Pursuing Crowns: A Study of First Samuel

By Christy Voelkel

"I have always been taught in Bible classes that I should pursue the crown, but I always thought that it was just a matter of living a Christian life. I never thought that I could be more intentional about it." That was the rather surprised reaction (paraphrased) that I received from one of my students as we began this study. A missionary who vi

• Language: English
• Publisher: Christy Voelkel
• Release date: Mar 27, 2023
• ISBN: 9780998038261

Book preview

LESSON 1 : FIRST SAMUEL 1 – 2

Crown of Rubies, Crown of Grace

READ

First Samuel 1:1–2:11

NARRATIVE STRUCTURE

The book of First Samuel begins with a comparison of two brides, Hannah and Peninnah, in Chapter 1. After an introduction that sets the scene and characters for us, the narrative is broken into three main parts—according to where they happen—and are arranged in a chiastic structure (A-B-A):

1) Introduction (1:1–7)

2) The Wives of Elkanah

A) The scene at Shiloh (1:8–18)

B) The scene at Ramah (1:19–23)

A) The return to Shiloh (1:24–28)

3) Hannah’s Prayer (2:1–11)

The story is capped off with Hannah’s song in Chapter 2 which provides a narrative break between the pictures of the brides and priests.

BUILD THE PICTURE

The Wives of Elkanah

1. Where did Elkanah live?

Elkanah lived in Ramathaim Zophim. This name is later shortened to Ramah, but it is interesting that it is introduced by this long name. We should look at the meaning of the name.

Ramah means a high place or a height, usually in the context of a high place used for idolatrous worship. Ramathaim is the plural of Ramah, suggesting a double or exceeding height—a high, high place. Zophim means watchmen.

So, Ramathaim Zophim means the high, high hill of the watchmen. You get a mental picture of a place that is like a promontory lookout where watchmen might keep vigil because they could see a distance. That seems an appropriate birthplace for Samuel, a far-seeing and foreseeing prophet.

2. What is Elkanah’s lineage? (See Levite Family Tree chart)

He is the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. Except he was not an Ephraimite, which we discover from the book of First Chronicles.

In First Chronicles 6, we find a retelling of Elkanah’s lineage, except that it doesn’t trace back to the tribe of Ephraim but the tribe of Levi. For the sake of clarification, I have provided you with a family tree chart of the house of Levi in First Chronicles 6 (see the lineage chart). On the chart, we will begin with Elkanah’s lineage on the bottom right in black and then work our way up the family tree.

In First Chronicles 6:33-38, we see that the renowned singer in David’s administration, Heman, was the son of Joel, the son of Samuel, the son of Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Eliel (aka Elihu), the son of Toah (aka Tohu), the son of Zuph. Despite the variation in a few names, this is clearly the house of Elkanah described in First Samuel 1:1. But First Chronicles doesn’t stop at Zuph. It extends the length of Elkanah’s ancestry back to Levi.

Notice the patriarchal names. Levi’s son, Kohath, had four sons. Amram was the first, and through him came the high priestly line of Aaron described in First Chronicles 6:1-15 (gray). Izhar is the second son and the father of Korah. Remember Korah from the book of Numbers? He is the one who staged a rebellion against Aaron and Moses along with Dathan and Abiram in the middle of Israel’s wilderness wanderings. The second census in Numbers 26:9-11 tells us that the children of Korah did not die. In fact, it is from Korah’s line that Samuel springs.

LEVITE FAMILY TREE

If Elkanah is a Levite, why is he called an Ephraimite? I don’t know. Since Levites do not own land, they are usually claimed by the tribe to which they are assigned. In Elkanah’s case, his family is assigned to Ramah, but that city is within the tribal land of Benjamin, not Ephraim.

3. What do we know about Elkanah’s wives?

Hannah is named first, possibly because she was the first wife, but she is barren, which might explain why Elkanah took a second wife who would bear him sons. It was a sign of the LORD’s favor that a woman would be able to have children. Barrenness in a wife was considered a judgment from God, because it meant the end of a man’s lineage if he could not have children. For this reason, barrenness was considered a legitimate ground for divorce, and yet we see that Elkanah does not put Hannah away. Quite the contrary. He loves her and honors her by giving her a double portion.

