appearance of godliness, to lead to earnest, honest repentance, and bring men to seek again God’s mercy in true living faith.
2. Outcry over inbreaking outward and inward corruption, in which God’s judgments are inflicted, is nothing but an expression of the sorrow which flesh and blood feels, a sign of the distance and alienation of the fleshly heart from God, unless therein the cry is heard: “It is the Lord, this the Lord hath done,” and the confession is made: “We have deserved it by our sins,” and unless recourse is had in penitence and faith to God’s grace and mercy. And all this was lacking in the outcry of that whole city and its loud tumult.
3. “Being in God”—that is, the union of the heart with Him in the deepest foundation of its being, reveals itself in times of great misfortune and suffering in this, that the sorrow and mourning is not restricted to the loss of earthly-human possessions, but directs itself chiefly to the loss and lack of God’s gracious presence, and thus shows that for the inner life the glory of God and blessedness in communion with Him is become the highest good. So here in this refraining from grief over the loss of what to the flesh was the nearest and dearest, and in the outspoken sorrow only over the violence done to God’s honor and the contempt cast on His name, is verified the Lord’s word: “He who forsaketh not father or mother, or brother, etc., is not worthy of me.”
4. Eli and his son’s wife are shining examples of true heartfelt piety in the gloom of the corruption that reigned in the high-priestly family and the judgments that came on it, in that they are not taken up with their own interests, but bewail the violation of the sanctuary, the contempt put on God’s honor as the highest misfortune; and so in times of universal confusion and degradation which God the Lord lets befall His kingdom in this world, He has always His people in secret, who look not on their own need and tribulation as most to be lamented, but sorrow most deeply and heavily that the ends of His grace are thwarted, the honor of His name violated, and the affairs of His kingdom in confusion.
5. Even a sudden terrible death under the stroke of a merited judgment of God may be a blessed death in the living God, if the heart breaks with the cry: “To God alone the glory!”
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1Sa_4:12. The outward signs of mourning, such as were usual among the people of Israel—rending the garments and putting ashes or dust on the head—ought to be a symbolical representation of godly sorrow for sin, in which the heart is broken to pieces by the word of the holy and righteous God, and the whole man casts himself humbly and penitently into the dust before his God. [Very fanciful.—Tr.] But, as then under the oppression of Philistine rule in Israel, there is nowhere a trace to be found of such repentance, when the misfortune over which men mourn and lament is not regarded and felt as a punishment of God for sin, and the smiling hand of the righteous and holy God is not therein recognized.
1Sa_4:13. S. Schmid: We must take care not to do any thing with a doubtful conscience, that we may not have always to stand in fear, Rom_16:23.—Those who will not cry out over their sins in true repentance must at last cry out over the punishment and their misfortune.
1Sa_4:17-18. Starke: When men sin without distinction, God also punishes without distinction, and regards no person, dignity, age, nor condition, Wis_6:7.—S. Schmid: The honor of God and the true service of God must lie more on our hearts than our own children and parents.—Berl. Bible: It is a wonderful thing that whereas the people were so powerful and had gained so many victories, as long as God protected them, they now fly and let themselves be overcome almost without a struggle, as soon as ever God ceases to be on their side. If God protects us in a special way, we are a match for our enemies; but if He leaves us only for a little to ourselves, into what weaknesses do we not then fall! So that we unite with our enemies in contributing much to our downfall.—We must, however, regard it as an effect of God’s compassion when He permits us to be smitten. For if this did not happen, we should not sufficiently recognize our weakness, and our great need of His assistance.—It is an honorable and glorious death to die from concern for the honor of God.
1Sa_4:21-22. Berleb. Bible: As soon as we lose this presence (God’s), we fall into the utmost weakness and into powerlessness, so that we can no more do what we have done before. We also cease to be a terror to our enemies; for these, on the contrary, now rejoice over our defeat.—Wunderlich (in Daechsel): So prevalent in Israel was a regard for the glory of God, which streamed down upon the people, so deeply implanted was the theocratic national consciousness that a woman in travail forgot her pains, and a dying woman the terrors of death, a mother did not comfort herself in her new-born son, and sorrow for the lost jewel of the nation outweighed even sorrow for the death of a father and of a husband, and this in a family and in a period which must be regarded as degenerate.
1Sa_4:12-22. A terrible and yet an honorable end—if 1) With the humble confession “ It is the Lord ” the hand of God as it smites down is held back; 2) In complete unselfishness one’s own misfortune and ruin is quite forgotten over the shame brought upon the honor and the name of God; and 3) The hidden man of the heart, with all his striving, turns himself alone towards the honor and glory of God as his supreme good.—The defeats of God’s people in the conflict with the world which is hostile to His kingdom. 1) Their causes: a) on their side: unfaithfulness towards the Lord, arbitrary, self-willed entrance into the strife without God, cowardice and flight; b) on God’s side: punitive justice, abandonment to the hands of their enemies. 2 Their necessary consequences: deep hurt to the yet remaining life of faith, injury to the honor of God, and shame brought upon His glorious name. 3) The results contemplated by God in permitting them, or their design: sincere repentance, all the more zealous care for the Lord’s honor, glorifying His name so much the more.—Without honor to God no honor to the people: 1) In the inner life of the people—error and heterodoxy, where the light of His revealed truth does not shine, sin and unrighteousness, where there is a lack of faithful obedience to His holy will, spiritual-moral wretchedness and ruin, where God must withdraw His gracious presence; 2) In the outer life of the people in relation to other peoples, oppression and subjection, introduction from without of godlessness and immorality, loss of their good name.—The cry, Ichabod, the glory is departed from Israel, is a cry which 1) as a lamenting cry, is grounded in the proper recognition of the cause, greatness and significance of the ruin and wretchedness which come from being abandoned by God, and 2) as an awakening cry is designed to admonish to earnest repentance and returning to the Lord, that the light of His glory may again break forth out of the gloom.
[1Sa_4:19-22. The pious wife of Phinehas. 1) Pious, though living in an age of general corruption. 2) Deeply pious, though the wife of a grossly wicked husband. 3) So pious, that in her devout grief all other strongest feelings were swallowed up: a) maternal feeling, b) conjugal and filial feeling, c) patriotic feeling.—Tr.]
Footnotes:
[20][1Sa_4:12. Instead of the Gen. construction, as here, the Heb..has more commonly the tribal name as Adj. (gentilie), as in Jdg_3:15; 2Sa_20:1; but for ex. of this form see Jdg_10:1.—Tr.]
[21][1Sa_4:13. The Art. here points to some well-known or accustomed seat.—Tr.]
[22][1Sa_4:13. It is generally agreed that we must here read, with the Qeri and Syr., יד instead of יך, but the absence of the Art. in דרך makes a difficulty, and the Sept. and Chald. seem to hare rendered from a slightly different text. Sept. has: “Eli was near the gate, watching the way,” and Chald.: “Eli sat in the path of the way of the gate watching.” So in 1Sa_4:18 the Heb. text “side of the gate.” It would seem probable, therefore, that הַשַּעַר “the gate” has fallen out here.—Tr.]
[23][1Sa_4:15. Sept. here gives 90 years, and Syr. (followed by Arab.) 78.—Tr.]
[24][1Sa_4:18. Wellhausen objects to בעד יד, rejects the עד as repetition by error, and reads ביד. But this is unnecessary; comp. the אֵל in 2Sa_18:4, and the force of בעד in Job_2:4.—Tr.]
[25][1Sa_4:18. Sept. gives 20 years, other verss. 40.—Tr.]
[26][1Sa_4:19. לַת for לֶדֶת, the only place where this contraction occurs (so Rashi).—Tr.]
[27][On the importance of “runners” see note in Bib. Comm. on this verse, which remarks also, that as the messenger came from Ebenezer within the day (1Sa_4:16) it must have been near.—Tr.]
[28][See Talmudical Tract Sota, and the Midrash of Samuel, and comms. of Rashi and Abarbanel.—Tr.]
[29][See “Textual and Grammatical” note on this word.—Tr.]
[30][This word (כסא) everywhere else clearly means “throne” (unless perhaps in 1Ki_2:19; Psa_9:14), and comp. Zec_6:13. Yet, in the infrequent occurrence of any word for an ordinary seat (and see Eze_28:2, מוֹשַׁב א׳ “seat of God”), though the word seems to imply something of official dignity, the rendering throne (Josephus: ἐφ’ ὑψηλο͂υ θρόνου) would here be not so good as “seat.”—Tr.]
[31][The messenger probably entered the city by the gate where Eli was sitting.—Tr.]
