Michael's Abbey Bible Study - 1 Samuel Chapter 4

1 Thus the word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out to meet the Philistines in battle and camped beside Ebenezer while the Philistines camped in Aphek. The beginning of this verse is in introductory language in Hebrew. Whereas 1:21 is in terminus language. So this begins the next recorded event, and took place at the time all Israel had learned that Samuel was God's prophet.
However, Samuel was not yet judge of Israel. The judge was still Eli. Thus it was Eli who called for or approved of the call for Israel to march counter to the Philistine attack from their northern city of Aphek. This meant men leaving their farms and businesses to answer the call to fight. They did not have a standing army. The Israelite army camped near Ebenezer. Both Ebenezer and Aphek were west of Shiloh.
The Philistines, which means "sea people", came from Crete and Cyprus in the 12th century B.C. and settled in the coastal area of Canaan, what is now Israel. (This is confirmed by writing in the Egyptian temple of Ramses III in Thebes, Egypt.) Palestine is named after them.
What is absent from this verse, and the next several chapters, is any attempt to ask God what to do through the one whom everyone knew to be His prophet, Samuel. Since Eli was clearly not right with God, and God had pronounced judgment on him, it was very foolish of him to use his political office to direct the army of Israel. Some people never learn. Of course, if he was capable of learning and repenting, God would have corrected him instead of ending his line. Any current-day person foolishly putting themselves in the position of judge of God's actions should think about this. God's punishment of Eli was proven to be the correct one by Eli's own actions after the sentence had been pronounced in 2:30-36.
2 The Philistines drew up in battle array to meet Israel. When the battle spread, Israel was defeated before the Philistines who killed about four thousand men on the battlefield. The Philistines deployed in a military formation. No such notation is made about Israel being properly organized, but it doesn't say they weren't either. However, it does appear they were not as savvy militarily. The word "spread" in the second sentence, tittosh in Hebrew, implies disarray such as an outclassed opponent folding before a superior force.
The Israeli army was at least 40,000 men, and could have been 120,000. But 40,000 to 80,000 is more likely. Regardless, when things went badly they were able to do an organized retreat with minimal losses.
3 When the people came into the camp, the elders of Israel said, "Why has the Lord defeated us today before the Philistines? Let us take to ourselves from Shiloh the ark of the covenant of the Lord, that it may come among us and deliver us from the power of our enemies." They returned to their camp near Ebenezer. The elders were the tribal leaders of Israel. These were political leaders representative of their tribes. They still held power even after Saul was made king. It is notable that they did not say the Philistines defeated them, but God did. They thought they would win because God was on their side. But they did not consult with the prophet of God, so that was arrogant presumption on their part. That they didn't bother to consult with the prophet of God was likely a deliberate choice.
Then they decided to take the Ark of the Covenant, this time not even consulting the judge of Israel, Eli, let alone God's prophet, Samuel. The Hebrew word for take is the same word used for when the Philistines take the ark in verse 11. In essence, they arrogantly thought they could make God do what they want by taking the Ark with them.
Where this verse talks about the Ark "may come among us" there are some differences between English translations. The verb come, yavo in Hebrew, is in the gal imperfect third person masculine singular with a jussive meaning. From this is it reasonable to translate this as "may come." However, this is can be misleading in English if one focuses too much on the word may. This is not the may of a maybe, or even a hopeful wish for a possibility. It is the may of a mild command. (This form could be interpreted as a very strong wish if the context supports that, which this passage does not. And that usage is rare.) An example would be, "send him to the city that he may destroy it." May destroy is a mild command, as in the intention of the person saying it. They had decided to get the ark. It was going to come among them. There was no doubt about that. The context shows they were sure this would bring them victory. Whether they thought this was a magic object, or they thought Yahweh would never let anything happen to His Ark is not specified. But clearly they thought they could move the hand of God by their own decision and action.
This was arrogance on top of arrogance, topped with world-class foolishness. They had reduced God to a puppet they could control, but they were beyond wrong. The Ark had been their shield against enemies in the past, but that was when they were operating according to God's will, not trying to force God to follow their will.
4 So the people sent to Shiloh, and from there they carried the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts who sits above the cherubim; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there with the ark of the covenant of God. At least they knew to carry the Ark, which is the proper way to move it, even if they were treating it like an idol at their command. It is noteworthy that the author uses this long title for the Ark, implying the elders had forgotten that the Ark itself was only holy because of God, not because of some innate quality of this inanimate object.
There is no indication that Eli approved of them taking the Ark or not. While the accompanying of it by his sons may be for that reason, they could also have been sent even if it wasn't with Eli's approval. The description of Eli in verse 13 tells us he was worried about the Ark. But again, this does not actually tell us whether he was for or against its removal. Considering his passivity and failure to correct the priests under him, (all were not following the law of Moses, not just his sons,) it seems likely that he just went along with what the crowd wanted.