Peninnah is the second wife, who gave Elkanah many sons and daughters, and was Hannah’s antagonist. Peninnah should have been favored by Elkanah, and yet she doesn’t have his love nor does she receive an extra portion. When he gives her a portion at the time of offerings, she gets a single portion for herself and her children as is her due.

4. Why does Peninnah torment Hannah?

Because 1) Hannah has no children, 2) Hannah is loved more, and 3) Hannah receives a greater portion. (Notice that Peninnah’s harassment steps up at the time of the yearly offering.)

5. If Hannah is so loved and provided for, why does she still weep?

Even if they aren’t true, hateful words can wreck a person. The torment and oppression she is experiencing in her family is not something she can get away from, and it grieves her.

6. How does Hannah respond to Peninnah’s harassment?

It is a tribute to Hannah’s humility that she doesn’t retaliate with hateful words or rub in the fact that Elkanah loves her more than Peninnah. Even so, she goes to the LORD and asks for what she thinks will relieve the oppression—one son. She doesn’t even ask to keep him. She promises he will be devoted to the LORD’s service all his days, and he will be a Nazirite (no razor shall come on his head).

What she is really asking for is the LORD’s validation. She has her husband’s validation, but it isn’t enough to overcome Peninnah’s torment. Only validation from the LORD will stop it.

7. How does Hannah respond to Eli’s rebuke for being drunk?

Where she did not answer Peninnah, this time she answers back in her own defense. It is clear from her spirited address that she is most certainly not drunk. Eli, who is both a high priest and a judge, misjudges Hannah because of what he sees—or imagines he sees—and not by the truth. She stands up to her accuser and pleads her case. Having misjudged her, Eli then blesses her.

8. What is the reward for Hannah’s faith?

God blesses her with a son, Samuel, whom she devotes to the LORD’s service; but then in Chapter 2, we find that He also blesses her with more children to make up for her gifting of Samuel to His service. She has three sons and two daughters. And so she is blessed exceedingly.

APPLY THE PICTURE

Before we move on to Hannah’s prayer, I want to consider the author’s purpose in focusing so heavily on Hannah and Peninnah as an opening picture. Of course, it is a way of introducing Samuel into the narrative, but the build-up seems to have more purpose than that. The conflict between the two women is driven by Hannah’s barrenness. Let’s sketch a profile of each woman in regards to the reward or inheritance they are pursuing.

What Peninnah and Hannah Model

The name Peninnah means rubies. She is blessed with an earthly abundance of children for which she labors, literally, and for her effort, she is rewarded with what is due her for her labor. The reward or inheritance that she pursues is of an earthly nature to build an earthly kingdom for her own glory. Her abundance of children gives her personal value, status, and validation.

The topic of rubies introduces a sub-picture to Peninnah’s picture—an underlying element that expands the application. In Scripture, rubies form a comparison to wisdom:

. . . For the price of wisdom is above rubies. —Job 28:18b

For wisdom is better than rubies, and all the things one may desire cannot be compared with her. —Proverbs 8:11

There is gold and a multitude of rubies, but the lips of knowledge are a precious jewel. —Proverbs 20:15

Who can find a virtuous wife? For her worth is far above rubies. —Proverbs 31:10

The comparison of rubies to wisdom then carries into the comparison of Peninnah and Hannah, and we are left with a clue as to which is the wiser.

The name Hannah means grace. Lacking the earthly abundance of physical children, she has the love of her husband and a double portion. These things are gifted, not earned, and therefore scorned by Peninnah as being unmerited.

Like Peninnah, Hannah also pursues the legacy of children, but she seeks it in a different way. She seeks validation from God in asking for one child—a child who she willingly gives back to the LORD. Even as she attains that crown, she casts it before the LORD’s throne for His glory and for the building up of His spiritual kingdom instead of her earthly kingdom. For this He grants her an additional abundance of children as a rebuke to Peninnah.

Interestingly, Peninnah’s children are not mentioned in any of the great lineages, but Hannah’s descendants will be among those who sing praises to God in His court.

Crown of Rubies, Crown of Grace

Set the Hebrew names aside for a moment and consider the comparison between rubies (riches) and grace. In these two women, we see two ways of pursuing a particular reward or inheritance, which in this case is embodied in children. Children are a sort of crown for a mother. They are her legacy.

