Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible
1 Samuel 2:10-17
The Rise Of Samuel And The Fall Of The House Of Eli (1 Samuel 2:12 to 1 Samuel 3:1).
In this section we now have a description of the careful build up of Samuel's ministry and of his own spiritual growth. But deliberately interlaced within it is the continuing description of the downfall of the house of Eli. While the lesson from it is simple. Even in the same environment some develop and grow nearer to God, while others continue headlong on the way to disaster.
This continued growth of Samuel, and the fall of the house of Eli, is depicted as follows:
a ‘The child ministered to YHWH before Eli the Priest' (1 Samuel 2:11).
b A description of the wicked behaviour of the sons of Eli (1 Samuel 2:12).
c ‘Samuel ministered before YHWH being a child girded with a linen ephod ---and the child Samuel grew before YHWH' (1 Samuel 2:18).
d Eli rebukes his sons for their wickedness in trespassing on what belongs to YHWH (1 Samuel 2:22).
c ‘And the child Samuel grew on and was in favour both with YHWH and also with men' (1 Samuel 2:26).
b A man of God prophesies the fall of the house of Eli and the death of his wicked sons (1 Samuel 2:27).
a ‘And the child Samuel ministered to YHWH before Eli' (1 Samuel 3:1).
The narrative is carefully patterned. Note that in ‘a' the child Samuel ministers to YHWH before Eli, and in the parallel he does the same. In ‘b' we have described the wickedness of the two sons of Eli and in the parallel the fate of both they and their house is described. In ‘c' Samuel continues to grow before YHWH, and the same occurs in the parallel. In ‘d', and centrally, Eli rebukes his two sons for trespassing on the preserves of YHWH and warns them of the consequences of their actions. It is the consequences of their behaviour for Israel that will cover the next part of the book (1 Samuel 3-6), and will also affect the years ahead until the rise of Samuel, a rise which will lead to a ‘golden age' in which the Philistines will be driven back, and will subsequently as a consequence of the activity of his protégé David, result in the Ark returning to its proper place in the Tabernacle/Temple.
Samuel Is Set Apart For The Service Of YHWH (1 Samuel 2:11).
‘ And Elkanah went to Ramah to his house. And the child ministered to YHWH before Eli the priest.'
In a few poignant words the traumatic moment of the separation is rapidly passed over. There is no mention of Hannah. Her prayer has said all that needs to be said. As the head of the house the godly Elkanah leaves Samuel with Eli, and returns to his house in Ramah without his son, for his son has been given to YHWH. And Samuel remains behind at Shiloh and begins to minister to YHWH under Eli's guidance and instruction. He has been adopted by YHWH and is under Eli's protection. How Eli must have wished that his own sons were like this.
The Two Sons of Eli (1 Samuel 2:12).
The lives of the two sons of Eli were the very opposite of Samuel's. They too had been ‘given to YHWH' when they had been made priests, but their behaviour revealed how far they were from YHWH. No wonder that YHWH had deserted Shiloh (1 Samuel 3:21).
‘ Now the sons of Eli were worthless men; they did not know YHWH.'
These men who had the responsibility for ministering to YHWH on behalf of Israel are described as ‘worthless men'. No wonder then that Israel languished. And the result was that ‘they did not know YHWH'. We know from 1 Samuel 3:7 that this refers to the fact that YHWH did not reveal His word to them. Thus those who came to Shiloh seeking spiritual assistance and guidance went away empty. We must not, however, see Israel as totally empty of such guidance for, as 1 Samuel 2:27 reveals, YHWH still had local prophets (‘men of God') who would pronounce His word. Throughout the ages this has always been so. God has always had His ‘local prophets'. But the central place at which that guidance should have been made available was empty. The fountain had dried up. It was a pattern that would be revealed again and again throughout history.
‘ And the custom of the priests with the people was, that, when any man offered sacrifice, the priest's servant came, while the flesh was boiling, with a flesh-hook of three teeth in his hand, and he struck it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot. All that the flesh-hook brought up the priest took for himself. So they did in Shiloh to all the Israelites who came there.'
The Law had laid down clear instruction about the priest's portion, which consisted of the breast and shoulder (Leviticus 7:29). But these two men took no notice of the Law. Instead of simply accepting the breast and shoulder, whenever a sacrifice was offered they sent their servant with a three pronged fork, and when the flesh that had been taken off the sacrifice was still boiling, in went the fork, and whatever came out was claimed by the priests. This may have been additionally to the breast and shoulder, or it may simply be that the fork was designed in such a way as to ensure the collection of much larger portions. Either way they were taking more than was allotted to them. This was what Shiloh had come to under their priesthood. A place of daylight robbery. And no one dared to argue with God's ‘holy' priests.
In the same way we also should ask ourselves whether we are similarly robbing God. For we too are His servants, and all the wealth that is committed to our care is His. The danger for us also is that we can use for our own purposes what we should really see as His, for as Jesus informed His disciples when He directed their attention to the widow who gave her mites in the Temple, our giving is judged on the basis, not of how much we give, but of what we keep for ourselves. Others of us want more than God intends for us, and spend time that we should be spending in His service on obtaining more wealth for ourselves.
However, here the priests got tired of boiled meat and so they devised another plan in order to satisfy themselves.
‘ Yes, before they burnt the fat, the priest's servant came, and said to the man who sacrificed, “Give flesh to roast for the priest, for he will not have boiled flesh from you, but raw.” And if the man said to him, “They will surely burn the fat first, and then take as much as your soul desires,” then he would say, “No, but you must give it to me now, and if not, I will take it by force.” '
This second breach of the Law was even more flagrant than the first. They actually demanded that they be given the raw flesh before the fat, which had to be given to YHWH, had been burnt. Presumably therefore it was before it had been removed. This was sheer blasphemy. At such a gross breach of the Law the people protested. The Law emphasised that the fat must first be given to YHWH and burned on the altar. It was sacred. Then the priests could have as much as they wanted. But they were then threatened that if they did not do as they were told force would be used so that the priests would get their way. None, of course, could prevent it. No one would dare to strike a holy priest or his servant. That would have been sacrilege. So they had to give way. Thus the two priests and their servants blatantly insulted YHWH by ignoring all His requirements, taking advantage of their privileged position.
‘ And the sin of the young men was very great before YHWH, for the men despised the offering of YHWH.'
The writer sums up the situation. The sin of these young men, Hophni and Phinehas (1 Samuel 2:34), was very great before YHWH, in that by their actions they were demonstrating that they despised the offering of YHWH. (This was, of course, a later Phinehas than the one in Numbers 25:11). And the result was that the offerings would become despised by the people (Malachi 2:8). The whole sacrificial system was being brought into disrepute because of the scandalous behaviour of these two priests. And it seems that Eli did nothing about it.