[32]The לְ before לֶדֶת=לַת is that of time, our towards, on, about; comp. Jos_2:3, “the gate was for closing,” that is, was to be closed immediately; Ew. Gr. 217, 2 b. So here: towards bearing, near to bearing. On the contraction of לֶדֶת into לַת comp. Ew. Gr. § 236,1 b, and § 80.—אֵל is often used, as here, to point out the object to which the narration relates—with the verbs “say, relate.” Comp. Gen_20:2; Psa_2:7; Psa_69:27; Isa_38:19; Jer_27:19; Job_42:7. It is explained by the fact that, in narrating or speaking, the mind is directed to the object, stands in relation to it. Comp. לִ Isa_5:1. That it here depends on a subst., and not, as usually, on a verb, does not affect the principle, since a verbal conception lies in this subst.
[33][We can hardly draw a conclusion concerning the whole nation from the example of one person, and Gerlach’s inference is, for other reasons, doubtful.—Tr.]
[34] אִי is not אָבִי contracted, as in אִיעֶזֶר, Num_26:30; Ew. § 84 c, but = “not,” “without,” Ew. § 273 b, A. 1, p. 667, comp. § 209 c, to which the context points.
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 On vv3, 13 Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of…
Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of Shiloh unto us--Strange that they were so blind to the real cause of the disaster and that they did not discern, in the great and general corruption of religion and morals (Sa1 2:22-25; Sa1 7:3; Psa 78:58), the reason why the presence and aid of God were not extended to them. Their first measure for restoring the national spirit and energy ought to have been a complete reformation--a universal return to purity of worship and morals. But, instead of cherishing a spirit of deep humiliation and sincere repentance, instead of resolving on the abolition of existing abuses, and the re-establishing of the pure faith, they adopted what appeared an easier and speedier course--they put their trust in ceremonial observances, and doubted not but that the introduction of the ark into the battlefield would ensure their victory. In recommending this extraordinary step, the elders might recollect the confidence it imparted to their ancestors (Num 10:35; Num 14:44), as well as what had been done at Jericho. But it is more probable that they were influenced by the heathenish ideas of their idolatrous neighbors, who carried their idol Dagon, or his sacred symbols, to their wars, believing that the power of their divinities was inseparably associated with, or residing in, their images. In short, the shout raised in the Hebrew camp, on the arrival of the ark, indicated very plainly the prevalence among the Israelites at this time of a belief in national deities--whose influence was local, and whose interest was especially exerted in behalf of the people who adored them. The joy of the Israelites was an emotion springing out of the same superstitious sentiments as the corresponding dismay of their enemies; and to afford them a convincing, though painful proof of their error, was the ulterior object of the discipline to which they were now subjected--a discipline by which God, while punishing them for their apostasy by allowing the capture of the ark, had another end in view--that of signally vindicating His supremacy over all the gods of the nations.
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 On vv3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 21 3. Wherefore — Having undertaken the battle at the…
3. Wherefore — Having undertaken the battle at the word of the Lord by Samuel, they had not dreamed of defeat, for why should God counsel them to go to war, and then deliver them over to defeat by a heathen foe?
Let us fetch the ark — Their fathers conquered the Midianites when they carried with them into the war “the holy instruments,” (Num_31:6,) and Jericho fell when the ark was carried around it, (Joshua 6,) and they now vainly suppose that the same ark will surely save them from the hand of the foe. Previous to this, at the time of the Benjamite war, the ark had been removed from Shiloh, and abode for a time at Beth-el. Jdg_20:27. Then, as now, the Israelites were counselled of God to go to war, but were nevertheless defeated. But then, as now, they were also themselves not without sin, and their arrogance and self-confidence needed to be deeply humbled.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 3. And when, &c.] Connect closely with 1Sa_4:2 by…
3. And when, &c.] Connect closely with 1Sa_4:2 by rendering, And the people came to the camp, and the elders, &c. The use of the term people for army is characteristic of the time when there was no standing army, but a levy of all the men capable of bearing arms in time of war.
the elders of Israel said] The officers of the army held a council of war, and resolved to fetch the Ark. On the Elders see note on 1Sa_8:4.
Read full note →
3. Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us] The Israelites assume that their defeat came from Jehovah. Cp. Jos_7:7-8. But instead of enquiring the cause of His displeasure, they fancy that His aid can be secured by the presence of the Ark. They may have recollected the words which Moses used when the Ark set forward, “Rise up, Lord, and let thine enemies be scattered; and let them that hate thee flee before thee” (Num_10:35): and how the Ark had led them to victory against Jericho (Jos_6:6).
Possibly the Philistines, as upon a later occasion (2Sa_5:21), had brought the images of their gods into the field, and this suggested the idea of fetching the Ark. The superstition which confused the Symbol with the Presence was the natural result of the decay of religion.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21 (3) Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us?—The people and…
(3) Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us?—The people and the elders who, as we have seen above, had undertaken the war of liberty at the instigation or the young man of God, amazed at their defeat, were puzzled to understand why God was evidently not in their midst; they showed by their next procedure how thoroughly they had gone astray from the old pure religion.
Let us fetch the ark of the covenant.—Whether or not Samuel acquiesced in this fatal proposition we have no information. It evidently did not emanate from him. but, as we are expressly told, from the “elders of the people.” Probably the lesson of the first defeat had deeply impressed him, and he saw that a thorough reformation throughout the land was needed before the invisible King would again be present among the people.
Read full note →
It may save us.—It was a curious delusion, this baseless hope of the elders, that the unseen God was inseparably connected with that strange and beautiful symbol of His presence, with that coffer of perishable wood and metal overshadowed by the lifeless golden angels carved on the shining seat which closed this sacred Ark—that glittering mercy seat, as it was called, round which so many hallowed memories of the glory vision had gathered. Far on in the people’s story, one of the greatest of Samuel’s successors, Jeremiah, presses home the same truth the people were so slow in learning, when he passionately urges his Israel, “Trust ye not in lying words, saying The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord are these. For if ye thoroughly amend your ways and your doings, then will I cause you to dwell in this place, in the land that 1 gave to your fathers, for ever and ever” (Jer_7:4-5; Jer_7:7).
Wordsworth here, with great force, thus writes:—“Probably David remembered this history when, with a clearer faith, he refused to allow the Ark to be carried with him in his retreat before Absalom out of Jerusalem; and even when the priests had brought it forth, he commanded them to carry it back to its place, saying, ‘If I shall find favour in the eyes of the Lord, He will bring me again, and show me both it and His habitation.’ (2Sa_15:25.)
“David, without the Ark visibly present, but with the unseen help of Him who was enthroned on the mercy-seat, triumphed, and was restored to Jerusalem; but Israel, with the Ark visibly present, but without the blessing of Him whose throne the Ark was, fell before their enemies, and were deprived of the sacred symbol, which was taken by the Philistines.”
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19 When the people were come into the comp. Before…
When the people were come into the comp. Before the battle Israel had entrenched itself, so that upon its defeat it had a place capable of defence into which to retire. We find also that their communications were open, so that they could send to Shiloh. The army is called the people because battles were not fought in those days by men specially trained, but by all the inhabitants of the country of the proper age. The question, Wherefore hath Jehovah smitten us? expresses surprise. The elders had evidently expected victory, and therefore the domination of the Philistines could not have been so complete as it certainly was in the days of Samson. There must have been an intermediate period of successful warfare during which Eli had been their leader. Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of Jehovah. This, the remedy suggested by the elders, was to employ their God as a talisman or charm. The ark was the symbol of Jehovah"s presence among them, and of their being his especial people, and by exposing it to danger they supposed that they would compel their God to interfere in their behalf. They would have done right in appealing to their covenant relation to Jehovah; and had they repented of the sins which had grown up among them, fostered by the evil example of Eli"s sons, he would have shown them mercy. But for God to have given Israel the victory because of the presence of his ark in their camp would have been to overthrow all moral government, and would have insured their spiritual ruin as inevitably as would the granting to any order of men now the power of working miracles or of infallibly declaring the truth.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 22 Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us today before the…
1Sa_4:3
Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us today before the Philistines?
Read full note →
The advantages of defeat
This cry of amazement stands between two defeats. Defeat astounded Israel: it fell in despite of priests and religious parade. We should study defeats. Personal and corporate both. Army cadets at Sandhurst and Woolwich prepare to achieve victory by the study of military failures. Good will come of such study in spite of its sadness.
I. Defeat that compels enquiry into our moral discipline is good.
1. Defeat comes as a surprise. We are in the hosts of the Great King. We have been educated to expect victory. Our base, our supplies, our alliances, our history, have led to this.
2. We should be grateful to the first questioner in the Church, who demands research into the Churchs character. Wherefore? is the prelude of Hallelujah. So, too, in the life of the soul.
3. Enquiry will demonstrate the omission of some condition essential to success. A little later (1Sa_7:8) Samuel explains the double disaster. Our Leader and Commander has not promised unconditional triumph. The promises are made to character. If ye do return unto the Lord . . . He will deliver you.
