Author: Charlie Garrett

Matthew 12:6

Charlie Garrett Daily Writing, Matthew (Written)

Thursday, 24 July 2025

Yet I say to you that in this place there is One greater than the temple. Matthew 12:6

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And I say to you that the temple – greater, it is here” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus provided the Pharisees with an example from the law concerning the priests profaning the Sabbath. Despite this, they were considered blameless. Now, based on His two examples of David and the priests, He says, “And I say to you that the temple – greater, it is here.

The adjective is neuter. Because of this, it is debated if Christ is speaking of His body as being greater than the temple in Jerusalem or the labors of His disciples as being more important than the labors of the priests at the temple. He referred to His body as a temple in John 2 –

“So the Jews answered and said to Him, ‘What sign do You show to us, since You do these things?’
19 Jesus answered and said to them, ‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’
20 Then the Jews said, ‘It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?’
21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body. 22 Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said.” John 2:18-22

The same neuter adjective is used in verses 41 & 42 in comparison to Jonah (based on his proclamation) and Solomon (based on his wisdom).

As for the truth Jesus conveys, in His first example to the Pharisees, David’s needs were greater than the rules for the temple. In the second example, the requirement to serve the Lord on the Sabbath was greater than the mandate to observe the Sabbath.

Jesus, claiming that His body is greater than the temple, thus allows the disciples to serve Him on the Sabbath. Further, in serving Him, their needs, like the priests at the temple, also need to be met.

Therefore, if His claim is true, then there has been no infraction. The precedent for the lesser has already been set in Scripture itself. Therefore, the allowance for the greater must be granted.

Life application: In the case of the temple, the superiority of Jesus’ body then determines the superiority of the disciples’ rights. In the case of Jonah, the superiority of who Jesus is determines that His proclamation is greater. In the case of Solomon, the superiority of Jesus’ person determines that His wisdom is greater.

The greatness of Jesus means that what He does and says is greater than each of those things done or said by those He is contrasted with. The temple is the place for serving the Lord. Jonah’s proclamation is a transmission of the word of the Lord. Solomon’s wisdom was bestowed by the Lord (1 Kings 3:12).

Claiming to be greater than these things is thus an implicit claim to being the Lord. This is an undeniable point. There is no intermediate point between the Lord and any of these things. Therefore, it must be that Jesus is proclaiming He is the Lord from whom those things issue.

There are sects and cults that deny that Jesus is God. A proper evaluation of what Jesus claims and what is stated about Him, however, demonstrates that this view is not in accord with Scripture. In fact, Jesus’ words concerning Himself would be the epitome of blasphemy if He were not the Lord.

Even if we don’t fully grasp the deity of Jesus, we should accept that it is what the Bible proclaims. Be on the lookout for those who deny it. Jesus’ dual nature is the key point upon which Scripture rests. God Himself united with human flesh. If this is not the case, there is no hope for humanity. Trust this fundamental point, believing that it is so.

O God, help us in our times of weakness or misunderstanding concerning the doctrines set forth in Scripture. May we be careful to accept them, even if we do not fully understand them. In time and through study, we can solidify our thinking in them. Until that happens, help us to trust, by faith, the things the Bible clearly proclaims. Amen.

 

Matthew 12:5

Charlie Garrett Daily Writing, Matthew (Written)

Wednesday, 23 July 2025

Or have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? Matthew 12:5

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“Or not you read in the law that, the Sabbaths, the priests in the temple the Sabbath profane, and they are guiltless?” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus referred to the showbread being given to David though it was intended only for the priests. He now continues with the same general idea as He refutes the claims of the Pharisees, saying, “Or not you read.”

This contains a new word, anaginóskó, to read. It signifies “to know again.” In other words, when one reads, he is reminded of something that he may have forgotten. Thus, in reading, one refreshes his mind concerning what is written down.

In this case, it is something read, “in the law.” The Pharisees claimed Jesus did something unlawful in regard to eating on the Sabbath. He first addressed David’s need to eat and how it had a priority that even transcended the intent of the law concerning the showbread.

