Unless otherwise stated, all citations are taken from the New International Version (NIV).
1 Samuel 1 (Hannah Gives Birth to Samuel)
Summary: In approximately 1,100 B.C., Elkanah, a descendant of Levi (1 Chron. 6:16-30), navigated the complexities of ancient family life with his two warring wives: Peninnah and Hannah. While Peninnah bore children, Hannah faced the anguish of barrenness. Her pain was compounded by societal pressures—namely, offspring signified security and legacy (vv.1-2). Peninnah’s taunts exacerbated Hannah’s suffering (v.6), echoing the cultural significance of fertility.
In desperation, Hannah fervently prayed for a child, vowing to dedicate him to the Lord’s service (vv.9-11). Her commitment extended to fulfilling the Nazarite Vow, symbolized by her pledge not to cut her son’s hair. Eli, the priest, initially misinterpreted her intense supplication as drunkenness, but upon clarification, he empathized with her and offered his support (v.13, 17). Encouraged by Eli’s understanding, Hannah found consolation and comfort (v.18).
After Hannah’s earnest prayer, God intervened. She conceived and bore a son named Samuel, whom she dutifully presented to Eli for consecration to the priesthood (v.20, 27-28; cf. 1 Sam. 2:11).
Why does the book open with this one particular family? This small family would change the course of Israel’s history, because the prophet Samuel would come through this family and this one woman’s prayer. Hannah was “bold enough to believe that God would hear and answer her prayer for a son.”[1]
(1:1) There was a certain man from Ramathaim, a Zuphite from the hill country of Ephraim, whose name was Elkanah son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite.
Elkanah came from Ramathaim or “Ramah” (1 Sam. 1:19; 2:11; 7:17). Chronicles states that Samuel was from the tribe of Levi (1 Chron. 6:16, 22, 31-33). Bergen harmonizes this by stating that “Samuel was geographically an Ephraimite but genealogically a Levite.”[2] Indeed, the Levites lived in the greater region of Ephraim (Josh. 24:33).
Hannah’s problem
(1:2) He had two wives; one was called Hannah and the other Peninnah. Peninnah had children, but Hannah had none.
Hannah (ḥannāh) literally means “grace.”[3] Peninnah (peninnāh) literally means “ruby.”[4] In the ancient world, childlessness was tragic, because this meant the end of your family line. This contributes to the ongoing theme of “barrenness” in the OT (e.g. Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel; Gen. 11:30; 25:21; 29:31; Judg. 13:2).
(1:3) Year after year this man went up from his town to worship and sacrifice to the LORD Almighty at Shiloh, where Hophni and Phinehas, the two sons of Eli, were priests of the LORD.
Shiloh. The priests held the Ark of the Covenant here at this time (1 Sam. 4:3-4).
Eli was a priest there. His two sons both had Egyptian names: Hophni (“Tadpole”) and Phinehas (“The Nubian”).[5]
(1:4-6) Whenever the day came for Elkanah to sacrifice, he would give portions of the meat to his wife Peninnah and to all her sons and daughters. 5 But to Hannah he gave a double portion because he loved her, and the LORD had closed her womb. 6 Because the LORD had closed Hannah’s womb, her rival kept provoking her in order to irritate her.
Elkanah understood that Hannah’s infertility was the result of God’s providence (cf. Gen 15:3; 16:2; 20:18; 30:2). Even though Hannah wasn’t bearing children, Elkanah loved her more than Peninnah.
It’s obvious that Elkanah’s polygamy led to a dysfunctional family. He favored Hannah over Elkanah by giving her a “double portion.” And this led to Peninnah taunting Hannah (v.6). The Bible doesn’t condone everything that it records.
(1:7) This went on year after year. Whenever Hannah went up to the house of the LORD, her rival provoked her till she wept and would not eat.
Peninnah would pour the insults thick during the annual festival, because this was a time when Hannah’s infertility was most prominent. Bergen writes, “These insults appear to have been particularly poignant during the annual festival times at Shiloh because the family sacrificial meal that rewarded Peninnah’s maternal blessings also insulted Hannah’s unproductive womb.”[6]
Peninnah’s bullying of Hannah was so vicious that Hannah couldn’t even enjoy her food. Even though she received a “double portion” of food from her husband (v.5), it didn’t matter because Peninnah’s taunting made her lose her appetite. This journey was supposed to be a time of worship, but it turned into a dysfunctional and hostile family gathering. Interestingly, many family holidays (e.g. Thanksgiving, Christmas, Easter, etc.) are still this way today in modern culture.