4. Each day may be with us a day of battle.
II. It is no small gain when we see defeat to be the fruit of past neglect.
1. Had Israel been true long before, there would have been no Philistines now to vex and humiliate them. At the conquest of Canaan they had their chance. But fatigue set in, and enthusiasm faded away before the conquest could be completed. Awed and crippled remnants of heathen nations were left. Jebusites in Mount Zion, Philistines on the southwest border. They were the seed of future miseries and shames to Israel.
2. To every Christian there comes a time of special power and possibility. By laying hold on Gods strength it would be easy then to slay our native foes, our inbred sins. Conversion should bring us more than pardon. It should bring the mastery of sin. Too often, the forgiven soul carries into the Christian life sins which, though crippled, are by no means dead. Rightly taught, we should seek their extermination.
III. It is an advantage when defeat proves the worthlessness of superstition.
1. Some sacral warrior, looking on the field with its 4,000 slain, cried, Let us fetch the Ark . . . that it may save us. Superstition added to sin does not improve the position. Israel called for the Ark, instead of for the God of the Ark and of the nation.
2. High regard for the Ark was natural. Read its history. It was made on a Divine plan; and housed in the Holy of holies; it was the resting place of the Shekinah. By grand histories it had taken a deep place in their reverence and love. Here lay the danger. It is easy to cling to the visible loved symbol, whilst the invisible world of truth for which it stands is let slip. We may carry to lifes battlefields all our religious methods, and fail in the fight. Faith in God would have purified their hearts (Act_15:9) and made them heroes in the fight. The historian Napier, speaking of our army in Spain, said, Incalculable is the preponderance of moral power in war. Superstition may be described as moral faith lowered from the living God to things. It is incapable of faiths valiant movements. It has no grip of God.
3. Superstition shows itself in the Christian congregation. A modern form of it is Ecclesiolatry. The Church is unspeakably great, sacred, and dear. And it is not difficult to set it in the souls faith and love as a rival to God.
IV. It is a gain when defeat removes unworthy leaders. The peril of Israel lay as much in their leaders unworthiness as in their own vices. The nation was like a drifting ship. With men of high character at the helm she might have recovered leeway. But of her steersmen two were drunk with iniquity, and one lacked energy to the point of criminality. It was necessary to get rid of these helmsmen if the ships company was to be saved. First, Hophni and Phinehas were slain (1Sa_4:11). Next, Eli fell. With the death of these men a new era opens--the epoch of Samuel. Storms shake rotten wood from living trees to make way for fresh and healthy development.
V. Though defeated, we may win on the same site ere long. The battles were fought at Ebenezer (1Sa_4:1). Here the armies met again soon (1Sa_7:12). Then victory sat on the banners of Israel. It was a day of praise and monument raising. We improve our record of deeds done when we improve our character. (1Sa_7:2; 1Sa_7:4.) Let no man lose heart. Rather let him seek victory through repentance and faith in God alone. Defeat is not Gods design for us. Thanks be to God which always causeth us to triumph in Christ. (James Dunk.)
Let us fetch the ark . . . that when it cometh among us it may save us. (Compare with 1Sa_4:10, and 1Sa_7:3.)--
Superstition and religion
Let us fetch the ark. What was the ark? It was a chest made of wood. It was overlaid with pure gold, within and without, and crowned with a mercy seat of pure gold. What was its purpose? It was a material thing representing a spiritual idea. It was a thing made with hands to symbolise things not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. It was a temporality pointing to a spirituality. That is how humanity deals with unseen presences; it makes visible vestures for them, garments that can be touched. Here are ten thousand men, a nations army, moving with one step, to one music, on one mission. They are possessed by one sentiment, that of patriotism; they are swayed by one idea, that of freedom. But these sentiments and ideas are intangible, spiritual, unseen. The nation must give them visibility; they must become enshrined in vestures that can be handled and seen. So we give our army a flag, and a flag which cam be touched represents the unseen which cannot be couched; it represents patriotic sentiment, national enthusiasm, the common hope. Through that flag there gleams the idea of duty and of right. To abuse the flag is to insult the nation. The ermine which our judges wear is the symbol of an idea. That visible robe represents the unseen vesture of authority with which their fellow men have clothed them. All these are visible representatives of unseen forces and powers. Our very instinct leads us to give these unseen presences a local and visible habitation and name. And here was God, an unseen Power, and men hungered for some material symbol to represent the unseen and eternal. And God said: Make an ark of wood and gold, and it shall stand as the symbol of the meeting of God and man, the confluence of time and eternity, the blending of the unseen influences of heaven with the unseen aspirations of earth. Now the character of symbols depends upon the character of man as men become better, symbols become enriched. As men deteriorate symbols become degraded. Is that not so with the commonest of all symbolism which we call language? These words which I am now addressing to you are all symbols which I am using to represent my unseen thought. The corruption of language follows the degradation of man. Language loses significance; it becomes debased, and its deterioration must be traced to its essential cause in the deterioration of man. It is the same with other symbols besides language. They become emptied of their royal significance when men lose their royalty. The more high-minded is the soldier, the more illustrious is his flag; the more debased is the soldier, the more vulgar is the flag. And so symbols wait upon character, they can become gradually impoverished in their meaning, until at length they become as empty as those shells which are strewn in myriads along our shores, empty houses which have lost their tenants, forsaken and lifeless forms. But now, mark you, a strange foible and trick of human nature. When our feelings and enthusiasms have deteriorated, and the symbols have lost their life, we are prone to hug the empty shell, and we delude ourselves into the belief that the empty symbol can do what only could be done by its living guest. Thoroughly bad men wear a crucifix, an empty shell, a cross without a Saviour. One of the most notorious criminals of our time was found with a crucifix next to his skin. Now let us realise their position. They had lost the purity of their character, and they tried to pervert a religious symbolism into unreligious magic. They thought that a dead symbol would do the work of a living devotion, and that is superstition. It would be just as reasonable for a man who was being drawn headlong to ruin by drink to seek end save himself by putting on a blue ribbon, a symbol of sobriety, and yet to continue to grovel in the waste and slough of passion and lust. For bad men to send for the ark to protect them is evidence that their religion has degraded them into the grossest superstition. There are homes in which Bibles are kept, not to be read, but because their presence is supposed to surround the home with a certain sanctity and protection. But are we not prone to use these symbols and means as the Israelites used their ark, to obtain a sort of magical protection from physical peril, and not deliverance from the captivity of sin? And is not the divine purpose of prayer sometimes forgotten, and is it not often employed as a spell to save us from poverty and loss of danger, but not from sin? There is a short paragraph in the life of one of the saintliest men of our time which I will read to you, as it specially illustrates my argument. In one of his letters, written in manhood, he writes: Once I recollect I was taken up with nine other boys at school to be punished, and I prayed to escape the shame. The master, previous to flogging all the others, said to me, to the great bewilderment of the whole school: Little boy, I excuse you, I have particular reasons for it. That incident settled my mind for a long time; only I doubt whether it did me any good, for prayer became a charm. I knew I carried about a talisman--which would save me from all harm. It did not make me better, it simply gave me security. Will you mark that last phrase? It did not make me better; it simply gave me security. That was what the ark did for the Philistines; is that all that prayer does for us--composing our fears but not affecting our morals, giving us a sense of security, but not delivering us from our sin? If the exercise has been thus debased, it will betray us when we need it most; refuge will fail us when we stand at last in the presence of the pure and holy God. (J. H. Jowett.)
A superstitious and religious use of sacred things
(1Ch_13:14):--In the first text the children of Israel say, Let us fetch the ark of the covenant out of Shiloh unto us. The bringing of the ark then from Shiloh was a free and spontaneous act on their part. They had a purpose in sending for it--to save them out of the hand of their enemies. Remembering what had been done at Jordan and at Jericho through the instrumentality of the ark, they were satisfied that by having it with them they would be able to triumph over their foes. Consequently, on its being brought into the camp there was great joy on the part of the Israelites (1Sa_4:5) and great consternation among the Philistines (1Sa_4:6-7). The Israelites were disappointed in their expectations, for they, instead of being victorious, were defeated with great slaughter (1Sa_4:10-11). From the second text we learn that the ark came into the house of Obed-edom more by accident than anything else. He did not send for it; he did not express a wish to have it; and he had not even the expectation of its ever being brought into his house. These incidents, when placed side by side, are very instructive. The Israelites sent for the ark, and took it with them to battle, but for all that they lost the day. Obed-edom did not send for the ark, but only received it into his house, and the Lord blessed his family and all that he had. To the Israelites, who sent for it, the ark became a savour of death unto death; but to Obed-edom, who received it into his house, the same ark became a savour of life unto life. In the one case the ark was a snare, and in the other a blessing.