The crown of rubies is a temporal, earthly reward gained by human works. Its value is weighed by size or quantity—the more you have, the more valuable you are. A person pursuing a crown of rubies seeks glory and validation for his/herself from men only and not God.

The crown of grace is a heavenly blessing gifted by God according to a promise. Grace’s worth is not in physical works or reckoned by earthly standards, and yet the honor it receives is comparable. While those pursuing the crown of grace seek glory and validation for themselves, they seek to glorify God first and be glorified by God and not man. In attaining this crown, they also receive an additional blessing of the crown of rubies.

Why would this contrast between Hannah and Peninnah, the legacy of grace versus the legacy of riches, be the first picture Samuel presents in developing this theme of pursuing crowns? Because defining the crown is foundational. This picture has to be established first. You can pursue a crown for right reasons and right ways, but if the crown you are pursuing is the wrong crown, your effort is to no avail.

There are right and wrong crowns to pursue.

There are right and wrong ways to pursue a crown. One way is by works, the other is by grace. Hannah stands out not just as a model of grace, but also as a model of wisdom in how she pursues the reward.

There are right and wrong reasons to pursue a crown. One is for personal glory; the other, for God’s glory. Hannah pursued hers to God’s glory and was rewarded.

The Barren Woman Typology

The conflict that surrounds Hannah provides a picture of the contrast between an inheritance pursued by works versus grace, but she is not alone in illustrating this picture. Hannah is only one in the pantheon of barren women who have this picture in common and form an Old Testament type. Let’s compare them.

All barren women mentioned in Scripture are gifted by God with firstborn sons who became men of renown and a legacy to the mothers. These women include Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, Samson’s mother, Hannah, and Elizabeth in the Gospels. Consider the honor their sons attained:

• Sarah had Isaac, the son of the promise and type of Christ.

• Hannah, Samson’s mother, and Elizabeth all had Nazirite sons with special callings.

• Hannah and Samson’s mother had sons who were judges.

• Hannah and Elizabeth had sons who were priests and prophets.

• Rachel and Samson’s mother had sons who were deliverers.

These women and their sons give us some rich typology in regards to crowns or legacies that are pursued. Just as Hannah and her crown of grace are contrasted to Peninnah and her crown of rubies, so Sarah is contrasted similarly to Hagar. Paul uses Sarah and Hagar as an analogy of two covenants: one of bondage and flesh, and the other of freedom and the Spirit through the promise.

Rebekah gave birth to Jacob and Esau, two sons who were opposite one another by nature. One valued and pursued an inheritance (at his mother’s prompting) while the other despised it and gave it up (though he was his father’s favorite). The writer of the book of Hebrews uses Esau as the example of one who sought a blessing and inheritance only after he had lost it (Hebrews 12:14-17). Paul also uses the example of Jacob and Esau to explain God’s election based on grace as opposed to works in Romans 9:10-13.

Isaiah 54 also addresses the barren woman in regards to pursuing a reward and an inheritance. She becomes a projection of Israel in a future kingdom, as it says:

"‘Sing, O barren, you who have not borne! Break forth into singing, and cry aloud, you who have not labored with child! For more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married woman,’ says the LORD. ‘Enlarge the place of your tent, and let them stretch out the curtains of your dwellings; Do not spare; lengthen your cords, and strengthen your stakes. For you shall expand to the right and to the left, and your descendants will inherit the nations, and make the desolate cities inhabited.

"‘Do not fear, for you will not be ashamed; neither be disgraced, for you will not be put to shame; for you will forget the shame of your youth, and will not remember the reproach of your widowhood anymore. For your Maker is your husband, the LORD of hosts is His name; and your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel; He is called the God of the whole earth. For the LORD has called you like a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, like a youthful wife when you were refused,’ says your God . . .

‘O you afflicted one, tossed with tempest, and not comforted, behold, I will lay your stones with colorful gems, and lay your foundations with sapphires. I will make your pinnacles of rubies, your gates of crystal, and all your walls of precious stones. All your children shall be taught by the LORD, and great shall be the peace of your children. In righteousness you shall be established; you shall be far from oppression, for you shall not fear; and from terror, for it shall not come near you.’ —Isaiah 54:1-6, 11-14

This is the promise given to the barren woman, that the barrenness she once suffered would be turned into abundant fruitfulness, her reproach would be taken away, and she would be granted a perpetual covenant of peace by the LORD, who is both her Husband and Redeemer. Her abundance comes in the form of children, but notice that she is also granted a kingdom built of jewels—sapphires, rubies, crystal, and all manner of precious stones. This is the wealth that the world covets and tries to attain by its own effort, but such blessing comes by grace and faith and not by works.