(1:8-9) Her husband Elkanah would say to her, “Hannah, why are you weeping? Why don’t you eat? Why are you downhearted? Don’t I mean more to you than ten sons?” 9 Once when they had finished eating and drinking in Shiloh, Hannah stood up. Now Eli the priest was sitting on his chair by the doorpost of the LORD’s house.
Elkanah didn’t stop Peninnah’s caustic antagonizing of Hannah. Instead, he asks Hannah why she is so sad. In a sense, he is asking her, “Am I not good enough for you?” This statement doesn’t seem very comforting, but it seems to have been a “current idiom.”[7] At the end of the book of Ruth, women told Naomi, “Your daughter-in-law… has been better to you than seven sons!” (Ruth 4:15 NLT).
Hannah’s prayer
(1:10) In her deep anguish Hannah prayed to the LORD, weeping bitterly.
Typically, when we feel “deep anguish,” we mope and complain. Not Hannah. She took her distress to God.
(1:11) And she made a vow, saying, “LORD Almighty, if you will only look on your servant’s misery and remember me, and not forget your servant but give her a son, then I will give him to the LORD for all the days of his life, and no razor will ever be used on his head.”
Hannah must be dedicating him with a Nazarite Vow (see Numbers 6). Chuck Smith’s mother had a scare where she thought that she would lose Chuck as a young boy. She prayed something similar. It wasn’t until he was a grown man and wanting to pursue full-time vocational ministry that Chuck Smith’s mother told him about this.
(1 Sam. 1:11) Does God support bargaining practices and vows? God doesn’t answer prayers based on our vows for him, but based on his own will (1 Jn. 5:14-15). Hannah wasn’t asking for a son for her own purpose, but for God’s purposes. For instance, if a person vowed, “God, give me a brand new car, and I’ll promise to follow you forever!” God wouldn’t answer this. However, if someone said, “God, give me a reliable car, so I can serve in a high school Bible study on the weekends,” this would be different. If you’re vowing to give what you get to God’s purposes, this is qualitatively different. Like Hannah, we would be asking for something, so that we could put it to God’s purposes—not our own.
(1:12-13) As she kept on praying to the LORD, Eli observed her mouth. 13 Hannah was praying in her heart, and her lips were moving but her voice was not heard. Eli thought she was drunk.
God can hear inaudible prayers that are spoken “in the heart.”
(1:14) He said to her, “How long are you going to stay drunk? Put away your wine.”
This shows how badly Eli misinterpreted what was happening. He thought she was drunk, but in reality, she was changing the course of salvation history with the birth of Samuel. This foreshadows how corrupt the worship in Israel had become, and it “tells us something about the problems he frequently had to contend with.”[8]
(1:15-16) “Not so, my lord,” Hannah replied, “I am a woman who is deeply troubled. I have not been drinking wine or beer; I was pouring out my soul to the LORD. Do not take your servant for a wicked woman; I have been praying here out of my great anguish and grief.”
She wasn’t pouring herself drinks; she was pouring herself out to God. She wanted to clear her reputation with Eli, the priest. The expression “wicked” woman is the same term used of Eli’s sons being “wicked” men (1 Sam. 2:12).
(1:17-18) Eli answered, “Go in peace, and may the God of Israel grant you what you have asked of him.”
18 She said, “May your servant find favor in your eyes.”
Then she went her way and ate something, and her face was no longer downcast.
“Her face was no longer downcast.” This prayer changed her depressed heart (v.10).
Hannah’s answered prayer: Samuel
(1:19-20) Early the next morning they arose and worshiped before the LORD and then went back to their home at Ramah. Elkanah made love to his wife Hannah, and the LORD remembered her. 20 So in the course of time Hannah became pregnant and gave birth to a son. She named him Samuel, saying, “Because I asked the LORD for him.”
“The LORD remembered her.” This doesn’t mean that God forgets anything. Rather, this is an anthropomorphism for God choosing to act and intervene (Gen. 8:1; Ex. 2:24).
“Elkanah made love to his wife.” God also worked through a natural process (“Elkanah had relations with Hannah”).
Samuel’s name literally means, “The Name of God.”[9]
Hannah’s sacrifice
(1:21-23) When her husband Elkanah went up with all his family to offer the annual sacrifice to the LORD and to fulfill his vow, 22 Hannah did not go. She said to her husband, “After the boy is weaned, I will take him and present him before the LORD, and he will live there always.”