He now returns to the law to specifically address the Pharisees’ main issue with what the disciples (and thus by extension, He as well) were doing. In order to make His case complete, He continues, saying, “that, the Sabbaths.”

The plural is used to refer to the repetitive nature of the appointment, coming each week on the seventh day. On any and all Sabbaths, this point will hold true. His point is that “the priests in the temple the Sabbath profane.”

The profaning of the Sabbath by the priests is found on several occasions in the law. For example, sacrifices were to be presented every day of the week, one of several examples says –

“And on the Sabbath day two lambs in their first year, without blemish, and two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour as a grain offering, mixed with oil, with its drink offering— 10 this is the burnt offering for every Sabbath, besides the regular burnt offering with its drink offering.” Numbers 28:9, 10

The consecration of Aaron and his sons was held over at least one Sabbath as well –

“Thus you shall do to Aaron and his sons, according to all that I have commanded you. Seven days you shall consecrate them.” Exodus 29:35

Despite these things, Jesus says, “and they are guiltless?”

This is a second new word, anaitios. It is derived from the negative particle a (not) and aitios, an adjective signifying “causative.” As such, it signifies one who is not causing guilt. What can be inferred is that if a priest were not on duty, he would be required to observe the Sabbath, but if he was on duty, he would not be so required.

Further, if called to duty on the Sabbath, they would be held guiltless. This is seen in the record of the ill-fated end of the wicked queen Athaliah –

“‘This is what you shall do: One-third of you entering on the Sabbath, of the priests and the Levites, shall be keeping watch over the doors; 5 one-third shall be at the king’s house; and one-third at the Gate of the Foundation. All the people shall be in the courts of the house of the Lord. 6 But let no one come into the house of the Lord except the priests and those of the Levites who serve. They may go in, for they are holy; but all the people shall keep the watch of the Lord. 7 And the Levites shall surround the king on all sides, every man with his weapons in his hand; and whoever comes into the house, let him be put to death. You are to be with the king when he comes in and when he goes out.’
8 So the Levites and all Judah did according to all that Jehoiada the priest commanded. And each man took his men who were to be on duty on the Sabbath, with those who were going off duty on the Sabbath; for Jehoiada the priest had not dismissed the divisions.” 2 Chronicles 23:4-8

The law says, “Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death” (Exodus 31:15). Despite this, profaning of the Sabbath by the priests in the course of their duties does not apply. As this is true, like the account with David and the bread, there is a greater standard that takes precedence over mandates of the law.

Life application: The word anaginóskó signifies “to know again.” Why do you suppose the Greek language uses such a word to describe the process of reading? The main reason is obvious. When we see, hear, or experience something, even when reading about it, we will eventually have the matter fade from our minds.

It may be that what we read will get confused with other things we have read, thus incorrect cross connections will result. Considering that the Bible is comprised of sixty-six books that are formed out of one thousand one hundred and eighty-nine chapters, it is a given that we will not be able to remember everything we have read.

But even if one is a savant who could somehow remember everything he read, there is no way he could make all of the necessary connections within the book that exist when attempting to understand how things fit together.

With our fading memories and with our inability to make all the connections we should on the first, fifth, tenth, or fiftieth time through, it becomes obvious why we need to constantly read the Bible. If we want to more fully understand what God is telling us and why, we must read and reread His word.

And because almost nobody is a savant who can remember everything he has ever read, it is a given that our memories will quickly fade concerning the content of the word. By the time we reach Revelation, we have jumbled up or forgotten the vast majority of what the previous sixty-five books have said.

If you want to have a right knowledge and clear remembrance of the word, you must continue to read it, all the days of your life. Please do this.

O God, help us to be responsible as we read Your word, reminding ourselves daily of what it records as we pick it up and read it. If we don’t do this, the memory of its contents will fade, and our close connection to You will also begin to fade. May this never be so! May our hearts be constantly geared towards You as we enter into the pages of Your precious word. Amen.

