Chapter 3

1 How the word of the Lord was first revealed to Samuel. 11 God telleth Samuel the destruction of Eli’s house. 15 Samuel, though loth, telleth Eli the vision. 19 Samuel groweth in credit.

1. There was no open vision. The word translated “open” is from the verb paras, which means “to break forth,” or “to burst forth.” The expression therefore reads literally, “there was no vision being broken forth,” or “there was no vision bursting forth.” The preceding statement, to the effect that the word of the Lord was “precious” or “rare,” is descriptive of the contemporary situation—inspired messages seldom came to God’s people. Now, more specifically, the narrator explains why this situation existed—God did not appear to men in vision as often as in other times. Emphasis is not so much on the manner of revelation as on its frequency.

This is the first use in Scripture of the word chazon, “vision,” and the only instance of its use in the two books of Samuel. A comparison of chazon with marХah, also translated “vision,” clarifies God’s method of revealing His plans for the salvation of mankind. The word chazon is from a verb meaning “to perceive with inner vision,” whereas marХah is derived from a verb meaning “to see visually.” Both are used interchangeably with chalom, “dream.” The word marХah is commonly used in the earlier books of the Bible to describe messages from God to men, either in dreams or by the personal visit of heavenly messengers. As Jacob started on his journey to Egypt (Gen. 46:2), God spoke to him “in the visions [marХah] of the night.” Jacob felt himself in the divine presence, and the revelation was as real as that received by Abraham when the three angels visited him before the destruction of Sodom (Gen. 18:2–22). This same kind of divine revelation is also called a dream, chalom, as when God warned Abimelech regarding Abraham’s wife (Gen. 20:3–13). At the time of the sedition of Aaron and Miriam, God said, “If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision [marХah], and will speak unto him in a dream [chalom].”

Daniel makes frequent use of all three words. When he relates the vision of the four beasts he uses chazon (Dan. 7:1, 2, 7, 13, 15) to describe the dream, chalom (ch. 7:1), in which future events were pictured symbolically. He uses the same word, chazon, in ch. 8:1 also. But when Daniel is troubled as to the meaning of the vision, he goes down by the riverside, where the angel Gabriel, who appears to him, is told to “make this man to understand the vision [marХah].” But Gabriel, after strengthening the prophet, says, “Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision [chazon]” (Dan. 8:16, 17).

The impression made upon Samuel by his heavenly visitant was so real that he referred to it in 1 Sam. 3:15 as a marХah. Therefore the statement in v. 1 does not imply that the Lord was unwilling to guide His people. The thought is stressed, however, that the spiritual and intellectual perceptions of Israel had now reached low ebb.

3. Ere the lamp. The seven-branched golden candlestick, placed on the south side of the holy place, was never to go out (see on Ex. 27:20, 21). The cups were filled with the best olive oil, symbolic of the Holy Spirit, and the high priest adjusted the lamps morning and evening at the time of placing incense on the altar before the veil that separated the holy from the most holy place (see on Ex. 30:7, 8). As the glow of these lamps illuminated the darkness of the night, so Christ is the light that illumines this dark world, ever shedding forth the glory of His love and sacrifice into the darkness of men’s hearts (see John 1:4, 5, 9).

As the candlestick illuminated the sanctuary of old, so the Holy Spirit provides spiritual illumination, by which men may have a clearer perception of the plan of salvation. But without the inner light to illumine the soul, the literal light could have but little value. The letter of the sanctuary ritual meant nothing if the spirit was not there (see Isa. 1:11, 13, 15, 16). Although both leaders and people were following the ways of the idolatrous nations about them, there were, here and there, humble souls such as Elkanah and his household who preserved the spiritual vision so greatly needed.

8. The Lord had called. When Samuel came to Eli the third time the aged priest perceived that it was God who spoke. That the Lord should pass him by to communicate with a mere youth might easily have created in his heart a spirit of professional jealousy. Remembering the message of the man of God in past years, however, Eli may have concluded that the message was for him and could have reasoned that the Lord should have revealed it to him directly. Eli’s honesty in dealing with Samuel under these conditions is greatly to be admired. Realizing, perhaps for the first time, that God was preparing another to fill his office, he felt no grudge, but on the contrary did his utmost to prepare Samuel for his important post by giving the lad the best counsel he had. Samuel was instructed to think of himself as the Lord’s servant, ready to hear His counsel and to do His bidding. What a lesson in Eli’s experience for those who are fearful lest they do not receive the honor their office demands, and lest the hands of other men replace theirs at the tasks required of that office