23 “Do what seems best to you,” her husband Elkanah told her. “Stay here until you have weaned him; only may the LORD make good his word.”
So the woman stayed at home and nursed her son until she had weaned him.
“Do what seems best to you.” Elkanah could’ve annulled Hannah’s vow (Num 30:10-15), but he followed his wife’s step of faith.
Once Hannah gave him over to the Lord’s priestly service, she wanted this to be a clean break. If she gave him now, he would still need to breastfeed, and this was before the time of baby formula. Babies were breastfed for two or three years during this time (2 Macc. 7:27), so she would’ve only had a couple of years with this sweet little boy. Imagine how hard it would be to follow through on this vow—especially after you had wept for years to have a son!
(1:24-25) After he was weaned, she took the boy with her, young as he was, along with a three-year-old bull, an ephah of flour and a skin of wine, and brought him to the house of the LORD at Shiloh. 25 When the bull had been sacrificed, they brought the boy to Eli.
The bull was meant to be sacrificed (v.25), but what was the flour and wine for? There is only one mention of flour being used as a sacrifice, and this is in a very unique situation (Num. 5:15). More likely, Hannah was “packing her son’s lunch” so he could “go away to school.” It’s like she was putting him on the school bus for the final time, saying goodbye.
(1:26-28) She said to him, “Pardon me, my lord. As surely as you live, I am the woman who stood here beside you praying to the LORD.” 27 I prayed for this child, and the LORD has granted me what I asked of him. 28 So now I give him to the LORD. For his whole life he will be given over to the LORD.” And he worshiped the LORD there.
“I am the woman who stood her beside you praying to the LORD.” Hannah shares the incredible story about this answer to prayer with Eli.
“The LORD has granted me what I asked of him.” Her words echo what Eli had said to her years earlier (v.17). Hannah must have treasured those words and believed them.
“So now I give him to the LORD.” Hannah didn’t view this as giving her son to Eli, but giving her son to God himself. One scholar comments, “We should not overlook the sacrifice made by Hannah; but her loss was to be Israel’s gain, and she felt amply compensated.”[10]
Concluding insights
Why was Peninnah taunting Hannah? She probably thought that Hannah was being looked down upon by God. As it turns out, God used Hannah’s descendants more than Peninnah. In fact, we don’t even know the names of Peninnah’s children. Similarly, we sometimes feel scorned by our world for not having worldly blessings, but this isn’t a sign of God’s disfavor.
Hannah gave her most precious desire over to God. Some preachers will teach this passage by saying, “If you pray for your desire, God will give it to you.” But this isn’t the point. Hannah was willing to give her desire over to God and trust him with it. God isn’t a sadist who wants to take our pleasure from us (Ps. 37:4). Instead, he wants to give us good things. Indeed, while God accepts Samuel as an offering in the priestly service, in the next chapter, God gives Hannah five more kids (1 Sam. 2:21). At this point in the narrative, we learn that Hannah could trust God with her desire. What deep desire do you hold back from God that you aren’t willing to give over?
1 Samuel 2 (Eli’s Omissive Error)
Summary: Hannah expresses profound gratitude to God through a prayerful song, demonstrating a deep appreciation for his intervention in her life. Next, the narrative shifts to Eli and his sons, who are depicted as corrupt priests, exploiting offerings for personal gain, even resorting to force (v.16). God condemns this as quite severe (v.17).
Returning to Samuel, we learn of his upbringing by his mother, who annually made him new clothes (v.19). Eli blesses Hannah, and God responds by granting her five more children, illustrating divine favor for those who trust in God (v.21).
The focus shifts back to Eli and his sons, where Eli, aware of their misconduct, proves reluctant to discipline them (v.22). It is even revealed that Eli’s sons were engaging in immoral acts at the Tabernacle’s entrance. Eli rebukes them (vv.23-25) but fails to take further action. Consequently, God intervenes, decreeing judgment that culminates in their demise (v.25).
A man of God predicts Eli’s family’s downfall, prophesying their future as either dead or destitute (vv.30-31). This prophecy is later fulfilled when Solomon removes Abiathar from the priesthood (1 Kings 2:27), fulfilling God’s earlier judgment on Eli’s household in Shiloh.