5 As the ark of the covenant of the Lord came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great shout, so that the earth resounded. The roaring of the Israelite camp would be like the thunderous noise of a battle, yet one was not actually happening. This indicates that like the elders, the trust of the people was also in the object of the Ark, and not on Yahweh.
6 When the Philistines heard the noise of the shout, they said, "What does the noise of this great shout in the camp of the Hebrews mean?" Then they understood that the ark of the Lord had come into the camp. The camps were not that close, although they were both located on the southern edge of the flat plain of Sharon. Still, this must have been a considerably and impressively loud noise. Hebrews was used as a derogatory term. It doesn't say how they learned this meant the Ark had arrived. But it is likely that their scouts and lookouts heard what was being shouted.
7 The Philistines were afraid, for they said, "God has come into the camp." And they said, "Woe to us! For nothing like this has happened before. It is notable that the word for God, Elohim, is plural, but the verb come, ba, is singular. Of course, there are some who argue for the royal "we" in such instances. However, I cannot find any instance of a royal we being used before 1101 A.D., and this was in England on documents between the crown and foreign powers. So this is not likely. Much more likely is this points to the trinity.
The word for woe is oy in Hebrew, which is still used today as an exclamation of woe, dismay and grief in both Hebrew and Yiddish.
8 "Woe to us! Who shall deliver us from the hand of these mighty gods? These are the gods who smote the Egyptians with all kinds of plagues in the wilderness. The Philistines were polytheistic. So hearing God referred to as plural to them meant multiple Gods of Israel. The Israelites understood God was one God, despite the plural case ending. Remember that the word of how God had dealt with the Egyptians, Amorites and others had preceded the Israelites before they even reached Canaan hundreds of years ago. At that time Rahab hid the Israelite spies in Jericho because she knew what the God of Israel had done to those who opposed them.
Historical records show the Philistines visited Egypt before this time, and they may have learned from them that the God of Israel is not to be messed with.
9 "Take courage and be men, O Philistines, or you will become slaves to the Hebrews, as they have been slaves to you; therefore, be men and fight." The charge by the Philistine leaders to their soldiers of be brave and be men years later was Kind David's charge to his son Solomon. This view of conquer and make slaves or be conquered and become slaves was the view of most of humanity throughout most of human history. It is informative that these conflicts were less about land than the conquering and enslavement of people. But that has been the norm for most of history. The reign of King Solomon was the sole exception for Israel. And examples outside Israel are just as rare and remarkable. The peace brought by the English Empire and later by American dominance is a tiny blip on the timeline of humanity.
10 So the Philistines fought and Israel was defeated, and every man fled to his tent; and the slaughter was very great, for there fell of Israel thirty thousand foot soldiers. The Philistines had chariots, while Israel didn't have a significant chariot force until King Solomon. So even if they were evenly matched in numbers, the Philistines had a significant military advantage. If God had intervened this would have meant nothing. But the Israelites were operating as if God was theirs to command. So God left them to the defeat they had engineered for themselves.
The phrase "fled to his tent" is a euphemism for complete abandonment of any semblance of military order. In the first encounter the Israelites held it together and only lost 4,000 in their defeat. This time their arrogance and presumption led them to a complete rout and the loss of 30,000. Chariots are particularly effective in cutting down fleeing troops on an open plain.
11 And the ark of God was taken; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, died. The Ark is taken and the escorting priests, Eli's sons, are killed. Both of those were unthinkable to the Israelites. It is possible that the Philistines continued in their pursuit all the way to Shiloh and destroyed it. It is also possible this didn't happen for some time. Scripture is clear that Shiloh was destroyed at some point as the Ark was not returned there, and the Prophet Jeremiah prophesied that Jerusalem would be destroyed like Shiloh because of the wickedness of the Israelites. And Psalm 78 documents the end of Shiloh as the place of the temple because of it's destruction by enemies.
How Eli's sons, Hophni and Phinehas die is not detailed. It seems unlikely that they died protecting the Ark considering their selfish and self-centered lives. But it is possible. However, it is a common tactic to kill all adversaries in the area when trying to capture a prize. It is probable that Eli's son's thought the Ark would protect them, like a person carrying a lucky rabbit's foot. (A very strange superstition as it obviously wasn't lucky for the rabbit.)
12 Now a man of Benjamin ran from the battle line and came to Shiloh the same day with his clothes torn and dust on his head. The man was from the tribe of Benjamin, whose assigned land was south of Shiloh. The coastal areas occupied by the Philistines were originally assigned to the tribes of Judah, Dan, Ephraim and the western half-tribe of Manasseh.
Shiloh was a significant distance from Ebenezer. So the man was likely running for a long time, as a man running for his life. The word translated as dust, adamah, is literally earth as in dirt, not the planet. In scripture, the word dust usually refers to dirt, as in what a person gets coated in from traveling or farming, not the dust we think of in house cleaning. While it isn't significant, it is interesting that the root is the same as the name Adam who was made from earth.
13 When he came, behold, Eli was sitting on his seat by the road eagerly watching, because his heart was trembling for the ark of God. So the man came to tell it in the city, and all the city cried out. Eli's normal place to wait and watch was at the side of the temple door. That he was by the road here is significant. Eli's location and fear could mean the taking of the Ark was without his permission. On the other hand, it could be he gave it and was now thinking he had made a mistake. Or it could simply be because the Ark was out of his care and in a combat area. Whatever the reason, he did not have faith that all would be well, which means at least by this point he did not have the attitude of the tribal elders.