 

Matthew 12:4

Charlie Garrett Daily Writing, Matthew (Written)

Tuesday, 22 July 2025

how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? Matthew 12:4

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“How he entered into the house of God and the bread ‘the before-setting’ they ate, which not it is being permitted him to eat, nor those with him, if not the priests only?” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus questioned the Pharisees as to whether they remembered what Scripture said in regard to David. He continues with that now with the words, “How he entered into the house of God.”

This account was cited in the previous verse commentary. The tabernacle was located at Nob, where Ahimelek the priest was. David went into an area designated for the priests only. Also, the words of Jesus continue with, “and the bread ‘the before-setting’ they ate.”

The word prothesis, before-setting, is introduced. It is used at this time when referring to the consecrated bread set before the Lord in the tabernacle (and later the temple). However, the word is not limited to this. It is a word that can speak of a set purpose, such as that used in Romans 8:28 –

“And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose [prothesis].”

In Matthew, the “before-setting” refers to the showbread set before the Lord. The Hebrew literally reads “bread, faces,” which signifies the bread of the Presence first mentioned in Exodus 25:30. Of this bread, Jesus continues with, “which not it is being permitted him to eat.”

This is stated explicitly in Leviticus 24 –

“Take the finest flour and bake twelve loaves of bread, using two-tenths of an ephah for each loaf. 6 Arrange them in two stacks, six in each stack, on the table of pure gold before the Lord. 7 By each stack put some pure incense as a memorial portion to represent the bread and to be a food offering presented to the Lord. 8 This bread is to be set out before the Lord regularly, Sabbath after Sabbath, on behalf of the Israelites, as a lasting covenant. 9 It belongs to Aaron and his sons, who are to eat it in the sanctuary area, because it is a most holy part of their perpetual share of the food offerings presented to the Lord.” Leviticus 24:5-9

The law says that the bread belonged to Aaron and his sons. It further defines where it could be eaten. There is no legal provision to allow the priest to give this bread to David, “nor those with him, if not the priests only?”

Understanding this, the Pharisees, who had used a precept from the law, had an account from Israel’s history presented to them which refers to violations of the law. And yet, the Bible remains silent on the event other than noting that it occurred.

In other words, there is a positive command in the ceremonial laws for the priests to eat the bread in the sanctuary, just as there is a positive command concerning the Pharisees’ accusation concerning the Sabbath. Despite these, there is an underlying allowance on display in the account of David when the needs of man must be met.

To condemn Jesus means that these men would have to, in turn, condemn David, the hero of God and a man after the Lord’s own heart. But how could they? The word concerning David contained no word of condemnation.

The two accounts, that of what David and his men did, and the example of Jesus with his disciples, are on a one-to-one footing. The Pharisees, therefore, no longer have a valid accusation to raise against Jesus.

Life application: There are times when things in our stream of existence will come into conflict with what is written. An example may be the establishment of a church in an area previously unevangelized. Suppose there are two people in the area who could be chosen to lead the church.

The first is a lady who heard the good news while away. She not only heard the gospel, but she also was there long enough to obtain sound biblical doctrine. She then returned to tell the people in her village about Jesus.

The second is a man who just learns about Jesus but who is willing to lead the people in their newly accepted faith. Wouldn’t the woman be a better candidate? Scripture provides thoughts on both –

“Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. 12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.” 1 Timothy 2:11-13

“A bishop then must be … not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.” 1 Timothy 3:2 & 6, 7

Which would be the appropriate person to lead the church? It is a conundrum that must be thought through as both are technically biblically excluded from the role. However, if one must be chosen, the substance behind the matter and the intent behind the precepts need to be considered.

There is a need for the people to have proper leadership. At times, there will be instances, like this example, where decisions must be made that have to consider the spirit and intent of the word, even if there is a conflict with a precept stated in the word.

Glorious God, help us to always carefully consider Your word. May we be cautious to uphold it for what it is and then apply it to our walk before You. You have set forth guidelines for us to consider. May we carefully and cautiously do so at all times. Amen.