Hannah’s prayer
When we receive answers to prayer, we are immediately happy, but often forget to give thanks. Hannah received a great answer to prayer, and consequently, it led to even more prayer. Some scholars see “Hannah’s Song” as an inclusio with “David’s Song” at the end of the book (2 Sam. 22).[11] That is, the book of Samuel opens and ends with prayer. Others note similarities between Hannah’s prayer and Mary’s prayer after she becomes pregnant with Jesus (Lk. 1:48-52). Youngblood writes, “Both Hannah and Mary became pregnant miraculously (though admittedly in quite different ways), in due course each presented her firstborn son to the Lord at the central sanctuary (1:22; Luke 2:22), and both sang a hymn of thanksgiving and praise (Hannah after the birth of Samuel [1 Sam 2:1-10], Mary before the birth of Jesus [Luke 1:46-55]).”[12]
In her prayer, Hannah repeatedly uses antithetical parallelism: the strong become weak, and the weak become strong. God is sovereign over all of this.
(2:1) Then Hannah prayed and said: “My heart rejoices in the LORD; in the LORD my horn is lifted high. My mouth boasts over my enemies, for I delight in your deliverance.”
“My heart rejoices in the LORD.” Hannah begins her prayer by rejoicing in God himself.
“Horn.” The “horn” most likely symbolizes strength (v.10). The imagery comes from animals like deer who use their “antlers in playful or mortal combat (cf. Deut 33:17; Ps 92:10).”[13] Hannah’s strength didn’t come from herself, but from being “in the Lord.”
(2:2) There is no one holy like the LORD; there is no one besides you; there is no Rock like our God.
“There is no one holy like the LORD.” God is totally and utterly unique. There is no one like him.
“There is no Rock like our God.” The concept of a “rock” is a symbol of stability and protection.
(2:3) Do not keep talking so proudly or let your mouth speak such arrogance, for the LORD is a God who knows, and by him deeds are weighed.
Why shouldn’t we be proud or arrogant? Hannah gives two reasons: (1) God knows everything, and (2) God is the ultimate judge. If we lived in a universe without God, then pride would come easily. We might actually think that we lived at the top of the pyramid. But when God enters the picture, we realize how pathetic these pretensions really are.
Weakness is strength
(2:4) The bows of the warriors are broken, but those who stumbled are armed with strength.
Hannah gives her first example of antithetical parallelism: The strong warriors are broken, but the weak warriors are strengthened.
(2:5) Those who were full hire themselves out for food, but those who were hungry are hungry no more. She who was barren has borne seven children, but she who has had many sons pines away.
Hannah uses another reversal: The full go hungry, but the hungry become full. Moreover, the barren woman has many children (“seven”), while the fertile woman “pines away” or “grows faint” (cf. Jer. 15:9). Incidentally, Hannah has a total of six children (1 Sam. 2:21).
(2:6) The LORD brings death and makes alive; he brings down to the grave and raises up.
“He brings down to the grave and raises up.” God is sovereign over death and life. This is an early reference to resurrection.
(2:7-8) The LORD sends poverty and wealth; he humbles and he exalts. 8 He raises the poor from the dust and lifts the needy from the ash heap; he seats them with princes and has them inherit a throne of honor. For the foundations of the earth are the LORD’s; on them he has set the world.
“The LORD sends poverty and wealth; he humbles and he exalts.” He makes the rich poor, and the poor rich.
“For the foundations of the earth are the LORD’s; on them he has set the world.” God created the very ground on which we walk (cf. Job 38:4; Ps. 75:3; 82:5; 104:5; Isa. 24:18; 48:13; 51:13, 16).
(2:9) He will guard the feet of his faithful servants, but the wicked will be silenced in the place of darkness. It is not by strength that one prevails; those who oppose the LORD will be broken.
The way to victory is not by power or by “strength.” In fact, this is a proud attitude, and God will “oppose” such people (cf. Ps. 138:6; Prov. 29:23; Mt. 23:12; Lk. 1:52; Jas. 4:6; 1 Pet. 5:5). It is by being a “godly one” that someone gains strength. That is, we gain strength by having the hesed of God.
(2:10) The Most High will thunder from heaven; the LORD will judge the ends of the earth. He will give strength to his king and exalt the horn of his anointed.
“The Most High will thunder from heaven.” Peninnah “thundered against” Hannah (1 Sam. 1:6), but God “thundered against” Peninnah.
“The LORD will judge the ends of the earth.” God is the ultimate Judge (v.3), and he will rule through his righteous “King” and “Anointed.” This foreshadows the life of David, and ultimately, Jesus.