10. The Lord came. Since it was a new experience for young Samuel, the Lord graciously manifested His presence in some definite way not described in detail. Ere a word was spoken, both the old priest and his young assistant had ample proof of the presence of a supernatural power, and like children instructed by their parents, both were brought by the Holy Spirit to the place where they were willing to listen and obey. Such would not have been true had the word of the Lord come to such as Hophni For example, how different was the reception accorded the rebuke of God as it came to Saul on the one hand, and to David on the other Saul was full of criticism, alibis, and self-justification (ch. 15:16–31), but David, because of many years of surrender to the Lord, offered no alibi for his sin and sought only for a clean heart and a right spirit (2 Sam. 12:1–14; cf. Ps. 51:10; 103:12).

The question may well be asked: Why did the Lord not speak to Eli directly? Eli seems to have been a sincere, humble man, one who desired peace and righteousness above all else. Why, therefore, bring Samuel into the case? But God no longer communicated with Eli and his sons (PP 581).

11. I will do. Samuel lived for years in an evil environment, and could not help seeing the difference between the instructions given in the scrolls of the law and the lives of the young priests who had been his intimate associates. Had he made inquiry of them, he would have received only angry rebuffs. His parents were not present to advise him, and he was hesitant to approach Eli himself. As he turned the matter over in his heart, the same question would come to him that comes to the mind of a godly youth today: If the Word of God lays down certain principles for the conduct of His work, and the leaders not only fail to follow these instructions, but are guilty of gross misconduct, why does He allow them to continue ministering in holy office?

Seed sowing is not followed immediately by the harvest, because time is needed for the fruit to reach maturity. The process of character development requires time—probationary time. Thus it was with Hophni and Phinehas; thus it is today. Eventually God brings to nought all who defy His statutes (Ps. 119:118). As Christ permitted Judas to occupy a position where he would have the opportunity to succeed, so He allowed Hophni and his brother to be placed in a position where they could, by relying on Him, become acceptable ministers of the covenant. But like Judas, the sons of Eli would not surrender to His guidance. By allowing self to reign supreme, they made it impossible for God to impart to them the necessary training. God knew what would happen should they continue in their perverse course, and in love and long-suffering warned them what the result would be. Yet, like Judas, they chose their own way, only to realize ultimately the truth expressed by Paul centuries later, “He that soweth to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption” (Gal. 6:8). In his own experience, Samuel verified Paul’s admonition, “Let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not” (Gal. 6:9).

15. Samuel feared. In this world of sin it is never easy to be the mouthpiece of the Lord. Elijah took his life in his hands as he warned Ahab of the impending famine; but he was fearless in his obedience, and God made Himself responsible for the results. Samuel was a mere youth! And he had to learn in his youth not to be afraid of men’s faces, even as Jesus feared not to face the leaders of His time, while He was, as yet, a child of only 12 summers!

19. The Lord was with him. Eli’s sun was about to set, but that of Samuel was already rising. Christ suffered the pangs of separation from the Father (see DA 685, 686, 753, 756), but God has never yet led His people through the total darkness of separation from Him. To Christ on the cross it appeared that He trod the winepress alone, yet His Father was there suffering with Him. To Samuel it might have seemed, after years of observing sin all about him, either that God winked at sin or that His plan for man had changed. But Samuel was unaware of how long God had waited for a young man to whom He could truly impart His Spirit, and commit the leadership of His work on earth.

When Saul, for example, failed, he was not immediately replaced. For a number of years he still had the opportunity of changing his mind and surrendering to the guidance of a loving Father. But bigotry and criticism soon gave way to rebellion against divine leadership, while pride and self-justification robbed him of spiritual virtue. During the years of Saul’s testing, however, David was invited to sit at the feet of the King of kings, preparatory to taking over the responsibilities of the leadership of Israel.

None of his words. Samuel naturally had much to learn, but as a youth he was trained in the school of obedience to God’s call. What a joy it must have been to the Lord to find a lad eager for the privilege of learning the ways of God and determined to obey Him whatever the cost Little wonder he was accepted by the people as a prophet when hardly more than a child!

Ellen G. White comments

1–21PP 581–583

1–43T 472

1–6PP 581

7     PP 582

8–14PP 581

9     SL 12

11   TM 410

11–14SR 185

13, 14  1T 119, 217; 2T 624

14   1T 190

15–18PP 582

18   SR 185; 1T 119; 4T 200

19   CT 143

19, 20  PP 590