 

Matthew 12:3

Charlie Garrett Daily Writing, Matthew (Written)

Monday, 21 July 2025

But He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: Matthew 12:3

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And He said to them, ‘Not you read what he did, David, when he hungered, he and those with him?’” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus’ disciples, and thus implicitly He also, were accused of doing what was not lawful on the Sabbath. In response, Matthew records, “And He said to them, ‘Not you read what he did, David, when he hungered, he and those with him?’”

The Pharisees’ accusation was of doing something in violation of the law that is not even recorded in the law. Only by a huge stretch of the imagination could what His disciples did even be inferred as wrongdoing. Rather than address the nonsensical legalism of the accusation, Jesus turned to Scripture, citing an account from the life of David.

The account is recorded in 1 Samuel –

Now David came to Nob, to Ahimelech the priest. And Ahimelech was afraid when he met David, and said to him, “Why are you alone, and no one is with you?”
2 So David said to Ahimelech the priest, “The king has ordered me on some business, and said to me, ‘Do not let anyone know anything about the business on which I send you, or what I have commanded you.’ And I have directed my young men to such and such a place. 3 Now therefore, what have you on hand? Give me five loaves of bread in my hand, or whatever can be found.”
4 And the priest answered David and said, “There is no common bread on hand; but there is holy bread, if the young men have at least kept themselves from women.”
5 Then David answered the priest, and said to him, “Truly, women have been kept from us about three days since I came out. And the vessels of the young men are holy, and the bread is in effect common, even though it was consecrated in the vessel this day.”
6 So the priest gave him holy bread; for there was no bread there but the showbread which had been taken from before the Lord, in order to put hot bread in its place on the day when it was taken away. 1 Samuel 21:1-6

Jesus has given an example from the historical writings of Israel about a matter that arose. This matter could also be inferred as a violation of the law. This will be further explained in His continued words.

Life application: In a society, there has to be a basis for legal matters. In the US, for example, there is the prime basis for the workings of the government, the Constitution. This sets the basis for what is legal and what is not.

From there, the Constitution authorizes certain bodies to run the government, make laws, regulations, etc. There is a judicial system set forth to interpret the constitutionality of new laws, determine if violations of the law have been made, etc.

Lower governments likewise have the authority to make and enforce laws. The Bible is the governing authority for spiritual matters in the Christian faith. At times, from that springboard, many denominations and churches add books of rules for the governance of the body that they oversee.

These usually start out closely aligned with the Bible, at least someone’s interpretation of it. However, such books of common order, discipline, and governance can be amended. As amendments take place, there is often a deviation from Scripture.

As an example, a church that once would not allow homosexuality in the congregation because it is contrary to the Bible may eventually change its written guidance to allow homosexuals to be members of the congregation. Later, the book is amended again to allow them to be deacons. From there, amendments are made to allow them to be ordained.

When a book of governance deviates from the Bible, the Bible is relegated more and more to a showpiece without any true authority. The best policy is to keep away from such books that can be amended and keep to Scripture alone as the basis for the faith.

Scripture cannot be amended by man. It is also not an organic document where its meaning changes over time. Rather, it is the fixed and unchangeable word of God. Within the Bible, there are dispensations which reflect the way in which God is working with man at various times in human history, but this is not something that changes set doctrine for a given dispensation.

Rather, it is what reveals doctrine for each outcropping of dispensations as God’s word has unfolded in the course of redemptive history. Understanding this, keeping the interpretation of God’s word in the proper context is the appropriate way of interpreting the Bible. Let us be sure to do this.

The word is precious, and it must be treated as such. Hold fast to it and let it be your guide for daily living and a right walk before the Lord at all times.

Glorious God, may our time in Your word be guided by You as You reveal to us what You intend for our lives. Help us to properly consider what it says and how it applies as we progress through it. May You help us to keep from faulty logic and faulty interpretation concerning it. Be with us as we engage with You through this precious word. Amen.

 

1 Samuel 2:12-26 (Seed From the Woman)

Charlie Garrett 1 Samuel (Written), Recent Sermons (Written)

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson

1 Samuel 2:12-26
Seed From the Woman

 

(Typed 28 April 2025) There are a lot of things in God’s word that are beyond me. There have been things in past sermons that I was unable to explain. There are parts of Scripture that I have not yet fully analyzed and which I have no idea about at this time.