(2:11) Then Elkanah went home to Ramah, but the boy ministered before the LORD under Eli the priest.
Hannah must have gone home with her husband, leaving Samuel with Eli.
Eli’s passivity with his evil sons
(2:12) Eli’s sons were scoundrels; they had no regard for the LORD.
Eli’s sons were “scoundrels” in stark contrast to Hannah’s son, Samuel (1 Sam. 1:16-17).
“They had no regard for the LORD.” The Hebrew literally states, “They did not know the LORD.”[14]
(2:13-14) Now it was the practice of the priests that, whenever any of the people offered a sacrifice, the priest’s servant would come with a three-pronged fork in his hand while the meat was being boiled 14 and would plunge the fork into the pan or kettle or caldron or pot. Whatever the fork brought up the priest would take for himself. This is how they treated all the Israelites who came to Shiloh.
The law taught that the people would freely give what they wanted to the priests (Deut. 18:3). The sons of Eli broke this law. They would “take for [themselves]” what they wanted.
(2:15) But even before the fat was burned, the priest’s servant would come and say to the person who was sacrificing, “Give the priest some meat to roast; he won’t accept boiled meat from you, but only raw.”
They wanted the meat before it was even cooked. This could show that they were impatient, or that they were showing further contempt for God’s method (Ex. 12:8-11).
(2:16) If the person said to him, “Let the fat be burned first, and then take whatever you want,” the servant would answer, “No, hand it over now; if you don’t, I’ll take it by force.”
“Let the fat be burned first, and then take whatever you want.” By eating the fat of the animal, Hophni and Phinehas were explicitly breaking the Torah: “Give the following instructions to the people of Israel. You must never eat fat, whether from cattle, sheep, or goats. 24 The fat of an animal… must never be eaten, though it may be used for any other purpose. 25 Anyone who eats fat from an animal presented as a special gift to the LORD will be cut off from the community” (Lev. 7:23-25).
“Hand it over now; if you don’t, I’ll take it by force.” Instead of taking a voluntary offering, they would take it by “force.”
(2:17) This sin of the young men was very great in the LORD’s sight, for they were treating the LORD’s offering with contempt.
They were showing “contempt” for God because they didn’t “know the Lord” (NASB, v.12). How odd to have priests that don’t even know God.
Samuel grows older
(2:18) But Samuel was ministering before the LORD—a boy wearing a linen ephod.
Samuel is in stark contrast to the sons of Eli. Even as a young boy, he was wearing the clothing of an adult priest (i.e. an ephod).
(2:19) Each year his mother made him a little robe and took it to him when she went up with her husband to offer the annual sacrifice.
Hannah didn’t leave her little boy as an orphan. She would visit every year. Bergen comments, “This thoughtful gift from Hannah suggests that although Samuel was gone from the household in Ramah, he was still very much in Hannah’s heart (cf. Prov 31:19-21).”[15]
(2:20-21) Eli would bless Elkanah and his wife, saying, “May the LORD give you children by this woman to take the place of the one she prayed for and gave to the LORD.” Then they would go home. 21 And the LORD was gracious to Hannah; she gave birth to three sons and two daughters. Meanwhile, the boy Samuel grew up in the presence of the LORD.
God blessed Hannah with five more children. Meanwhile, God was cursing Eli’s two sons…
Eli’s sons
(2:22) Now Eli, who was very old, heard about everything his sons were doing to all Israel and how they slept with the women who served at the entrance to the tent of meeting.
Eli was “very old.” Since his sons were acting by “force” (v.17), he may have felt impotent to assert his authority. Regardless, God held him responsible for his passivity. He was all bark, but no bite.
“They slept with the women who served at the entrance to the tent.” The law commanded women to serve at the opening of the tent (Ex. 38:8). But not like this! These women were “being treated as though they were pagan shrine prostitutes,”[16] and God forbade this sort of cult prostitution (Deut. 23:17; Num. 25:1-5; Hos. 4:14).
(2:23-24) So he said to them, “Why do you do such things? I hear from all the people about these wicked deeds of yours. 24 No, my sons; the report I hear spreading among the LORD’s people is not good.”
Was Eli’s rebuke a form of man pleasing? We think so. Eli was more concerned with what the people were saying, rather than what God was saying. Indeed, Eli mentions what the “people” were saying twice, but doesn’t mention God at all. He was more concerned about his personal reputation than he was with God’s reputation.
