The Expositor's Bible: The First Book of SamuelBlaikie, William Garden
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The First Book of Samuel
Blaikie, William Garden
Bible. Samuel, 1st -- Commentaries
2. We proceed now to the message itself, and Samuel's reception of it.
It is substantially a repetition of what God had already communicated to
Eli by the man of God a few years before; only it is more peremptory,
and the bearing of it is more fixed and rigid. When God denounced His
judgment on Eli's house by the prophet, he seems to have intended to
give them an opportunity to repent. If Eli had bestirred himself then,
and banished the young men from Shiloh, and if his sons in their
affliction and humiliation had repented of their wickedness, the
threatened doom might have been averted. So at least we are led to
believe by this second message having been superadded to the first. Now
the opportunity of repentance has passed away. God's words are very
explicit--"I have sworn unto the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli's
house shall not be purged with sacrifice nor offering for ever." After
the previous warning, Eli seems to have gone on lamenting but not
chastising. Hophni and Phinehas seem to have gone on sinning as before,
and heedless of the scandal they were causing. In announcing to Samuel
the coming catastrophe, God shows Himself thoroughly alive to the
magnitude of the punishment He is to inflict, and the calamity that is
to happen. It is such that the ears of every one that heareth it shall
tingle. God shows also that, painful though it is, it has been
deliberately determined, and no relenting will occur when once the
terrible retribution begins. "In that day will I perform against Eli all
that I have spoken concerning his house; when I begin I will also make
an end." But terrible though the punishment will be, there is only too
good cause for it. "For I have told him that I will judge his house for
ever, for the iniquity which he knoweth; because his sons made
themselves vile, and he restrained them not." There are some good
parents whose sons have made themselves vile, and they would fain have
restrained them but their efforts to restrain have been in vain. The
fault of Eli was, that he might have restrained them and he did not
restrain them. In those times fathers had more authority over their
families than is given them now. The head of the house was counted
responsible for the house, because it was only by his neglecting the
power he had that his family could become openly wicked. It was only by
Eli neglecting the power he had that his sons could have become so vile.
Where his sons were heirs to such sacred functions there was a double
call to restrain them, and that call he neglected. He neglected it at
the time when he might have done it, and that time could never be
recalled.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account