Once they are looked over, maybe that will no longer be the case. However, it is certain that every word in the Bible is there for a purpose. God has not given us pointless words, thoughts, and concepts in Scripture.

Even if nobody knows the exact meaning of a word, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t have an exact meaning. It would be silly to cite a conversation containing made-up words. It would be useless to include an article that had no purpose. And since it has a purpose, then God included it for a reason.

Concerning some of the words of verse 2:14, Adam Clarke says, “Kettle – caldron, or pot – We know not what these were, nor of what capacity; nor is it of any consequence.”

It is true that we don’t know exactly what these were or how much they held. However, I can’t think of a more demeaning thing to say about something in God’s word than that it is not of any consequence. Please, never have this attitude.

Text Verse: “For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.” John 1:17

The theme presented in the previous 1 Samuel sermons concerning law versus grace continues in the passage today. God gave the law to Israel, but it was never intended to be anything except a temporary learning tool for Israel and the world at large.

The law promised a Messiah. The prophets under the law continued to reveal more and more about Him and His coming throughout the centuries. Jeremiah said that when He came, He would establish a New Covenant, not a renewed one, not an addition to the old one, and not an amendment to it, either.

What Christ would initiate would be completely different. The author of Hebrews carefully explains this, telling the Hebrew people that in the establishment of a New Covenant, the Old is obsolete, annulled, and set aside.

Paul says the same thing in various ways as well. It’s hard to understand how people who have read and studied the Bible don’t understand this. It is as if the words in front of them have no meaning at all.

Maybe that is why we are given so many typological hints of this truth from the Old Testament. If we aren’t wise enough to tell it from clear written language, maybe we will see it in pictures? Or maybe He is giving these pictures to those who want to be sure they have understood properly.

Either way, He continues to convey to us the marvelous truth that Jesus Christ is who we should be focusing on. It is a poignant lesson to be found in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I Not They Knew Yehovah (verses 12-21)

12 Now the sons of Eli were corrupt;

u-vene eli bene veliyaal – “And sons Eli, sons worthlessness.” As happens often in Scripture, a thought, person, place, etc., is introduced and then set aside. Later, it is reintroduced when it becomes the main focus of the ongoing narrative. Such is the case here. Chapter 1 opened, saying –

“Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim Zophim, of the mountains of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. 2 And he had two wives: the name of one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah. Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children. 3 This man went up from his city yearly to worship and sacrifice to the Lord of hosts in Shiloh. Also the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, the priests of the Lord, were there. 4 And whenever the time came for Elkanah to make an offering, he would give portions to Peninnah his wife and to all her sons and daughters. 5 But to Hannah he would give a double portion, for he loved Hannah, although the Lord had closed her womb. 6 And her rival also provoked her severely, to make her miserable, because the Lord had closed her womb. 7 So it was, year by year, when she went up to the house of the Lord, that she provoked her; therefore she wept and did not eat.” 1 Samuel 1:1-6

The inclusion of Eli seems normal as he is brought into the narrative concerning Hannah’s situation, but noting his sons seemed out of place. Nothing further was said of them. Now, after Hannah’s intercession, however, they become the center of focus, explaining why they were mentioned before.

They are Eli’s sons, but they are sons of worthlessness. Some translations say, “sons of Belial,” as if it is a proper name. That is not the intent here. The name explains their character, not a pagan god they worshiped.

The only way that saying Belial could be correct is if it were taken as personification. If so, it would be translated as sons of Worthlessness. That would then be what Paul is referring to in 2 Corinthians 6 –

“Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? 15 And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? 16 And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God.” 2 Corinthians 6:14-16

As such, he could be making contrasts between the states of people rather than saying that Belial is a false god. Eli means Foster Son. His sons’ state of worthlessness is explained in the next words…

12 (con’t) they did not know the Lord.

lo yadeu eth Yehovah – “Not they knew Yehovah.” It isn’t that they knew a foreign god. Rather, they didn’t know the God they served. Their dealings with Him show no heart for or care about Him.