(2:25) “If one person sins against another, God may mediate for the offender; but if anyone sins against the LORD, who will intercede for them?” His sons, however, did not listen to their father’s rebuke, for it was the LORD’s will to put them to death.
“If anyone sins against the LORD, who will intercede for them?” This foreshadows the great work of Christ. As God and man, Jesus was the perfect mediator for humanity (1 Tim. 2:5).
“For it was the LORD’s will to put them to death.” The sins of Eli’s sons were already irrevocable. Therefore, God judicially hardened them in order to bring judgment on them. This is similar to Pharaoh: these weren’t good men who were hardened to do evil, but bad men whom God had already decided to judge. Baldwin agrees, “Hophni and Phineas sealed their own fate by their refusal to take warning.”[17]
(2:26) And the boy Samuel continued to grow in stature and in favor with the LORD and with people.
By contrast, Samuel grew with the Lord. The description of Samuel is very similar to that of Jesus (Lk. 2:40, 52), just as Hannah’s song is similar to Mary’s Magnificat (Lk. 1:46-55).
(2:27) Now a man of God came to Eli and said to him, “This is what the LORD says: ‘Did I not clearly reveal myself to your ancestor’s family when they were in Egypt under Pharaoh?’”
This “man of God” could be an angel (Judg. 13:3, 6), but it is more likely a human prophet (1 Sam. 9:9-10).
(2:28) “I chose your ancestor out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest, to go up to my altar, to burn incense, and to wear an ephod in my presence. I also gave your ancestor’s family all the food offerings presented by the Israelites.”
This line was chosen, but they forfeited their choosing.
(2:29) “Why do you scorn my sacrifice and offering that I prescribed for my dwelling? Why do you honor your sons more than me by fattening yourselves on the choice parts of every offering made by my people Israel?”
“Why do you scorn my sacrifice?” The word “you” is plural. This means that “Eli was implicated in some sense in the sin.”[18] Was Eli guilty for overlooking their sin, or was he participating in it to some degree? It’s interesting that Eli’s sons were stealing the fattened food for themselves, and at the end of his life, Eli was obese (1 Sam. 4:18). This could have “resulted from eating the forbidden food.”[19]
“Why do you honor your sons more than me?” This was the great sin of Eli. He wouldn’t put God first in his family. If he did, then he would’ve been the father that his boys needed him to be.
(2:30) “Therefore the LORD, the God of Israel, declares: ‘I promised that members of your family would minister before me forever.’ But now the LORD declares: ‘Far be it from me! Those who honor me I will honor, but those who despise me will be disdained.’ 31 The time is coming when I will cut short your strength and the strength of your priestly house, so that no one in it will reach old age, 32 and you will see distress in my dwelling. Although good will be done to Israel, no one in your family line will ever reach old age.”
(1 Sam. 2:30-31) Did God change his mind? This was a partial discipline of Aaron’s priestly line—not a complete cutting off of the line (v.33). Abiathar was spared to continue on in Eli’s line. Individuals could be removed from God’s line for sin or unbelief, but the line itself was permanently promised. When Abiathar was removed from priesthood (1 Kings 2:27, 35), Zadok took over after him (2 Sam. 8:17; 15:24-29; 1 Kings 2:35). This is fulfilled in 1 Kings 2:26-27.
(2:33) “Every one of you that I do not cut off from serving at my altar I will spare only to destroy your sight and sap your strength, and all your descendants will die in the prime of life.”
Eli’s line will still continue, but they will not live long lives (a sign of God’s blessing).
(2:34) “And what happens to your two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, will be a sign to you—they will both die on the same day.”
This is fulfilled in 1 Samuel 4:11-18.
(2:35) “I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who will do according to what is in my heart and mind. I will firmly establish his priestly house, and they will minister before my anointed one always.”
This likely refers to Samuel in the short term, but it could refer to Zadok who took over after Abiathar in the long term (2 Sam. 8:17; 15:24-29; 1 Kings 2:35). Ultimately, this is fulfilled in the everlasting priesthood of Jesus (Heb. 5:10; 6:20). Hannah opened this chapter referring to God’s King and Anointed One (v.10). Now, the chapter closes with a priest who would follow “My anointed always.”
(2:36) “Then everyone left in your family line will come and bow down before him for a piece of silver and a loaf of bread and plead, ‘Appoint me to some priestly office so I can have food to eat.’”
Eli’s offspring would grovel to simply have a piece of bread because of what they did. This is an example of the great “reversals” described in Hannah’s song (vv.1-10).