I. The superstitious use of sacred things. On the part of an irreligious man there is a tendency, when in sore straits, to betake himself, not to God, but to reading the Bible, or to what he calls prayer, in the hope that by sending for the ark his difficulties will be removed. And on the part of all there is a danger of our looking upon things sacred as charms, and therefore of contenting ourselves with keeping the Sabbath, reading the Bible, going to church, partaking of the sacrament, as if some special virtue was of necessity connected with the simple discharge of these duties. They are useful and profitable as means, but it is only in that light that they can profit anyone.
II. The religious use of sacred things. Respecting Obed-edom very little is known, but we are warranted in believing that he was a good man. He reverenced the ark not for its own sake, but as the token of Gods presence, and he was therefore blessed in his house and all that he had. His conduct suggests the profitableness of religion at home,
1. It is necessary to observe the word that is employed. It is not said that he was enriched, that he was made a prosperous man, or that he was raised above difficulties or trials. He was blessed.
2. He was blessed in his house, in his own person, in his family, in his dependents.
3. He was blessed in all that he had. He may have had burdens, he may have had trials, but he was blessed in his business, in his joy, in his sorrows. (P. Robertson, A. M.)
The form and spirit of religion
As is man, such must his religion be. Now, man is a compound being. To speak correctly, man is a spiritual being: he hath within him a soul, a substance far beyond the bounds of matter. But man is also made up of a body as well as a soul. He is not pure spirit, his spirit is incarnate in flesh and blood. Now, such is our religion. The religion of God is, as to its vitality, purely spiritual--always so; but since man is made of flesh as well as of spirit, it seemed necessary that his religion should have something of the outward, external, and material, in which to embody the spiritual, or else man would not have been able to lay hold upon it. Our religion, then, has an outward form even to this day; for the apostle Paul, when he spoke of professing Christians, spoke of some who had a form of godliness, but denied the power thereof. So that it is still true, though I confess not to the same extent as it was in the days of Moses, that religion must have a body, that the spiritual thing may come out palpably before our vision, and that we may see it.
I. In the first place then, the form of religion is to be reverently observed. This ark of the covenant was with the Jews the most sacred instrument of their religion. And, indeed, they had great reason in the days of Samuel to reverence this ark, for you will recollect that when Moses went to war with the Midianites, a great slaughter of that people was occasioned by the fact that Eleazar, the high priest, with a silver trumpet, stood in the forefront of the battle, bearing in his hands the holy instrument of the law--that is, the ark; and it was by the presence of this ark that the victory was achieved. It was by this ark, too, that the river Jordan was dried up. And when they had landed in the promised country, you remember it was by this ark that the walls of Jericho fell flat to the ground. These people, therefore, thought if they could once get the ark, it would be all right, and they would be sure to triumph; and, while I shall have in the second head, to insist upon it that they were wrong in superstitiously imputing strength to the poor chest, yet the ark was to be reverently observed, for it was the outward symbol of a high spiritual truth, and it was never to be treated with any indignity.
1. It is quite certain, in the first place, that the form of religion must never be altered. You remember that this ark was made by Moses, according to the pattern that God had given him in the mount. Now, the outward forms of our religion, if they be correct, are made by God. His two great ordinances of Baptism and the Lords Supper are sent for us from on high. I dare not alter either of them.
2. And as the form must not be altered, so it must not be despised. These Philistines despised the ark. To laugh at the Sabbath, to despise the ordinances of Gods House, to neglect the means of grace, to call the outward form of religion a vain thing--all this is highly offensive in the sight of God He will have us remember that while the form is not the life, yet the form is to be respected for the sake of the life which it contains; the body is to be venerated for the sake of the inward soul; and, as I would have no man maim my body, even though in maiming it he might not be able to wound my soul, so God would have no man maim the outward parts of religion, although it is true no man can touch the real vitality of it.
3. As the outward form is neither to be altered nor despised, so neither is to be intruded upon by unworthy persons. The Bethshemites had no intention whatever of dishonouring the ark They had a vain curiosity to look within, and the sight of these marvellous tables of stone struck them with death; for the law, when it is not covered by the mercy seat, is death to any man, and it was death to them. Now, you will easily remember how very solemn a penalty is attached to any mans intruding into the outward form of religion when he is not called to do so. Let me quote this awful passage: He (speaking of the Lords Supper) that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lords body.
4. And now, let me remark, that the outward things of God are to be diligently cared for and loved.
II. Now, it is a notorious fact, that the very men who have the least idea of what spiritual religion is are the men who pay the most superstitious attention to outward forms. We refer you again to this instance. These people would neither repent, nor pray, nor seek God and his prophets; yet they sought out this ark and trusted in it with superstitious veneration. Now, in every country where there has been any religion at all that is true, the great fact has come out very plainly, that the people who dont know anything about true religion, have always been the most careful about the forms.
III. And now, in the last place, it is mine to warn you that to trust in ceremonies is a most deceitful thing and will end in the most terrific consequences. When these people had got the ark into the camp, they shouted for joy, because they thought themselves quite safe; but, alas, they met with a greater defeat than before. Only four thousand men had been killed in the first battle, but in the second, thirty thousand footmen of Israel fell down dead. How vain are the hopes that men build upon their good works, and ceremonial observances! But there is one thing I want you to notice, and that is, that this ark not only could not give victory to Israel, but it could not preserve the lives of the priests themselves who carried it. This is a fetal blow to all who trust in the forms of religion. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Regard for the Ark of God
I. Tis so natural for men to claim the divine favour, in spite of their impieties; and when they disgrace the sanctuary, to rely upon the outward advantages and immunities of it. And tis to be feared the case is too much our own, to be confident of Gods defence when we renounce Him in our lives, and to boast of the purity of our religion when we shelter our vices under it. Upon this calamity what counsel do the Israelites agree upon? Is there a solemn day of humiliation appointed by them? Do they resort to the Tabernacle of the Lord with tears and supplications? Do they bewail their own iniquities, and those of their forefathers? It was madness in them to presume that God would be their champion, as long as they retained their vices.
II. We know what mighty veneration was paid to the ark by Gods express institution; and that He gave it to His people to distinguish them from the idolatrous world, both by a token of His extraordinary tuition, and by reserving them to Himself as a peculiar treasure.
III. To return then to the Ark, and Elis passionate concern for it, let us consider the grounds and reasonableness of it:
1. With reference to the dignity of the Ark; and,
2. With regard to the danger of it.
(1) I begin with the first excellency of the Ark, as it was the symbol of Gods Presence. There I will meet with thee (Exo_25:22). This then is the consequent thereof, That God blesses and defends a people with whom He dwells: And supposing the world to be governed by His Providence, we must acknowledge the necessity of His protection to succeed in any enterprise. To this purpose I shall argue upon two heads:
(1) That we may be secure in God;
(2) That we can be so in nothing else.
(1) That we may be secure in God, may appear upon three undeniable grounds; that no counsel can prosper in opposition to His wisdom; that no resistance can be made to His infinite power; and, that nothing can happen to us without His determination. From these considerations it may be seen how dismal a calamity it is to loss the protection of God; and how safe a nation is under this refuge, and this alone Let us compare it with the imbecility and deceitfulness of all human supports; none of which can bear the weight of our confidence, or justify our reliance upon them; and much less exclusively to God.
(2) Having thus considered the Ark, as it was the authentic token of Gods Presence; let us regard it, as it was the centre of the true religion: for thither the sacrifices were commanded, and the prayers of the congregation went constantly along with them; and to worship before it was in the sacred style to appear before the Lord.
For the plainer view of that assertion we may briefly consider three things.
(1) That religion is the greatest improvement of human nature, and does more distinguish it than all the endowments of reason: and that which raiseth the dignity of a man, and gives him the most honourable character, must in proportion increase the lustre of a community.
(2) Religion doth by a natural tendency promote the temporal peace and prosperity of a nation.
(3) Religion doth by a moral efficacy make a people happy, in that it engageth God to favour and protect them; His Presence goes along with the Ark of His testimony; and they that serve Him faithfully, have an especial title to the guardianship of His Almighty goodness.
(3) Supposing then, that pure religion is the greatest blessing of mankind, as united into public bodies, what more naturally follows from hence, than that good men ought to be affected as Eli was, and to be most warmly concerned for the Ark of God?
I shall briefly subjoin four reasons:
(1) Because the honour of God is dearer to them than anything else.
(2) Because nothing is more valuable to good men than what they expect in a better world; and desiring charitably for others what they justly prize for themselves, they consequently make religion their leading care.
(3) Another reason of concern for the Ark may be this, because Gods protection is removed from a people together with His presence: and hereupon, in the prophetic vision, the glory of the Lord departed out of Jerusalem, to presignify the destruction of it. Wherefore, if God departs from a land, nothing but darkness and desolation can follow: and religion is the only way of retaining Him.
2. This brings me to a prospect of the Ark, namely, as it may be in danger by the sins of those who are in possession of it: and so it actually went into captivity, when the heart of good Eli was trembling for it.