So, the picture of the barren woman begins with the literal lives of Old Testament women like Hannah who pursue an inheritance, then blossoms into the figurative picture of Israel’s hope in a future king, kingdom, and reward, and finally leads into the doctrinal teachings on a spiritual kingdom inherited by grace and faith instead of works.

Like the barren woman in Isaiah 54, Hannah sings out a prayer of exultation and worship to the LORD for the grace granted to her. Hannah’s song seems uncharacteristic for a woman of her place and circumstance. It has the strength of the prophetess about it. It begins and ends with much the same theme of the Song of Moses in describing God as Israel’s rock of salvation and His power in avenging His people and judging their adversaries.

BUILD THE PICTURE

Hannah’s Prayer

9. What understanding of God has Hannah gained through this episode in her life?

Let’s work through the verses of her prayer and consider the picture she paints of God as she sees Him:

(2:1-2) Hannah opens with her praise of God. His honoring of her has given her reason to smile at her enemies as she rejoices in her salvation. (Salvation here is the Hebrew word yeshua, which is alternately translated as deliverance or help.) I love that phrasing—to smile at one’s enemies. She had no need to say anything. God had said everything for her.

(2:3) Talk no more so very proudly; Let no arrogance come from your mouth, For the LORD is the God of knowledge; And by Him actions are weighed. This is a direct rebuke of her critics, certainly to Peninnah but also perhaps to Eli, God’s priest and judge, who presumed to know something about her yet judged her wrongly. The comparisons within the body of her prayer demonstrate not only God’s power but also His righteous judgment.

Verses 4-8 of Hannah’s song present a series of reversals that are comparable to those found throughout Isaiah 40-62. The verses are arranged roughly in a chiastic structure. Verses 4-5 open with a statement. Verses 6-7 introduce God as the pivotal figure upon Whom the reversals hinge. Verses 8-10a mirror verses 4-5 but attribute the reversal to God. Consider the attributes of God presented in the reversal comparisons:

(2:4) The bows of the mighty men are broken, and those who stumbled are girded with strength. This is the first reversal and focuses on strength.

(2:5) Those who were full have hired themselves out for bread, and the hungry have ceased to hunger. Even the barren has borne seven, and she who has many children has become feeble. The last part of that phrasing is echoed in Isaiah 54:1. It focuses on those who are hungry for food but figuratively for children (another kind of provision).

(2:6-7) The LORD kills and makes alive; He brings down to the grave and brings up. The LORD makes poor and makes rich; He brings low and lifts up. Verse 6 is almost a direct quote from the Song of Moses (Deuteronomy 32:39) and one of the proof texts used to support the doctrine of resurrection based on the word order (God kills, then makes alive). These verses together form the core statement that it is the LORD around Whom all reversals of fortune hinge.

(2:8) He raises the poor from the dust and lifts the beggar from the ash heap, to set them among princes and make them inherit the throne of glory. For the pillars of the earth are the LORD’s, and He has set the world upon them. This is the resolution to verse 5. It is the LORD who accomplishes this. Hannah testifies to the LORD’s sovereignty.

(2:9-10a) He will guard the feet of His saints, but the wicked shall be silent in darkness. For by strength no man shall prevail. The adversaries of the LORD shall be broken in pieces; from heaven He will thunder against them . . . This is the resolution to verse 4. It is the LORD who breaks those who stand by their own strength, but preserves the humble.

(2:10b) The LORD will judge the ends of the earth. He will give strength to His king, and exalt the horn of His anointed. This statement returns to the opening statement in verse 3. The last part of verse 10 is prophetic.

It speaks of a king at a time when there is no king, and anticipates the kingdom to come.

Hannah’s paean of praise to the LORD rings with the triumph of a woman who has realized her reward by aligning herself with the right king, the right way, and for the right reasons.

Questions for Reflection

• What are you pursuing as your legacy in life?

• What are you pursuing for your validation, and to whom are you looking for that validation?