Concluding insights
Eli’s sin was not a commissive sinner, but an omissive one. He was unwilling to do anything about the sin of his two sons. His problem was that he did… nothing. Leaders who aren’t willing to confront others in love are going to see God pull the plug on their fruit. We know of one famous Christian apologist who knew his high school son was sleeping around with multiple girls. But he did nothing about it. Today, his son is an agnostic author and speaker, who writes books about how the God of the Bible is evil! What a tragic legacy to leave behind as a parent.
In this chapter, we also see a comparison between Samuel’s righteousness and Eli’s unrighteousness. Consequently, in the next chapter, we see that God speaks to Samuel—not Eli.
1 Samuel 3 (Samuel Speaks with God)
Summary: Samuel hears a voice calling him and initially mistakes it for Eli. After being called three times, Eli discerns that it is God trying to communicate with Samuel. God informs Samuel of his judgment upon Eli’s family due to Eli’s failure to discipline his sons. Eli asks Samuel to recount what God has said, and he accepts the prophecy. Samuel’s credibility as a prophet is affirmed when God’s words are fulfilled exactly as predicted. Bergen comments, “Samuel’s first act as prophet was perhaps his most difficult; though only a child, he had to announce the Lord’s fatal judgment against Israel’s most powerful family.”[20]
(3:1) The boy Samuel ministered before the LORD under Eli. In those days the word of the LORD was rare; there were not many visions.
In the previous chapter, God made it clear to Eli that he was going to pull the plug on his priestly ministry. Most likely, the “word from the Lord was rare” because God was waiting for Samuel to grow older. He must’ve wanted Samuel to speak for him, rather than Eli.
(3:2) One night Eli, whose eyes were becoming so weak that he could barely see, was lying down in his usual place.
Eli eventually went blind (1 Sam. 4:15). By contrast, Moses had sharp eyesight until the very end of his life (Deut. 34:7). Perhaps the narrative is making a contrast here, because Eli was spiritually compromised and “spiritually blind.”
(3:3) The lamp of God had not yet gone out, and Samuel was lying down in the house of the LORD, where the ark of God was.
“The lamp of God had not yet gone out.” This event must have occurred at night. For one, these lamps were lit at night and kept burning all night long (Ex. 25:31-37; 30:8; 27:20-21). Second, Eli’s repeated command for Samuel to “lie down” implies that he was trying to sleep. Finally, after the talk with God, Samuel “lay down until morning” (v.15).
“Samuel was lying down in the house of the LORD, where the ark of God was.” Samuel slept in the direct vicinity of the Tabernacle and the Ark. By sleeping in this area, the text “positions the youth not only spatially but also spiritually; he was of all Israelites closest to the Lord’s throne.”[21]
(3:4-6) Then the LORD called Samuel. Samuel answered, “Here I am.” 5 And he ran to Eli and said, “Here I am; you called me.”
But Eli said, “I did not call; go back and lie down.” So he went and lay down.
6 Again the LORD called, “Samuel!” And Samuel got up and went to Eli and said, “Here I am; you called me.”
“My son,” Eli said, “I did not call; go back and lie down.”
“Here I am.” This is a typically expression that servants of God used to respond to him (Gen. 22:1; Ex. 3:4; Isa. 6:8).
(3:7) Now Samuel did not yet know the LORD: The word of the LORD had not yet been revealed to him.
“Samuel did not yet know the LORD.” After all, visions were “rare” during this time (v.1). Moreover, Samuel was listening and getting up each time in order to know the Lord. This is in contrast to Eli’s sons, who never knew the Lord (1 Sam. 2:12).
(3:8-9) A third time the LORD called, “Samuel!” And Samuel got up and went to Eli and said, “Here I am; you called me.” Then Eli realized that the LORD was calling the boy. 9 So Eli told Samuel, “Go and lie down, and if he calls you, say, ‘Speak, LORD, for your servant is listening.’” So Samuel went and lay down in his place.
It took three times before Eli recognized that God was speaking to Samuel. This could show his spiritual insensitivity. By contrast, Samuel was just a young boy, and he wasn’t familiar with God speaking to him.
(3:10) The LORD came and stood there, calling as at the other times, “Samuel! Samuel!”
Then Samuel said, “Speak, for your servant is listening.”
This is a theophany or an “appearance” of God.
Judgment for Eli’s house
(3:11) And the LORD said to Samuel: “See, I am about to do something in Israel that will make the ears of everyone who hears about it tingle.”