(1) This judgment of Gods removing Himself, and His Ark, is sometimes inflicted for national impenitence, when God hath long waited in vain for repentance of public sins.
(2) Another cause of Gods removing His Ark, is the contempt of Divine truth, and the undervaluing of revealed religion, and of the Holy Scriptures. And when we treat them with scorn and niceness, or with sceptical pride and curiosity. No monarch will endure the despising of his royal proclamations: and we cannot think that God is less jealous for His holy word. The Tables of the Law were kept in the Ark, to intimate what value God was pleased to stamp upon them.
(3) A cause of Gods withdrawing Himself and His Ark from a people, is the profaning of His worship: and this was the flagrant enormity which make it a spoil to the enemies of God under Elis administration.
(4) Divisions and contentions about religion are another cause of desolation to it.
(5) Lastly, the abuse of the means of salvation, and unfruitfulness under them, doth often provoke God to withdraw them. And tis what our Lord threatens to His own people, the kingdom of God (that is, the Gospel, with the rich privileges of it) shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
IV. And now to conclude with some inferences from what has been said.
1. Considering how necessary to us Gods protection is, let us secure it as well as we can, and be careful not to unqualify ourselves for it. What the sins are that are most obstructive to our public peace, it is the business of the day to enquire impartially; and to dispossess them by prayer and fasting.
2. Considering that the great felicity of a nation is to have the true religion established in it, let us put a grateful value upon the communion of our Church; and bless God for the inestimable advantages of it; and improve them so well as to procure the continual preservation of them.
3. Considering how we ought to tremble in all the perils of the Ark, let us implore the Divine grace, that we may seriously lay to heart the great dangers we are in by our unhappy divisions; and let us ask our own consciences whether we have not deserved that God should take sway His gospel from us?
4. Let it be considered, that though we could be certain of having the Ark of God always with us; yet we should not be nearer to Him, nor to everlasting bliss, unless our adorations towards it were pure, and our lives answerable thereunto. And let us thus maintain the credit of our Church, and when the lustre of it will not be impaired by any eclipse. We think our religion is the best in the world; and if it be so, let not those that have a worse outstrip us in any virtue: let us strive to excel them in zeal and integrity, in peacefulness and moderation, in probity and temperance. (Z. Isham, D. D.)
The Ark of God in the camp
Two great lessons were taught the Israelites by Gods revelation and dealings, viz., the peril of irreverence, the peril of superstition.
I. Professing Christians, when contending with their spiritual foes, are tempted like Israel to take refuge in superstition, to put the form for the reality. For instance,
1. Mistaken view of sacraments. Reception of sick and dying regarded as a guarantee of safety.
2. Mistaken use of the Bible. Supposed virtue in the bare reading of a chapter. Like Pharisees of our Lords days, or Saul of Tarsus before conversion.
3. Mistaken view as to use of certain religious language--a shibboleth. These may be all either means or signs of grace, and may be full of blessing; but in themselves they are profitless, like the ark without Gods presence.
II. Professing Christians, trusting to such expedients, meet with disastrous failure.
1. What did the ark contain? The tables of the law, which only condemned. These ungodly men only proclaimed their own condemnation. The law cannot save.
2. What gave it its special holiness? The presence of the Sheckinah on the mercy seat; God manifesting Himself in atonement of sin. When this was absent, the ark could not save, any more than the temple saved Jerusalem from her foes.
III. Professing Christians should learn herefrom some important lessons.
1. God values the substance more than the shadow, the reality more than the form. He will even sacrifice His own ark rather than let it conduce to superstition.
2. God rejects superstitious worship, and requires the heart and sincerity.
3. The presence on the mercy seat alone gives strength for conflict or peace in trouble. (Homilist.)
The Ark of God
1. Learn that the formal is useless without the spiritual. There is the ark, made as God dictated--a sacred thing: the law is there; the mercy seat is there. Yet Israel falls by the arms of the Philistines, and the sacred shrine is taken by the hands of the idolaters. The formal never can save men; the institutional never can redeem society. This is, emphatically, the day of bringing in arks, societies, formalities, ceremonies. You have in your house an altar; that altar will be nothing influential in your life if you have it there merely for the sake of formality.
2. Learn that religion is not to be a mere convenience. The ark is not to be used as a magical spell. Holy things are not to be run to in extremity, and set up in order that men who are in peril may be saved. That it may save us. That sounds like a modern expression! To be personally saved, to be delivered out of a pressing emergency or strait--that seems to be the one object which many people have in view when identifying themselves with religious institutions, Christian observances and fellowships. We must not play with our religion. We might guarantee that every place of worship would be filled at five oclock in the morning and at twelve oclock at night under given circumstances. Let there be a plague in the city--let mens hearts fail them with fear--and they will instantly flock to churches and chapels. That will not do! God is not to be moved by incantations, by decent formalities, and external reverence. He will answer the continuous cry of the life.
3. We learn that the Philistines took the ark of the covenant. But though they had captured the ark, that sacred shrine made itself terribly felt. (J. Parker, D. D.)
The Ark of God of no avail
It seemed a brilliant idea. Whichever of the elders first suggested it, it caught at once, and was promptly acted on. There were two great objections to it, but if they were so much as entertained they certainly had no effect given them. The first was, that the elders had no legitimate control over the ark. The custody of it belonged to the priests and the Levites, and Eli was the high priest. There is no reason to suppose that any means were taken to find out whether its removal to the camp was in accordance with the will of God; and as to the minds of the priests, Eli was probably passed over as too old and too blind to be consulted, and Hophni and Phinehas would be restrained by no scruples from an act which every one seemed to approve. The second great objection to the step was that it was a superstitious and irreverent use of the symbol of Gods presence. Evidently the people ascribed to the symbol the glorious properties that belonged only to the reality. And doubtless there had been occasions when the symbol and the reality went together. In the wilderness, in the days of Moses, It came to pass, when the ark set forward, that Moses said, Rise up, Lord, and let Thine enemies be scattered, and let them that hate Thee flee before Thee (Num_10:35). But these were occasions determined by the cloud rising and going before the host, an unmistakable indication of the will of God. (Num_9:15-22). Yet even superstitious men believe in a supernatural power. And they believe in the possibility of enlisting that power on their side. And the method they take is to ascribe the virtue of a charm to certain external objects with which that power is associated. The elders of Israel ascribed this virtue to the ark. They never inquired whether the enterprise was agreeable to the mind and will of God. They never asked whether in this case there was any ground for believing that the symbol and the reality would go together. They simply ascribed to the symbol the power of a talisman, and felt secure of victory under its shadow. Would that we could think of this spirit as extinct even in Christian communities? (W. G. Blaikie, D. D.)
Sin the reason of defeat
The elders hold a kind of council. Where were Eli the judge and Samuel the prophet? Neither had part in this war. The question of the elders was right, inasmuch as it recognised that the Lord bad smitten them, but wrong inasmuch as it betrayed that they had not the faintest notion that the reason was their own moral and religious apostasy. They had not learned the A B C of their history, and of the conditions of national prosperity. They stand precisely on the pagan level, believing in a national God, who ought to help his votaries, but from some inexplicable caprice does not; or who, perhaps, is angry at the omission of some ritual observance. What an answer they would have got if Samuel had been there! There ought to have been no need for the question, or, rather, there was need for it; but the answer ought to have been clear to them; their sin was the all-sufficient reason for their defeat. There are plenty of Christians, like these elders, who, when they find themselves beaten by the world and the Devil, puzzle their brains to invent all sorts of reasons for God smiting, except the true one--their own departure from Him. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)
Reliance on religious symbols
If this hypocrisy, this resting in outward performances, was so odious to God under the law, a religion full of shadows and ceremonies, certainly it will be much more odious under the gospel, a religion of much more simplicity, and exacting so much the more sincerity of heart, even because it disburdens the outward man of the performances of legal rights and observances. And therefore, if we now, under the gospel, shall think to delude God Almighty, as Michal did Saul, with an idol handsomely dressed instead of the true David, we shall one day find that we have not mocked God, but ourselves; and that our portion among hypocrites shall be greater than theirs. (William Chillingworth.)
God only for a crisis
Once an old Scotch woman was on board a steamship crossing the Atlantic. She was terribly afraid of storm and wreck. One day the wind and storm began to rise. Immediately she besieged the captain of the steamer with anxious questionings as to danger. At last the captain solemnly said, Well, madam, I think we shall have to trust in the Lord. Oh, cried the old lady, has it come to that? Such is a by no means uncommon tendency--to push away recognition of dependence upon God to the time of some great and squeezing crisis, and to refuse to remember that in the common calm of every day we are as much and as really dependent upon God. That is not true faith that grasps at God only in a crisis.