• Can you speak of God’s work in your life as Hannah did?

• What are some ways God has blessed you that the Peninnahs of this world might not value?

LESSON 2 : FIRST SAMUEL 2 – 4

Loss of the Crown of Glory

SERIES STRUCTURE

This lesson will follow the descent of the House of Eli to its demise in First Samuel 2–4. The series opens with a comparison of the House of Eli to the House of Elkanah, and then begins the interplay of ascents and descents: the ascent of Samuel and the descent of the house of Eli.

1) The house of Eli vs. the house of Elkanah (2:12–26)

2) The man of God’s prophecy against Eli (2:27–36)

3) Samuel’s prophecy against Eli (3:1–21)

4) Death of the House of Eli and the Ark’s capture (4:1–22)

First we will work through comparison pictures of the priests in Chapter 2 and discuss the models being presented. Then we will discuss the structure and narrative of Chapter 3 as Samuel ascends to the role of prophet. We will end with the death of the House of Eli in Chapter 4.

The House of Eli vs. the House of Elkanah

READ

First Samuel 2:12–26

BUILD THE PICTURE

The contrast between Elkanah’s wives segues to the contrast between priests—Samuel, the son of the House of Elkanah, and Hophni and Phinehas, sons of the House of Eli. Let’s look at the House of Eli first.

1. What do we know about Eli himself?

In First Samuel 1, Eli cropped up unexpectedly in the narrative without introduction, except to say that he was sitting by the door post of the Tabernacle watching Hannah as she prayed. He made an error in rebuking Hannah for being drunk, which he then retracted by giving a blessing. The initial presentation of Eli is one of a priest who lacks judgment. In actuality, Eli is a high priest and a judge (we don’t know he is a judge until First Samuel 4:18). He also has two very degenerate sons whom he has failed to restrain.

For a man who wore the crowns of a high priest and a judge, you would think that Eli would be something of an exalted character, but all the usual details are missing. Eli’s ancestral lineage isn’t even noted. Like kings, a high priest is usually given the honor of having his fathers’ names mentioned. That is a significant omission. Let’s consider that.

2. What is Eli’s lineage? (See Levite Family Tree chart)

Eli’s ancestral lineage is not mentioned anywhere in Scripture; however, there are some clues we can glean from the books of Samuel and First Chronicles 6.

Let’s begin with the fact that Eli is a high priest, which means he must come from the tribe of Levi. First Chronicles 6:1-15 give us the family tree of Levi. The high priestly line traces down from Amram to Aaron to Eleazar to Phinehas who was high priest at the start of the judges’ era. This is the Phinehas with whom God made the covenant of an eternal priesthood. Seven named generations pass before we come to Zadok, the eighth, who Solomon made high priest instead of Abiathar in First Kings 2:27.

Abiathar is a descendant of Eli, not Eleazar. None of Eli’s line are found in the lineage of the first sons descended from Aaron who would have been the high priests, and yet he is clearly officiating as the high priest at the opening of First Samuel, and his great-great-grandson Abiathar is high priest at the start of First Kings. So clearly we are looking at two separate arms of the family.

That begs the question: Where does Eli fit into the Levitical family tree then? I have gleaned Eli’s family out of the books of Samuel and charted

LEVITE FAMILY TREE

Eli’s descendants along with the verses where they are referenced. In First Samuel 14:3, we find this reciting of Ahijah’s lineage:

Ahijah the son of Ahitub, Ichabod’s brother, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eli, the LORD’s priest in Shiloh, was wearing an ephod . . . —First Samuel 14:3a

Here, Ahijah is mentioned as the acting high priest going back to Eli. The relationship between Ahijah and Ahimelech in First Samuel 22:9 is bit murky. Either he is Ahimelech by another name, or he is brother to Ahimelech. It’s not clear. Ahimelech is the priest that David seeks when he is fleeing from Saul—the priest who gives him the show-bread to eat along with Goliath’s sword. Ahimelech and his family lose their lives for that act, except for one son, Abiathar, who escapes.

Abiathar figures heavily in the life of David and eventually becomes high priest. His son Ahimelech (named for his grandfather) becomes part of David’s priestly administration, as noted in Second Samuel 8:17. This Ahimelech in the sixth generation is our clue. First Chronicles 24:3-6 gives us a second account of David placing this young man in priestly service, only this time Ahimelech is not called the son of Abiathar but the son of Ithamar.