God’s judgment on Eli and his sons would send a shockwave through the nation of Israel. God was using them as an object lesson for the rest of the nation.
(3:12-14) “At that time I will carry out against Eli everything I spoke against his family—from beginning to end. 13 For I told him that I would judge his family forever because of the sin he knew about; his sons blasphemed God, and he failed to restrain them. 14 Therefore I swore to the house of Eli, ‘The guilt of Eli’s house will never be atoned for by sacrifice or offering.’”
God had already spoken this prediction to Eli through an earlier prophet (1 Sam. 2:27-36). He took Eli’s passivity very seriously.
“The guilt of Eli’s house will never be atoned for by sacrifice or offering.” Eli’s house couldn’t get away with making a religious sacrifice in order to solve what they had done. Eli’s sons had already denied God, and as his representatives, they should’ve known better.
Samuel tells Eli about the judgment
(3:15-17) Samuel lay down until morning and then opened the doors of the house of the LORD. He was afraid to tell Eli the vision, 16 but Eli called him and said, “Samuel, my son.”
Samuel answered, “Here I am.”
17 “What was it he said to you?” Eli asked. “Do not hide it from me. May God deal with you, be it ever so severely, if you hide from me anything he told you.”
“Do not hide it from me.” It must have been scary for a young boy like Samuel to tell an old man like Eli about this judgment. But a true prophet needed to speak the truth. God told Ezekiel, “I have appointed you as a watchman for Israel. Whenever you receive a message from me, warn people immediately. 18 If I warn the wicked, saying, ‘You are under the penalty of death,’ but you fail to deliver the warning, they will die in their sins. And I will hold you responsible for their deaths” (Ezek. 3:17-18 NLT).
Eli must have known that God was going to repeat the judgment that he had already revealed through the earlier prophet (1 Sam. 2:27ff).
(3:18) So Samuel told him everything, hiding nothing from him. Then Eli said, “He is the LORD; let him do what is good in his eyes.”
“Samuel told him everything.” This shows that Samuel was going to make a good prophet of God. Even though he was scared (v.15), Samuel told Eli everything.
“He is the LORD; let him do what is good in his eyes.” Eli accepts that God can give and take away his blessing (v.18). This is a good attitude to have. However, Eli almost seems to take this judgment passively—just as he showed passivity with his sons. Was Eli’s attitude right or wrong? Was he humbly submitting to God’s sovereign judgment, or was he passively refusing to seek repentance?
(3:19-20) The LORD was with Samuel as he grew up, and he let none of Samuel’s words fall to the ground. 20 And all Israel from Dan to Beersheba recognized that Samuel was attested as a prophet of the LORD.
“All Israel… recognized that Samuel was attested as a prophet of the LORD.” The people could recognize a true prophet, because Samuel’s predictions came true: “Everything Samuel said proved to be reliable” (NLT).
(3:21) The LORD continued to appear at Shiloh, and there he revealed himself to Samuel through his word.
This chapter opened with God’s words being “rare” (v.1). Now, God ceases his silence, and he begins speaking frequently to Samuel.
Concluding insights
Samuel listened to God when he spoke. He got up three times in the middle of the night in order to respond. While Samuel mistakenly thought Eli was the one who was calling, he was still willing to get up and hear from God.
In chapter one, Eli was the man God used. Here in chapter three, God shifted to Samuel. In his sovereignty, God can lift his blessing off of us and give it to another person. That is fully his prerogative.
It’s interesting that sometimes God will speak to the younger generation (Samuel) instead of the older generation (Eli). God enjoys working through young people.
[1] Joyce G. Baldwin, 1 and 2 Samuel: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 8, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 54.
[2] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 64.
[3] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 571.
[4] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 571.
[5] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 571.
[6] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 67.
[7] Joyce G. Baldwin, 1 and 2 Samuel: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 8, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 56.
[8] Joyce G. Baldwin, 1 and 2 Samuel: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 8, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 57.
[9] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 574.
[10] Payne, I and II Samuel, 12. Cited in Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 73.
[11] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 579.
[12] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 579.
[13] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 580.
[14] Joyce G. Baldwin, 1 and 2 Samuel: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 8, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 64.
[15] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 79-80.
[16] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 81.
[17] Joyce G. Baldwin, 1 and 2 Samuel: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 8, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 66.
[18] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 82.
[19] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 82.
[20] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 85.
[21] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 86.