That the man came to the city before the temple indicates that the tent of meeting was on the other side of the city, on the road that led to the River Jordan.
14 When Eli heard the noise of the outcry, he said, "What does the noise of this commotion mean?" Then the man came hurriedly and told Eli. The man didn't come because he heard Eli's question. (The city was not right up against the tent of meeting.) It is that he just came at the right moment to answer the question by luck of timing. He was hurrying to give the news to the temple.
It may be that this warning was meant to alert the judge of Israel so he would have the priests and acolytes pack up the tent of meeting to evacuate it south.
15 Now Eli was ninety-eight years old, and his eyes were set so that he could not see. These facts are not significant to the text, but are likely a literary device to pause the story for a moment and give it color.
16 The man said to Eli, "I am the one who came from the battle line. Indeed, I escaped from the battle line today." And he said, "How did things go, my son?" The end of verse 14 states the man told Eli, followed by the pause of verse 15. So the man and Eli are reset in the beginning of this verse. The man's exhaustive introduction of himself is illustrative of an interaction with someone who is blind. Or it could be that the messenger was traumatized by what had happened as this sort of repetition is typical in a case like that.
17 Then the one who brought the news replied, "Israel has fled before the Philistines and there has also been a great slaughter among the people, and your two sons also, Hophni and Phinehas, are dead, and the ark of God has been taken." Four things are presented as individual calamities: Israel was routed, a large number were slaughtered, Eli's sons are dead, and the Ark was taken.
18 When he mentioned the ark of God, Eli fell off the seat backward beside the gate, and his neck was broken and he died, for he was old and heavy. Thus he judged Israel forty years. It is significant that it was not at the news of the loss of his sons, but the news of the loss of the Ark when Eli falls backward and dies. Many erroneously conclude from chapter 2 that Eli's sin was that he didn't discipline his sons, and that he held them in higher esteem than God. However, this verse counters that even stronger than the the previous chapters. Eli's sin was that he didn't discipline the priests under him and didn't follow the law of Moses in temple operations. Because they were his sons, Hophni and Phinehas took even more advantage of their father's unwillingness to discipline temple priests and pushed the limits more than any of the others. But the root cause of the problem was Eli refusing to enforce consequences for bad behavior in his subordinates. His passivity resulted in extreme disrespect towards the temple and God, which Eli was ultimately responsible for.
It is only here at Eli's death that it is even mentioned that he was the judge of Israel, which was a political office even more than a religious one. It seems likely that this was a deliberate choice by the author to indicate he was not a good one. The same can be said for Eli not being introduced as the chief priest in chapter 1, or even as a priest in verse 1:3. However, the appointment of judges was supposed to be by God. We aren't told if this was the case for Eli. Regardless, he was left in place for 40 years despite his failings. This is something we should keep in mind when Christian leaders in our own churches are less than perfect.
19 Now his daughter-in-law, Phinehas's wife, was pregnant and about to give birth; and when she heard the news that the ark of God was taken and that her father-in-law and her husband had died, she kneeled down and gave birth, for her pains came upon her. This pregnant woman is introduced first as daughter-in-law to Eli, then identified which son she was married to. The relation to Eli was more important to the text. While the judgement came upon Eli and his sons, it was ultimately Eli's failing that brought the result and the judgement and sentence were pronounced on him. (Of course, his sons could have chosen to follow God on their own and lived righteously despite their father.)
This is the first mention of a wife, although it would be almost unheard of in Jewish society of the time to not be married. This implies that he was also cheating on his wife when he was fornicating with the women serving at the entrance of the tent of meeting in 2:22.
Crouching was the normal method of giving birth in Israel at this time. It appears that her going into labor was premature and due to the shock of the news.
20 And about the time of her death the women who stood by her said to her, "Do not be afraid, for you have given birth to a son." But she did not answer or pay attention. Sons were the primary source of support in old age. If only daughters were born, then one would be dependent on the care of a son-in-law. The words of the women were meant to comfort, meaning even though your husband is dead you have a son to take care of you and continue the line. While it could be that this was her first son to be born, or even her first baby, it is not necessarily the case. More sons meant more security, and also more status in society.
Scripture doesn't say why she didn't reply to the women. But as she was able to speak in the next verse it is likely this was due to her despair. Her death in childbirth is not necessarily due to the childbirth itself.
21 And she called the boy Ichabod, saying, "The glory has departed from Israel," because the ark of God was taken and because of her father-in-law and her husband. Ichabod, Ikavod in Hebrew, literally means "where is glory?"
22 She said, "The glory has departed from Israel, for the ark of God was taken." It is interesting that her focus was more on the lost of the Ark than the lost of her father-in-law or husband. The reason isn't given. But there are many reasons why this would be so.

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB © The Lockman Foundation.

If you have a question, you can find the email address to write to on the FAQ Page under the Questions FAQ.

1 Sam. 3   -   1 Samuel   -   1 Sam. 5

Bible Study Page   -   Michael's Abbey