So David reigned over all Israel . . . Zadok the son of Ahitub and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar were the priests . . . —Second Samuel 8:15a,17a

Then David with Zadok of the sons of Eleazar, and Ahimelech of the sons of Ithamar, divided them according to the schedule of their service. —First Chronicles 24:3

In the Second Samuel passage, Zadok and Ahimelech are identified relative to their immediate fathers; but in First Chronicles, they are identified relative to their patriarchal fathers.

Who is Ithamar? He is the fourth son of Aaron, the original high priest, and brother to the high priest Eleazar. Ithamar is technically a member of the Aaronic priesthood, just not in the designated line for the high priesthood.

In the days of the judges, we know that something went horribly wrong with the priesthood after Phinehas, the son of Eleazar—so much so that no high priest is mentioned in the book of Judges except for Phinehas. It might be that the high priestly line shifted away from the line of Eleazar and into the line of Ithamar for this reason. There will be a second reason for the shift, which we will see when we get to the prophecy of the man of God against the house of Eli.

3. What do we know about the sons of Eli?

In First Samuel 1:3, there is a mention of Eli’s sons, Hophni and Phinehas, being at the Tabernacle in Shiloh when Elkanah went up to the yearly offering, but, like their father, they are a mere byline. Now, in First Samuel 2:12-17, we get more details.

Hophni and Phineas were corrupt and degenerate priests who scorned the portion of the sacrifice allotted to them in God’s Law. According to Leviticus 7 and 8, the priests were allowed the breast and right thigh of the sin, trespass, and peace offerings, and the meat was to be boiled and the fat removed before they took their portion. Hophni and Phinehas made the boiling pot a grab bag and demanded raw meat for roasting instead of boiling. If the people did not give it, it would be taken by force. In addition to this sin, they also lay with the women who assembled at the door of the Tabernacle.

The name Hophni means two-fisted as a boxer, but he is really more of a thug. The name Phinehas means mouth of brass or mouth of a serpent, which speaks for itself.

4. Did Eli make any effort to restrain his sons?

He gave them a good talking-to, but it was completely ineffectual. They didn’t heed the voice of their father, because the LORD desired to kill them (2:25).

5. Compare the house of Elkanah and the house of Eli.

The author contrasts the house of Eli’s descent into degradation with the blessing on the house of Elkanah and Samuel’s ascent to honor in an alternating pattern. After the description of Hophni and Phinehas’ wickedness in verses 12-17, Samuel is presented in verses 18-21 as a priest ministering before the LORD and wearing an ephod even in his youth, and Elkanah’s house is blessed. After the description of Eli’s rebuke of his sons in verses 22-25, Samuel is commended in verse 26.

The house of Eli enjoys the blessings of God but is presented as a degenerate house lacking good judgment, mercy, and conscience. We see this in Eli’s lack of judgment with Hannah. Eli’s sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also ministered before the LORD, and yet they do not grow. They are, in fact, going to die.

By contrast, the house of Elkanah is presented as a gracious, God-fearing family that has the blessings of God from year to year and an increase in his kingdom. Their son, Samuel, ministered and grew before the LORD.

APPLY THE PICTURE

Hophni’s and Phinehas’ Model

Hophni and Phinehas are perfect models for those who have attained crowns but become disqualified and lose them.

. . . Thus I fight: not as one who beats the air. But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified.—First Corinthians 9:26-27

Paul’s analogy of a fighter who beats the air is appropriate for two-fisted Hophni. A boxer can flail about and hope to win, or he can discipline himself, take aim, and land an effective punch. Hophni flailed about his duties with a complete lack of restraint or self-reflection. Both he and Phinehas were men who had failed to discipline their bodies and bring them under submission. They focused on the earthly gratifications instead of their spiritual responsibilities and gave themselves over to the pursuit of their lusts. As priests charged with being examples and teaching God’s people, they disqualified themselves. They are good examples of the bad shepherds that Peter warns against:

Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly; nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock; and when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that does not fade away. —First Peter 5:2-4

They were men who sinned deliberately, and so the LORD gave them over to their uncleanness and lusts and hardened their heart so that their sinfulness becomes exceedingly sinful, as Paul says in Romans 1:

And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness . . . —Romans 1:28–29a

There are a number of New Testament teachings that address the issue of abusing the station God has given us in our worldly ministry. Peter warns us about using our liberty as a cloak for vice (First Peter 2:16) but let’s look at the greater context in which he houses that statement:

You also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ . . . you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light . . . Beloved, I beg you as sojourners and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul, having your conduct honorable among the Gentiles, that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may, by your good works which they observe, glorify God in the day of visitation. —First Peter 2:5, 9-12

There are ways to maintain the crown. Abstain from fleshly lusts. Discipline yourself.

