Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible
1 Samuel 2:27-36
YHWH Sends A Man Of God To Pass His Verdict On Eli's House (1 Samuel 2:27).
Scripture constantly reveals that God is never left without a witness. Always at special times of need a ‘man of God' appears. In this case there comes an anonymous ‘man of God' to Eli. He may well, of course, have been known to Eli, but like a number of ‘men of God' in Samuel and Kings he is not made known to us. He is one of God's anonymous witnesses. He is, however, important nonetheless, and his message is even more important, for he has come to signal the demise of Eli's house.
The coming of ‘the man of God' has another significance in the passage. For it indicates that at this point in time YHWH has no one else that He can use in order to convey the message to Eli. But in chapter 3 the situation will change, for there YHWH uses Samuel for the purpose. It is thus an indication that Samuel is by then also accepted as a ‘man of God', able to receive and pass on a message from YHWH. His status is continually growing.
‘ And there came a man of God to Eli, and said to him, “Thus says YHWH. Did I reveal myself to the house of your father, when they were in Egypt in bondage to Pharaoh's house? And did I choose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest, to go up to my altar, to burn incense, to wear an ephod before me? And did I give to the house of your father all the offerings of the children of Israel made by fire?” '
The man of God comes to Eli and outlines in YHWH's Name all that YHWH has done for his house. He had revealed Himself to the house of his ‘father' (ancestor) Aaron when he was in Egypt in bondage to Pharaoh's house. He had chosen him out of all the tribes of Israel to be His Priest, so that he might go up to His altar, burn incense, and wear the ephod (of the Priest) before Him. Note the order as it moves forwards from the sacrificial altar in the courtyard, to the altar of incense in the Holy Place, to wearing the Priest's ephod before YHWH in the Holiest of All. It was a huge privilege that the house of Aaron had been given. And YHWH had also given to the house of his father all the offerings of the children of Israel made by fire, a part of which was given to the priests, the very offerings which were now being misused by them.
“ Why do you trample on my sacrifice and my offering, which I have commanded in my habitation, and honour your sons above me, to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel my people?”
The charge is then laid, that Eli and his house have trampled on His sacrifice and offering which He has commanded in His own habitation, and indeed that Eli, by allowing what he has, has honoured his sons above YHWH, and what is more, has by participating in their behaviour made himself fat with the best parts of the offerings of His people Israel. Eli is thus not to be exonerated from blame.
“ Thus the word of YHWH (neum YHWH - an indication of a solemn prophetic statement), the God of Israel, “I said indeed that your house, and the house of your father, should walk before me for ever.” But now, the word of YHWH (neum YHWH), “Be it far from me; for those who honour me I will honour, and those who despise me will be lightly esteemed.”
In Exodus 29:9; Numbers 25:13 God had said that the family of Aaron in all its branches would serve perpetually as priests in His presence, but now He was altering the promise as far as Eli's line were concerned. The time would come when they would cease to act as priests. And the reason for it was because they had lightly esteemed Him and despised Him. For, He declares, ‘those who honour Me I will honour, and those who despise Me will be lightly esteemed'. By this they had excluded themselves from God's covenant. Thus they would be cut off from the priesthood, and the promise would from then on only apply to the house of Eliezer, that is, to the Zadokites. These last would, of course, also later be cut off as a result of their attitude towards Jesus Christ by the destruction of the Temple. In God's eyes Israel therefore no longer has a sacerdotal priesthood, apart from the High Priesthood of Jesus Christ. But that was yet in the far future.
“ Behold, the days come, that I will cut off your arm, and the arm of your father's house, so that there will not be an old man in your house.”
To cut off the arm meant to remove the strength. Thus the point was being made that no male of his house would in future grow to be an old man, because YHWH would not permit it.
“ And you will behold the distress of my habitation, in all that which God has shown of good to Israel, and there will not be an old man in your house for ever.”
This cutting off of the arm would have consequences also for the Tabernacle. As a result of the behaviour of Eli's family distress would come upon God's habitation, thus affecting all that God had given to Israel in their unique form of worship. And distress would come on Eli's family to such an extent that they would no longer be long-lived (something seen as an indication of God's displeasure)
So Eli would live to see YHWH's habitation distressed. This would happen when he received news of the capture of the Ark by the Philistines. The loss of the Ark was a cause of great distress to the Tabernacle, God's dwellingplace. It meant that Israel were bereft of the very symbol of God's presence with them. ‘In all which God has shown of good to Israel' would then refer to the loss of all the benefits that the Tabernacle brought to Israel. This would be the consequence of their defeat at the hands of the Philistines. The Ark would be taken, and later the Sanctuary of Shiloh would itself either be destroyed, or fall into disuse.
Alternately we can translate, ‘you will see a rival in my habitation', the ‘you' in this case referring to his descendants who would see themselves being displaced by the house of Zadok when Abiathar was forcibly ‘retired' by Solomon. This would fit better with the translation of the next phrase as ‘in all that God will give to Israel' found in many versions. For Zadok's day (the time of David and Solomon) would be a time of great prosperity, when the sacrifices and offerings would be numerous. But all would be lost to Eli's descendants. And again it is emphasised that no male in his house would live to old age, but now this judgment will be ‘for ever'.
“ And the man of yours, whom I will not cut off from my altar, will be to consume your eyes, and to grieve your heart; and all the increase of your house will die in manhood (‘in men').”