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 On vv3, 12 1Sa_4:1. “And the word of Samuel,” etc. Commentators are…
CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES—
1Sa_4:1. “And the word of Samuel,” etc. Commentators are divided in their opinions whether this clause is connected with the rest of the chapter, and whether it signifies that Israel went out to battle by the command of Samuel. Many think they entered into the conflict without Divine direction; but Keil says, “The two clauses, ‘The word of Samuel came to all Israel’ and ‘Israel went out,’ etc., are to be logically connected together in the following sense: ‘At the word or instigation of Samuel, Israel went out against the Philistines to battle.” There is no doubt that the Philistines were ruling over Israel at this time. “Ebenezer.” This name was not given to the place until a later period (see 1Sa_7:12). “Aphek.” As this word means strength, or firmness, it is applicable to any fort or fastness; and there were several places so named in Palestine. According to 1Sa_7:12 this Aphek must have been near Mizpeh, probably the Mizpeh of Benjamin mentioned in Jos_18:26, and identified by Robinson as the present Neby Samwil, five miles north-west of Jerusalem.
Read full note →
1Sa_4:2. “Joined battle.” “This word describes the sudden mutual assault of the opposing lines.” (Lange’s Commentary.)
1Sa_4:3. “Let us fetch the ark,” etc. “In recommending this extraordinary step, the elders might recollect the confidence it imparted to their ancestors (Num_10:35; Num_14:44), as well as what had been done at Jericho. But it is more probable that they were influenced by the heathenish ideas of their idolatrous neighbours, who, in order to animate their soldiers and ensure victory, carried the statuettes of their gods in shrines, or their sacred symbols to their wars, believing that the power of those divinities was inseparably associated with, or residing in, their images.” (Dr. Jamieson.)
1Sa_4:4. “The people.” “It was the army that here acted, rather than the people in a political capacity, but the word ‘people’ perhaps points to the absence of a regular army.” (Tr. of Lange’s Commentary.)
1Sa_4:7. “God is come into the camp.” “The ark is called by the sacred writer ‘The ark of the Lord (Jehovah)’, but the Philistines, being heathens, say that ‘Elohim is come into the camp;’ and they speak of God in the plural number—‘These mighty gods.’ ” (Wordsworth.) “Just as all the heathen feared the might of the gods of other nations in a certain degree, so the Philistines also were alarmed at the might of the God of the Israelites.” (Keil.) “There hath not been such a thing heretofore.” “The ark was always carried by the priests in the van (Num_10:33; Jos_3:14), and, with one solitary exception, when the attack upon the Amalekites and the Canaanites was made in spite of an express prohibition of Moses, it was invariably carried with them in their early wars. But when they had become settled in Canaan, and the ark was established in Shiloh, the practice of carrying it into the field was discontinued, till now that ignorance and superstitious fear revived it.” (Dr. Jamieson.)
1Sa_4:10. “There fell of Israel thirty thousand footmen.” “The slaughter in ancient warfare seems, from the record of profane as well as sacred history, to have been often immensely greater than in modern times, since the introduction of gunpowder and artillery. And in the nature of the case it must have been when the soldiers of opposing armies met in close combat—man engaged in mortal strife with man; and when the weapons, too, were tipped with poison, the result could not be otherwise than a fearful carnage. The great numbers, then, of the Israelites who are recorded in this passage (as well as in similar ones) to have fallen in battle, and which have called forth the sneers of the infidels as gross exaggerations, are, from the character of the context, perfectly credible, and the statements of the sacred historian are not only in the present instance corroborated by the testimony of Josephus, but harmonise with the recital of Herodotus, and other historians, as to the vast mortality that frequently marked the battles of antiquity.” (Dr. Jamieson.)
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—1Sa_4:3-11
THE CAPTURE OF THE ARK
I. Here is failure in a lawful enterprise. If a man finds himself so oppressed by a stronger power that his moral nature suffers in consequence, it is both lawful and right to endeavour to free himself from the yoke of the oppressor. Especially if he finds himself the slave of habits which tend to his moral degeneration, he is bound, out of regard for his own real interests, to use every means within his reach to obtain his freedom. The enterprise against soul-oppression, whether individual or national, is always lawful. If a nation is under such a yoke of bondage, and can find no way to liberty except through strife—if it finds that by reason of its oppression it is sinking in the moral scale, and sees no possibility of bettering its condition, except by the sword—such a nation is justified in resorting to the use of such means. Israel was so oppressed by the Philistines. The yoke of the heathen was not only injurious to them materially but spiritually. It was not only a national humiliation but it tended to national degradation of soul. Therefore they were fully justified in using every lawful effort to be free, and they were not defeated because they were engaged in an undertaking which was in itself displeasing to God.
II. Here is failure in a lawful enterprise because undertaken in a wrong spirit. As we have seen in considering the first defeat recorded in this chapter, Israel undertook to throw off the yoke of the Philistines without submission to the yoke of God, and this was altogether contrary to the Divine revealed will concerning them. They must first submit to Jehovah, and then their enemies would submit to them. “O, Israel, if thou wilt hearken unto me, there shall no strange god be in thee; neither shalt thou worship any strange god.… Oh that my people had hearkened unto me, and Israel had walked in my ways! I should soon have subdued their enemies, and turned my hand against their adversaries. The haters of the Lord should have submitted themselves unto Him; but their time should have endured for ever (Psa_81:8-15). But they were not willing to lend an obedient ear to the Word of the Lord, and therefore the Lord’s hand was turned against them in their day of need. This subject is full of teaching for the individual man. The soul of every man is by nature more or less enslaved by appetites and passions which will degrade him if he does not war against them. But there is but one way to do this successfully. There must be submission to the yoke of God before we can cast off the yoke of sin and Satan. Man’s will in its present condition is not strong enough to overcome the evil within his own heart. “To will” may “be present with him, but how to perform that which he wills he finds not” (Rom_7:18). There must be submission to a higher will before the Philistines of the heart can be brought into subjection. We are “made free from sin” by becoming “servants to God” (Rom_6:22)—by falling in with His method of salvation by the death of His Son, and thus receiving from Him the Divine help by which alone we can conquer sin within us. The man who sets out to free himself from the bondage of any sinful habit in any other way will find himself in the condition of Israel at this time—he will be baffled and beaten on every side, and will have to give up the contest in despair. The evil spirit may go out for a time, but when he returns he will find the house unoccupied by any stronger power, and “then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there; and the last state of that man is worse than the first” (Mat_12:43-45).
III. Failure in any lawful enterprise demands inquiry into the cause of the failure. Even Israel said, “Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us to-day?” (1Sa_4:3). He who has failed to overcome any sinful habit within himself, or has been defeated in his efforts to lessen the power of evil in the world, should ask himself why it is so. If he knows that the end for which he strives is for the glory of God, he will do well to suspect that the cause of the failure rests with himself, and a searching and sincere inquiry into the state of his own heart may lead to some wholesome discoveries, and prevent defeat in future efforts. Israel here admits that the hand of God was behind the hand of the Philistines, and that it was Jehovah who had smitten them by the sword of their enemies; but their inquiry lacked earnestness and sincerity. They admit that their failure demands investigation, but they stop short without arriving at the real cause of their defeat. They were unwilling to push the question to its final issue; but such a question asked with a desire to find the real answer cannot fail to bring instruction to the man who asks it.
IV. Unwillingness to admit the real cause of failure will probably lead to the use of means which will end in greater disaster. The inhabitants of a house which is built upon a sandy foundation may blame the thunder when the walls rock and crack beneath the storm, and they may seek to render themselves secure by making the walls thicker and the roof more firm. But all such efforts are only making more certain the ultimate fall of the building—all that is added to a structure upon such a foundation is only hastening its downfall and the destruction of its inhabitants. They have entirely missed the real root of the mischief. The thunder may be the occasion of the damage, but it is not the cause. That is to be found in the nature of the soil upon which the house is built, and their failure to find it leads them to use means which end in greater disaster. So it was with Israel in their first defeat. They did not search deep enough to find the real cause of their discomfiture. The Philistines under God were the occasion, but their own sin was the cause of their misfortune, and failing to find it they rushed to the use of means which resulted in a more shameful defeat and a more terrible humiliation. To send for the ark of God into the field was useless, because that state of heart was wanting which made the symbol of God’s presence anything more than a chest of wood—it was but to cast greater dishonour upon the God whose favour alone made the ark a sacred thing, and thus to add another sin to the many which already stained their national history. And God demonstrates the uselessness and unlawfulness of their effort by permitting this most sacred symbol to fall into the hands of the uncircumcised Philistines.