There are reasons to discipline yourself—that God might be glorified.

There are kings under which we must align ourselves for God’s glory, because our submission to the authorities He ordained on the earth are a reflection of our submission to Him as an authority. So Peter segues into the issues of submission:

"Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men—as free, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as bondservants of God. Honor all people. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king." —First Peter 2:13–17

Respect for authority is a lesson that will crop up again and again throughout First Samuel. A person who has no respect for authority, particularly God’s authority, loses the right to wield authority. That is one way a crown is lost. We will come back to this in some future lessons.

Apostate leaders and false teachers also follow the model of Hophni and Phinehas (Jude 1, Second Peter 2) in that they present themselves among God’s children, but the reason they pursue that crown of priesthood is for the gratification of their own lusts. There are right and wrong reasons for pursuing a crown.

Samuel’s Model

Samuel is the foil of Hophni and Phinehas, but we don’t know much about him at this point. We will go into what Samuel models in a bit, but I want to draw your attention to a couple of verses that describe him in the passage we just read.

Meanwhile the child Samuel grew before the LORD . . . And the child Samuel grew in stature, and in favor both with the LORD and men. —First Samuel 2:21, 26

Does the phrasing of that verse remind you of other people in the Bible? It reminds me of the descriptions of Samson, John the Baptist, and Jesus. Let’s compare the verses:

So the woman bore a son and called his name Samson; and the child grew, and the LORD blessed him. —Judges 13:24, speaking of Samson

So the child grew and became strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his manifestation to Israel. —Luke 1:80, speaking of John the Baptist

And the Child grew and became strong in spirit, filled with wisdom; and the grace of God was upon Him. —Luke 2:40, speaking of Jesus

And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men —Luke 2:52. This statement in Luke’s account follows the picture of Jesus in His youth, sitting in the Temple with the priests and teachers, listening and teaching. That is a very close picture comparison with Samuel. Just as Samuel stood in contrast to the degenerate priesthood of his day, so Jesus stood in contrast to the chief priests and Pharisees of His day.

Interesting, how the phrasing draws together this set of men. Three of them—Samson, Samuel, and John the Baptist—were born to barren women and were Nazirites from birth. Samson and Samuel were both judges. John the Baptist and Samuel were both Levites and prophets.

While Jesus is not born of a barren woman like the rest, He has this typology in common with them: that they were all born by divine gifting and grace. While He was not a Nazirite like the rest, nevertheless, He was nazir (separated) from His brethren—called out for a specific purpose to serve the LORD.

So we have a very interesting comparison between the pictures of Samson, Samuel, John the Baptist, and Christ, but particularly between Samuel and Christ based on the particular repeated phrasing, ". . . grew in stature, and in favor both with the LORD and men." We will have to see how that picture comparison develops in the on-going narrative.

Summary

The theme of pursuing crowns that began with the contrast at the individual level between barren Hannah and abundant Peninnah, now telescopes out to the family and community levels. We have the greater comparison of the houses of Elkanah and Eli represented by their sons. Elkanah’s house ascends to blessing through his son Samuel, while Eli’s house descends into curse because of his sons Hophni and Phinehas. The contrasting pictures that we have so far fall along these lines:

• There are those who value earthly rewards—the lust of the eyes, lust of the flesh, pride of life—and pursue immediate gratification and an earthly abundance by their own effort or works. These are contrasted to those who pursue an eternal reward gifted by grace from God and hold to the promise of a future blessing and inheritance.

• There are those who seek validation and glory from men, and they are contrasted with those who seek validation from God and give glory to God in their pursuit of a legacy.

• There are those who walk by sight, contrasted with those who walk by faith. Despite being a high priest and judge, Eli is a man of poor vision that will grow even dimmer in the narrative to come.