And any man of the house of Eli whom God does not cut off from His altar (prevent from being a practising priest), will be a cause of great sadness and grief of heart to his family, and all the males born in his house will die while still young men. In other words the future for his house is grim. They will never again produce satisfactory priests. It will be noted that they are not being excluded from the priesthood, only from its greatest blessings and benefits, and above all from the High Priesthood.
“ And this will be the sign to you, that will come on your two sons, on Hophni and Phinehas. In one day they will die, both of them.”
And the evidence that this prophecy will be fulfilled will be that Eli's two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, will both die on the same day, an event which will shortly be recorded (see 1 Samuel 4:11).
“ And I will raise me up a faithful priest, who will do according to what is in my heart and in my mind, and I will build him a sure house, and he will walk before my anointed for ever (literally, ‘all the days').”
The promise is then that in contrast to Eli and his family, which is now rejected, God will raise up a faithful Priest who will be totally faithful to Him, and He will establish his house and make it sure, and when he comes, this Priest will serve God's anointed one ‘all the days'. For ‘God's anointed one' compare 1 Samuel 2:10, which is the only mention of an anointed one up to this point, and is pointing forward to a future ideal king. Essentially therefore the promise here is of a faithful and true High Priest who will serve the coming expected ideal prince, the prince who in the future will be the anointed of YHWH. This is Israel's glorious future. While our thoughts may naturally turn to what lies ahead in Samuel that was not in anyone's mind when this prophecy was given. The thought was rather of the coming of ‘God's expected anointed one', which to them would have indicated, as it did to Hannah, the coming hoped for ideal king mentioned in 1 Samuel 2:10, whom God would raise up in accordance with Genesis 17:6; Genesis 17:16; Genesis 35:11; Genesis 49:10; Numbers 23:21; Numbers 24:17; Deuteronomy 17:14. The thought is therefore essentially ‘Messianic', and find its ultimate fulfilment in our Lord Jesus Christ Who would become our great and perfect High Priest, acting on our behalf (Hebrews 2:17 and often; compare also John 17).
But the reader is also clearly intended by the writer to see it as referring to later events in the Book of Samuel, which can be seen as a partial fulfilment of this promise. In this light there are two main views as to whom this refers. The majority view is that it is referring to the High Priest Zadok (2 Samuel 20:25), to whom David gave the responsibility for the Ark (2 Samuel 15:24), and who, being from the line of Eleazar, continued on as High Priest, followed by his heirs, when Abiathar (of the line of Ithamar and Eli) ceased from being the joint High Priest (1 Kings 2:26). From that day the High Priest never again came from the line of Ithamar (and Eli). Zadok was faithful to his trust, and his house was made sure, the line of Zadok (and Eleazar) lasting until the exile, and finally, after a few ups and downs, until the cessation of sacrifices. And Zadok did walk before David and Solomon (the prototypes of the coming king) all his days after his appointment, fulfilling the responsibilities of the High Priest's office. His line was also that which Ezekiel saw as operating at the new altar to be built after the Exile through which the heavenly Temple was to be accessed (Ezekiel 43:19; compare Ezekiel 40:46).
A minority view is that it refers to Samuel. He may well be seen as having been ‘adopted' by Eli, thus becoming recognised as of the priestly line, and he would certainly later offer sacrifices as a priest (although he never claimed the office of High Priest which was seemingly in abeyance after the destruction of Shiloh until it emerged again in Ahijah, the son of Ahitub (1 Samuel 14:3) to be followed by Ahimelech (1 Samuel 21:1). Ahitub was Ichabod's brother). Furthermore no one was more faithful than Samuel was and would be, and he would certainly do according to what was in God's heart and mind.
But where the prophecy fails with regard to Samuel is in the question of his being built a sure house, which in context means the house that would replace the house of Eli, for his sons in fact failed in their responsibilities (1 Samuel 8:1; 1 Samuel 8:5) and as far as we know never became priests. It is true that his house was later ‘established' in that his grandson became David's chief musician, and father of fourteen sons and daughters (1 Chronicles 6:33; 1 Chronicles 25:1; 1 Chronicles 25:4), but it was not as priests, and the thought in the prophecy here appears to be that the making sure was to be of a house connected with the priesthood. Samuel's house was not connected with the priesthood after his death. They too had forfeited the right to be so. Thus Samuel might have been a prospective candidate, but he did not fulfil all the qualifications. He only partially fulfilled the conditions.
“ And it will come about that every one who is left in your house will come and bow down to him for a piece of silver and a loaf of bread, and will say, “Put me, I pray you, into one of the priests' offices, that I may eat a morsel of bread.”
In terms of Messianic expectation the thought here is that the coming High Priest will be so exalted that this current priesthood will have to humble themselves before Him in order to receive life's necessities, desiring to serve Him in order to enjoy their bread. We find a fulfilment of this depicted in the covenant meal offered to the crowds by Jesus, followed by His exposition of it in terms of the need to receive Him as the Bread of life John 6:35. All would have to come to Him in this way. If we would live, we too must eat of Him.
But this vivid picture also emphasises how the line of Eli will be humbled in the nearer future. In the near future those who are of his line will have to submit to the line of Eleazar in order to receive their priest's portion, and their humiliation is emphasised. They will be relatively destitute. Such will be the destiny of Eli's house because of their atrocious behaviour and sacrilege.