V. Relationship to the victories of the past without the character of the victors may lead to wrong inferences and fatal results. There are many men of the present day who have a special relationship to the great events of the past, because they are descendants of those who were the actors in those events. But if they infer from their mere relationship that they are as fit to accomplish great things as their forefathers were, they fall into an error which may be fatal to themselves and others. They must first make sure that they possess the mental and moral qualities by which their ancestors became so renowned. It is not enough to be bone of their bone and flesh of their flesh unless they partake of their spirit. The children of the great and good must be great and good themselves if they would do the great deeds of their fathers. If they venture upon great enterprises, looking for success to their descent from some hero of the past, they will find that it will avail them nothing to bear his name if they lack his courage, his self-denial, his fortitude and his faith. Priests bearing the ark of God had in the past history of Israel made a way by which they had advanced to glorious victory. There had been a memorable day in their history when “as they that bare the ark were come unto Jordan, and the feet of the priests that bare the ark were dipped in the brim of the water, that the waters were cut off and the people passed over right against Jericho” (Jos_3:16). And perhaps both priests and people hoped for some such interposition of God on the present occasion. But then the ark was borne by men who had faith in God—the feet of those by whose touch under God Jordan was driven back, were cleaner feet that those of Hophni and Phinehas. The priests who stood firm in the midst of Jordan—the first to descend into its bed and the last to leave it—had confidence in the living God, and their courage and faith spread itself throughout all the ranks of Israel, and inspired them with a like faith and courage. But although the same ark of God was in the midst of Israel to-day it was borne upon the shoulders of men who had only a bodily kinship to their ancestors, and who, instead of inciting the people to confide in the God of their fathers, had brought His name and His worship into contempt. It was an act of the highest presumption on their part to bring the ark of God into the field, knowing, as they did, that though they belonged to a priestly family, they had none of the qualifications for the priestly office. If they relied upon their relationship to the victors of the past they were soon to become examples to all succeeding ages of the futility of such a reliance.
VI. When superstition is the foundation of joy, the joy will soon be turned into sorrow. It is superstition to attach any value to the symbol when that which makes the symbol worth anything has departed. The human body is a goodly and precious object, while it is tenanted by a living soul; but without the soul it is only dead matter. So is it with a symbol, and that which it signifies. When that which it symbolises is gone it is as a body without life. The ark was intended to be a sign to the Israelites of the presence in their midst of the invisible God. The mercy seat, upon which the blood of atonement had been sprinkled, and over which the glory of God had been visibly manifested, had been a token of the favour of Him to whom Israel had bound themselves to render obedience. But the covenant had been broken by their faithlessness, and the presence in their midst of the symbol of what had for a time ceased to exist, was of as little worth as the presence of a corpse in the place of a living man. To attach any value to it was an act of ignorant superstition, and the hope founded upon such a basis must end in disappointment. “When the ark of the covenant came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great shout” (1Sa_4:5), but their triumph was of short duration because it was founded upon a superstition. Joy springing from such a source only increases the bitterness of the disappointment when the true state of things is revealed, and men should look well to the foundation of their hope and joy and see that it is founded upon the truth of God, or the false hope will be but as the lightning flash which is gone in the twinkling of an eye, and makes the darkness all around seem deeper than it was before. The shout that now rang through the Hebrew camp was a terrible contrast to the cry of despair that ran through the host when the ark of God was taken.
VII. Men will fight as valiantly for a bad cause as for a good one. The Philistines fought as valiantly as the Israelites (1Sa_4:10). History furnishes us with abundant testimony to the fact that courage is born of error as well as of truth. He who believes a lie may contend for it as valiantly as he who fights for the very truth of God. The Israelites, fallen as they were, had more of right and truth on their side than their enemies had, yet the Philistines were at least as bold and brave as they were. Though the heathen believed that they were opposed by the mighty gods that smote the Egyptians, they resolved to quit themselves like men, and fight even unto death rather than become servants to the Hebrews. And the issue of the battle shows that their resolution did not falter. The courage of the battle-field is to a large degree of an animal nature, hence the savage will stand and die at his post with as much fortitude as the citizen soldier, and he who fights without knowing what he fights for, or for the worst of causes, will be as brave as he who fights from the purest and most patriotic motives. No men ever fought in a more unjust cause than the Spaniards who sought to crush the liberties of the Netherlanders, and yet their bravery was on many occasions equal to that of their opponents, who were engaged in the holiest of all struggles—the struggle for religious freedom.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
1Sa_4:3. The voice of many of us now is like to the voice of the Jews in the time of their distress. “Bring us the ark,” say they, “that it may save us,” when, alas, they were destroyed by the Philistines for all their ark. So thou, reader, when conscience frighteth thee, or death comes nigh thee, probably speakest in thine heart, Come, bring me the ark that may save me, bring me the sacrament that shall save me; thou runnest to thy baptism, to thy sabbath, to privileges, and thence concludest that thou canst not be condemned; when, alas, thou mayest go to hell fire for all thy font-water, and to eternal torments, though thou hast often been at the Lord’s table (Mat_7:22). Baptismal water is not the laver of regeneration. Many sit at the Lord’s table which do not taste of His supper.… Spiritual privileges always commend God to us, but not us to God.—Swinnock.
“Trust ye not in lying words,” says the prophet (Jer_7:4), “saying, The temple of the Lord;” but if ye thoroughly amend your ways, “then will I cause you to dwell in this place for ever and ever” (1Sa_4:7). It is observable that God there refers to this history, and says, “Go ye now to Shiloh, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people. Probably David remembered it, when he refused to allow the ark to be carried with him in his retreat before Absalom out of Jerusalem (2Sa_15:25).—Wordsworth.
As Israel became acted on by the system which prevailed under Eli, superstition succeeded to the fear of God. Now superstition is the refuge of the conscience when it has lost the sense of God’s personal presence. You may measure by its prevalence the absence of God from men’s hearts. It will be natural that in an age of mere outward respect for religion, superstition should be advancing and regaining its hold.—Alford.
It will often happen that those who are least affected by the overwhelming sense of God’s abiding presence with His Church, the authority of her ministry and the power of her ordinances, will be found, and that too because of their little inward affection, most forward on all occasions to talk about, and in argument to contend for, the high privileges with which Christ has endowed her. Such men, like the Israelites when defeated by the Philistines, in the hope of victory scruple not at every conflict with their enemies to lay bare, as it were, the veiled glories of the tabernacle, and at their own will to bring forth the ark of the covenant, as if that alone were wanting to strike dismay into the opposing ranks and ensure success.… But to make war in the name of the Lord against others only, and not against our own sins and iniquities, is to pollute the name of God and cause His offering to be abhorred.—Bishop Fulford.
1Sa_4:4. Jehovah as covenant-God is more properly designated in a twofold manner, corresponding to the situation, in which the Israelites desire His Almighty help, which they think to be externally connected with the ark. As Jehovah Sabbaoth (Lord of Hosts), He is the Almighty ruler and commander of the heavenly powers. As Jehovah who “dwells above the cherubim,” He is the living God, the God of the completest fulness of power and life, who reveals Himself on earth in His glory, exaltedness, and dominion over all the fulness of the life which has been called into being by Him as Creator. This designation of God is never found except in relation to the ark, which is conceived of as the throne of the covenant-God, who dwells as King in the midst of His people. The cherubim are not representatives of the heavenly powers, since they are, as to form, made up of elements of the living, animate, earthly creation which culminates in man. Representing this, they set forth, in their position on the ark, the ruling might and majesty of the Living God, as it is revealed over the manifoldness of the highest and completest life of the animate creation. In these two designations of God, then, reference is had to the glory and dominion of God, which embraces and high exceeds all creaturely life in heaven and on earth, and whose saving interposition the Israelites made dependent on the presence of the ark. In sharpest contrast to this indication of God’s loftiness and majesty, stands the mention of the two priests, Hophni and Phinehas, whose worthlessness has been before set forth, and who represent the whole of the moral corruption and sham religious life of the people.—Lange’s Commentary.
1Sa_4:5. When the ark was brought into the host, though with mean and wicked attendance, Israel doth, as it were, fill the heaven and shake the earth with shouts, as if the ark and victory were no less inseparable than they and their sins. Even the lewdest men will be looking for favour from that God whom they cared not to displease, contrary to the conscience of their deservings; presumption doth the same in wicked men which faith doth in the holiest. Those that regarded not the God of the ark think themselves safe and happy in the ark of God. Vain men are transported with a confidence in the outside of religion, not regarding the substance and soul of it, which only can give them true peace.—Bp. Hall.
1Sa_4:9. Observe the Philistines crying, “God is come into the camp; woe unto us!” etc. Yet they settle, hearten, harden themselves to fight against Him.… Refractory and perverse affections make a man frantic. There may be a sober knowledge, that the patient may say, “I see better things,” and a faith (but such as is incident to devils) “I allow of them,” but where the whole man is tyrannised over by the regent-house of irrefragable affects, he concludes his course with, “I follow the worse.”—T. Adams.
