A. The Rise of Samuel (Chs. 1-3)
The book of Judges sets the stage for 1-2Sa generally and the first chapters particularly. Judges is structured on the pattern: Israel sins, God sells them into the hand of an enemy, the people “cry out” (z'q), the deity raises up a deliverer, the latter defeats the enemy, and the land has rest (Jdg 2:10-19; 3:7-16:31). Thus the book asks whether Israel is doomed to this cycle of disobedience, punishment, and delivery, and also whether its leaders are becoming increasingly immoral, as stories featuring Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson suggest (Jdg 8:22-27 [cf. 8:28-9:57]; 10:6-12:7; 13-16).
Jdg also contains episodes in which Israelites severely mistreat other Israelites, underscoring the disunity of God’s people (Jdg 17-21). A stock phrase intimates that such wickedness was because Israel had no king (Jdg 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). This section asks whether a king might reverse this sad state of affairs.
At first the new episode with which 1Sa begins (1:1; see Jdg 13:2; 17:1; 19:1) seems to bypass such concerns (Eslinger, 65). It simply introduces Elkanah, who had two wives: Hannah and Peninnah. Though it seems innocuous, the potential for conflict is insinuated when the narrator reverses the names to emphasize that only Peninnah had children (1:2; cf. Ge 16:1-16; 29:31-30:22).
Trouble soon surfaces (1:3-8). During a yearly sacrifice at Shiloh, Elkanah gave his wives unequal sacrificial portions as a present. Peninnah and her children received a portion each, while Hannah received either a double (NIV) portion or a single one with great ceremony (Walters, 388, 390). Regardless, Hannah clearly was singled out for being childless. Peninnah’s cruelty added to Hannah’s misery.
Hannah suffered silently for years, not even responding to her husband’s ministrations (1:7-8). Eventually she vowed to dedicate any son whom God would grant her to lifelong religious service (vv.9-11; cf. Jdg 13:2-5). Still, the only concession she made to actual speech was moving her lips, something that Eli the priest took as a sign of inebriation. When the priest rebuked her, Hannah finally spoke in self-defense. Though he had initially misunderstood, as perhaps Elkanah had (v.8), Eli finally blessed her (vv.12-17). Having spoken at last, Hannah’s mood changed and she ate (v.18). The scene ends with worship, after which the party returned home where the Lord answered her prayer, a fact Hannah acknowledged in the naming of the child (vv.19-20; Walters, 405-6).
Does Samuel’s birth address the issues raised by Jdg? Will he become a new, righteous judge or a king who keeps the people from doing as they see fit? The narrative tantalizes at this point. We still do not know what role Samuel will play, though his birth is the result of God’s remembering his mother (v.19).
We are further tantalized when Hannah appears to renege on her promise by refusing to accompany Elkanah on the next trip to Shiloh. But it turns out that she wanted only to wait till the child was weaned. Her husband accepted her decision, but intriguingly added, “Only may the Lord make good his word” (v.23). But what word was that? We are not told. In any event, after weaning, the child is presented to Eli (vv.24-28).
Hannah moved from pained silence to inward prayer to bitter expression. She concluded with a doxology (2:1-10) in which she extolled God as a sovereign deity who reverses the fortunes of the powerless and poor, defeats the arrogant and mighty, and disposes of enemies. Moreover, the Lord’s strength will prevail, the Lord’s enemies will be shattered, and the Lord’s anointed will be empowered.
But what did Hannah have in mind? Who were her enemies: Peninnah, Eli, Elkanah? How is the military imagery to be understood? And what do the references to “king” and “anointed” (=“messiah”) portend (v.10)? Has Hannah somehow said more than she knew? Do her remarks intimate that Samuel will be the new king?
Instead of answering such questions, the narrative returns to Hophni and Phineas, who were introduced earlier (1:3). Now we learn that they are wicked and have no regard for the Lord. They have been seizing sacrificial portions that belong to God (2:13-16). These sinful priests and God’s reaction to them (v.17) are sharply contrasted to Samuel, whose service and that of his parents evoke a priestly blessing for more children, the fulfillment of which in addition brings to mind one of the inversions of Hannah’s doxology (2:5, 18-21).
As Samuel’s position before God and people improved (2:26), the status of Hophni and Phineas deteriorated, for they were lecherous as well as greedy (v.22). Eli attempted to restrain them, but to no avail, for they were now under a divine death sentence (v.25). Eli’s failure put him under judgment, too, according to a man of God (=prophet; vv.27-29). His priestly house, therefore, would not last as designed but would be replaced by another. As for Hophni and Phineas, they would die on the same day (vv.30-33). The new priestly line was to serve the Lord’s anointed, with those left from the old line reduced to begging (vv.35-36). Another reference to God’s anointed (v.35, mšḥ) by the “man of God” seems to confirm Hannah’s “prophecy” (v.10, mšḥ), even if she did say more than she realized.
Ironically, the appearance of a man of God (2:27-36) did not alter the fact that prophetic vision was rare in those days (3:1). But this was about to change.
As Samuel was previously contrasted to Eli’s corrupt sons (2:12-26), so now he is contrasted to the old priest himself. Eli’s inability to perceive that the voice which Samuel heard was God’s indicates that his failing eyesight was a spiritual as well as a physical condition (3:2, 5-6). Had this dual malady also been responsible for his surmise that Hannah was drunk (1:14)? Not until the third summons did the priest realize that Yahweh was speaking (3:8-9). At least then he managed to tell Samuel what to do (v.9).
When God called again and Samuel responded, he received a vision (ḥzn; cf. 3:1) that confirmed the previous judgment against Eli (2:27-36; 3:11-14). The priest insisted that the reluctant Samuel hold nothing back (vv.15-18). The condemnation notwithstanding, Eli was resigned to God’s will (vv.17-18; cf. 1:17; 2:20, 22-25; 3:8-9).
Ch. 3 began by noting that there was more darkness than light in Israel, symbolized by the infrequency of vision (ḥzn) and Eli’s weak eyes. The only light available was provided by the lamp of God, which was not yet extinguished (v.3). By the end of the account, God made Samuel’s word efficacious, all Israel recognized the new prophetic ministry, and God’s revelation became regular (vv.19-21). For now at least, prophetic light has overcome priestly darkness.
Finally, a phrase in the vision (3:12) reminds us that Elkanah’s cryptic remark (1:23) to Hannah was pregnant with meaning: “May the Lord make good [yāqēm] his word [deb̠ārô].” This corresponds to God’s statement: “I will carry out ['āqîm] against Eli everything I spoke [dibbartî].” The idea of God’s “confirming”/“making good”/“carrying out a word” occurs in contexts having to do with divine fulfillment of prophetic speech (Walters, 410-12). In this instance, whether Elkanah knew it or not, the word that God would confirm was the judgment against the house of Eli particularly (3:12) and the establishment of a prophetic ministry in Israel through Samuel generally.