The Prophecy of the Man of God

READ

First Samuel 2:27-36

BUILD THE PICTURE

An unnamed man of God delivers the LORD’s judgment against Eli. In verses 27-28, he begins with reminding Eli of God’s calling of the sons of Aaron to be a priesthood when He brought them out of Egypt and how the Lord gave them a portion of the offerings made to Him.

6. What are the charges that the man of God brings against Eli?

It seems that even though Eli rebuked his sons for what they were doing, he nevertheless reaped the benefits of their sin. The LORD charges Eli and his sons with making themselves fat with the best of the offerings. Eli dishonored the offering that the Lord had set aside for His priesthood and honored his sons instead.

7. What is the curse that the LORD institutes with Eli’s house?

• He will cut off the arm of Eli’s house and his father’s house.

The Hebrew word for arm is zeroah, which means a literal arm; or figuratively, a family line or a division of something, like an arm of government or military. It carries with it the sense of strength—physical, political, or military strength.

But more importantly, the zeroah is the arm of the sacrificed animal that was apportioned to the priesthood. It is the LORD’s zeroah that Eli and his sons had despised; therefore, God despises Eli’s zeroah. This is an eye-for-an-eye type of judgment.

• There will not be an old man in their house forever.

Eli’s descendants will die in the flower of their age. This curse is reiterated three times (2:31-33) and begins with the prophesied death of Hophni and Phinehas. Those of Eli’s house who are not cut off from the altar will bring his house to grief.

• You will see an enemy in My dwelling place. I will discuss this in the next lesson when I talk about why the Ark of God returned to Kirjath Jearim and not Shiloh in 1 Samuel 7:1.

• God will raise up a faithful priest for Himself, one who will do according to the LORD’s heart and mind, and will build up his house. This priest will walk before God’s anointed—His mashiach —forever. Mashiach can either refer to a king of Israel, specifically the Messianic king, or a high priest.

The man of God begins by reminding Eli of the covenant God made with his father’s house, and he was clearly referring to Aaron, Eli’s ancestor, and not his immediate father. So, when God says he is going to cut off the arm of Eli’s father’s house, that would seem to conflict with the previous covenants God made.

8. What previous covenants might the curse negate?

There was a covenant made with the tribe of Levi and then with the house of Aaron, that they would be a priesthood before God forever; but God also made another covenant specifically with Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, along the same lines.

Therefore say, ‘Behold, I give to him [Phinehas] My covenant of peace; and it shall be to him and his descendants after him a covenant of an everlasting priesthood, because he was zealous for his God, and made atonement for the children of Israel.’ —Numbers 25:12-13

Since this new curse falls not just on Eli’s house but on his father’s house as well, who is his father? The word father is a little vague in the Hebrew. It can refer to an immediate father or an ancestral father such as Phinehas or Aaron.

Is the LORD bringing the curse on the priesthood in its entirety? This would negate the covenants He made with Aaron and Phinehas. Once God makes a covenant with a people, does He go back on His word? No. Can the LORD bring a curse on an arm of the family without affecting the previous covenants? Yes, He can. We know He did just such a thing with the kings of Israel when Solomon’s line incurred a curse. The Davidic covenant was preserved because the Messiah came through a different family line from Solomon’s.

Then perhaps the curse is limited to Eli’s specific family arm. This means that the house of Eli would have to be disconnected from the house of Phinehas, which it is as we saw in the family tree. This is the second reason for the shift out of the line of Eleazar and into the line of Ithamar, as we discussed earlier.

9. Who then is the faithful priest that God raises up for Himself?

It is tempting to say Samuel, because the narrative is making a comparison between Samuel and the House of Eli, but I am pretty sure it isn’t Samuel. Samuel was a priest, but not from the priestly line that qualified to replace the high priest. We need to look for a new high priest to reclaim that role. I think it is Zadok for these reasons.

The high priesthood will remain in Eli’s line until Abiathar. Then it will shift back along covenantal lines when Solomon takes the high priesthood away from Abiathar and gives it to Phinehas’ descendant Zadok in First Kings 2:27:

So Solomon removed Abiathar from being priest to the LORD, that he might fulfill the word of the LORD which He spoke concerning the house of Eli at Shiloh. —First Kings