1Sa_4:10. It is just the same now, when we take merely a historical Christ outside us for our Redeemer. He must prove His help chiefly internally by His Holy Spirit, to redeem us out of the hands of the Philistines; though externally He must not be thrown into the shade, as accomplishing our justification. If we had not Christ, we could never stand. But if we have Him in no other way than merely without us, and under us, if we only preach about Him, teach, hear, read, talk, discuss, and dispute about Him, take His name into our mouth, but will not let Him work and show His power in us, He will no more help us than the ark helped the Israelites.—Berlenberger Bible.
It is one of the weightiest laws in the kingdom of God, that when His people, who profess His name, do not show covenant fidelity in faith and obedience, but, under cover of merely external piety, serve Him in appearance only, being in heart and life far from Him, He gives them up for punishment to the world, before which they have not magnified the honour of His name, but have covered it with reproach.—Lange’s Commentary.
1Sa_4:11. “The ark of God was taken.” Why did God permit this? I. In order to show that His presence had forsaken Israel, because they had forsaken Him. II. In order to show that visible ordinances of religion only profit those who have the spirit of religion within them. III. In order to show that though men are bound to use the means of grace which God has instituted for the conveyance of His blessings to them, yet God’s presence and working are not tied to those means. He can act without them.—Wordsworth.
Instead of bewailing a nation’s sins, and preaching public repentance and interceding for mercy from a forgiving God, Hophni and Phinehas had joined in the superstitious desire to take the ark into the field of battle, and they met with a bloody and ignominious death as the price of their perilous temerity and open profanity. It is ever dangerous for ministers of religion to mix in the strife of war. Not that it is foreign to their duty to become pastors of soldiers—that is a duty incumbent upon them.… But it ill becomes the minister of peace to mix in the clang of arms. It was an evil day for Hophni and Phinehas when they took the ark of the covenant from Shiloh, and sought to work on the fanaticism of the people by unveiling the Holiest of all. They provoked the judgment which shed their blood. It was an evil day for Zwingle when he left his chaplain’s post to wear a helmet, a sword, and a battle-axe: covered with wounds, insulted, killed, he lay under a tree at Cappel; not yet forty-eight years of age, his body cut and burned, and his ashes driven to the winds. “He had wielded an arm that God had forbidden,” says D’Aubigné; “the helmet had covered his head, and he had grasped the halberd. His more devoted friends were themselves astonished, and exclaimed, ‘We knew not what to say—a bishop in arms.’ The bolt had furrowed the cloud, the blow had reached the reformer, and his body was no more than a handful of dust in the palm of a soldier.”—Steele.
The ark of God was taken. These words record the most disastrous event that had till then befallen the children of Israel.… Even in the worst times, when the revolt might seem universal, there were always some, however few, who constituted the Church, the true Israel, who never bowed the knee to a false god; and to all such, Shiloh, with the tabernacle, the altar of burnt offering, and the ark of the covenant, would be a precious spot, towards which their thoughts would turn in every season of distress and disaster.… So long as there was no visible intimation that God had deserted Shiloh, true believers in Israel would still cherish the hope that, however severe might be the judgments with which God visited them, He had not finally given them up.… But now what could every thoughtful man in Israel conclude, but that all the wonderful deliverances in connection with the ark of which their fathers had told them, were at an end?… The state of the people of God at the time here referred to, as well as the immediate cause of their being brought into that state, reminds us of another period in which the Church must have been in great darkness and perplexity. I refer to the time when our Lord was delivered into the hands of ungodly men, when He was crucified, and remained for a time under the power of death. I do not say that the one is designedly typical of the other. But we know that the ark was in various respects a remarkable type of Christ, and the passage before us naturally suggests, at least, his humiliation and death.—B. Gordon.
Rather than God will humour superstition in Israelites, he will suffer His own ark to fall into the hands of Philistines: rather will He seem to slacken His hand of protection, than He will be thought to have His hands bound by a formal mis-confidence. The slaughter of the Israelites was no plague to this; it was a greater plague rather to them that should survive and behold it. The two sons of Eli, who had helped to corrupt their brethren, die by the hand of the uncircumcised, and are now too late separated from the ark of God by Philistines, who should have been before separated by their father; they had formerly lived to bring God’s altar into contempt, and now live to carry His ark into captivity.—Bishop Hall.
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.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v12 Death of Eli and of his Daughter-In-Law
Death of Eli and of his Daughter-In-Law
v. 12. And there ran a man of Benjamin out of the army, which was now in utter rout, and came to Shiloh the same day with his clothes rent and with earth upon his head, as signs of a sudden deep grief, in which the heart is rent with sorrow.
Read full note →
v. 13. And when he came, lo, Eli sat upon a seat by the wayside watching, straining his feeble eyes as much as their remaining strength permitted; for his heart trembled for the ark of God, especially since it had been taken without divine permission, and he was its real guardian, responsible for it. And when the man came into the city and told it, brought the news of the defeat of Israel’s army, all the city cried out, in sorrow, fear, and dread.
v. 14. And when Eli heard the noise of the crying, he said, What meaneth the noise of this tumult? The very sound of the cries filled him with grave forebodings. And the man came in hastily and told Eli.
v. 15. Now, Eli was ninety and eight years old; and his eyes were dim that he could not see; they were set in the lifeless, motionless appearance found in the extremely old, just before total blindness ensues.
v. 16. And the man said unto Eli, I am he that came out of the army, and I fled today out of the army. He was in a position to give authentic news. And he said, What is there done, my son? What news is there? What happened?
v. 17. And the messenger answered and said, Israel is fled before the Philistines, and there hath been also a great slaughter among the people, and thy two sons also, Hophni and Phinehas, are dead, and the ark of God is taken. The fugitive poured forth his news in four sharp sentences, every succeeding blow being harder, until the force of the message reached its climax in the crushing report that the ark was lost to the enemies.
v. 18. And it came to pass, when he made mention of the ark of God, all the other blows having been expected by Eli, that he fell from off the seat backward by the side of the gate, evidently at the entrance to the court of the Tabernacle, and his neck brake, and he died; for he was an old man and heavy. It was the beginning of the divine judgment upon Eli and his family, although he himself seems to have died in the fear of God. And he had judged Israel forty years.
v. 19. And his daughter-in-law, Phinehas’ wife, was with child, near to be delivered; and when she heard the tidings that the ark of God was taken and that her father-in-law and her husband were dead, she bowed herself and travailed; for her pains came upon her, literally, "turned upon her in a sudden attack," came upon her prematurely.
v. 20. And about the time of her death, for her strength was not able to bear the blow, the women that stood by her said unto her, Fear not; for thou hast born a son, the message being intended to comfort and strengthen her. But she answered not, neither did she regard it; she entirely ignored this information, since her mind was occupied with the more serious matter of the ark.
v. 21. And she named the child Ichabod (not-glory), saying, The glory is departed from Israel, is carried into captivity, because the ark of God was taken, and because of her father-in-law and her husband.
v. 22. And she said, repeating her complaint in a dull repetition, as though unable to grasp the magnitude of the horror which had come upon Israel, The glory is departed from Israel; for the ark of God is taken. "With the abandonment of the earthly throne of His glory the Lord seemed to have annulled His covenant of grace with Israel; for the ark, with the tables of the Law and the mercy-seat, was the visible pledge of the covenant of grace which Jehovah had made with Israel. " (Keil. ) The account of this death contains a great deal of comfort for poor sinners. He who in the hour of death clings to the Word of God and the covenant of His mercy dies a blessed death. God’s Word is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv3, 5, 7, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, 21 the people
the people
the soldiers who had been fighting the battle
Read full note →
Why has Yahweh defeated us today before the Philistines? Let us bring ... enemies
The elders truly did not know why Yahweh had defeated them, but they wrongly thought they knew how to make sure it did not happen again, by bringing the ark to be with them.
who sits above the cherubim
You may need to make explicit that the cherubim are those on the lid of the ark of the covenant. The biblical writers often spoke of the ark of the covenant as if it were Yahweh's footstool upon which he rested his feet as he sat on his throne in heaven above. AT: "who sits on his throne above the cherubim on the ark of the covenant" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
Phinehas
This Phinehas is not the same as the grandson of Aaron in Exodus and Numbers.
were there
were in Shiloh
translationWords
elder
Yahweh
ark of the covenant
Shiloh
power
send
Yahweh of hosts
cherub
Phinehas
God
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15, 18, 20 4:3 The Israelites were often defeated in war because…
4:3 The Israelites were often defeated in war because of the sin of one individual or the entire nation (Josh 7). In this defeat, no one inquired whether sin was the cause; apparently no one had even asked the Lord whether they should engage the Philistines in the first place (cp. 1 Chr 14:13-16). Instead, the Israelites treated the Ark, the most sacred symbol of the Lord’s presence, as a charm to ward off misfortune. Carrying the Ark into battle was not necessarily wrong (cp. Josh 6:2-21), but neither would this act ensure God’s blessing and victory.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.