They could be equated to the pastor, preacher, or priest who stands in the congregation, supposedly telling about the Lord while failing to uphold the word given by the Lord. There is a complete disconnect between the two. This flagrant disregard for the Lord begins to be explained…

13 And the priests’ custom with the people

u-mishpat ha’kohanim eth ha’am – “And verdict, the priests with the people.” The intent is based on the previous verse. In other words, this is speaking of the sons of Eli who are priests. They are sons of worthlessness because of how they acted. Saying that this is their mishpat, meaning their verdict, is setting them in contrast to the mishpat of the Lord.

Everything about the sacrificial system and the priests’ responsibilities was carefully detailed in the law, particularly in Leviticus, but also elsewhere in the books of Moses. There, it repeatedly says, “My judgments,” “the judgment of the Lord,” “His judgments,” etc.

Here, the contrast is made plain. They are disregarding the word of the Lord. It is like being a female preacher or a polygamous pastor. The word does not allow either, but they flagrantly violate the word. They would also be “children of Worthlessness.” This is the idea being presented. In explanation of the statement, it says…

13 (con’t) was that when any man offered a sacrifice,

kal ish zoveakh zevakh – “all man sacrificing sacrifice.” The words are stated this way for at least a few reasons. First, the word “all” is given to highlight the transgression. It wasn’t that they acted corruptly once in a while, but all the time.

Second, these are the sacrifices of the people. Therefore, this is a double transgression, the first part of which is against the people. They have come to sacrifice to the Lord, and yet, their rights under the law are being violated by the priests who were set in place to uphold the law and mediate between them and God.

In defiling the sacrifices, they are essentially defiling the people who came to sacrifice. This unholy process continues to be explained…

13 (con’t) the priest’s servant would come with a three-pronged fleshhook in his hand while the meat was boiling.

Rather: u-va naar ha’kohen kevashel ha’basar v’ha’mazleg shelosh ha’shinayim beyado – “and he came, lad the priest, according to boil the flesh, and the fork – three the tooth – in his hand.” The sacrifice has been made, something the priests would do. Then the blood would be poured out according to the ordinances.

Also, the fat reserved for the Lord was to be burned on the altar. The details are minutely laid out in Leviticus. For example, the ordinances for the peace offering are detailed in Leviticus 3. From there, the law of the peace offering is then detailed in Leviticus 7. There, it explains what part of the animal is given to the Lord, what is given to the priests, and what part belongs to the offeror.

In this case, however, these lads followed their own set of rules. The idea of the lad coming with the flesh hook while the meat is being boiled gives the sense of a selfish, uncaring attitude.

It is as if they are hungry lions, stalking prey rather than priests following a set procedure as provided by the Lord. This is the entire sacrifice, probably before it is divided up between the priests and the people according to law.

The fork has three teeth. This is the number of divine perfection. Teeth have a variety of meanings, but can be summed up as representing the state of a person. As for his actions, the words continue…

14 Then he would thrust it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot; and the priest would take for himself all that the fleshhook brought up.

vehikah vakiyor o vadud o vaqalakhath o vaparur kol asher yaaleh ha’mazleg yiqakh ha’kohen bo – “And he caused to strike in the caldron, or in the pot, or in the kettle, or in the skillet all which he will cause to ascend the fork – he will take, the priest, in him.”

The wording explains each implement, highlighting the greedy nature of the act. Whatever way the food was being prepared, the servant would come forward and grab what he wanted, depriving the offeror of what he was entitled to, even before the priest’s portion was set apart for him.

Two of these implements are introduced here. The first is the dud or pot. It is derived from dod, a word meaning beloved or an uncle. However, that is derived from an unused root signifying to boil. Just think of love boiling up. Thus, this is a pot for boiling.

The second is the qalakhath, kettle. It is only seen again in Micah 3:3. To add emphasis to the transgression, it says…

14 (con’t) So they did in Shiloh to all the Israelites who came there.

kakhah yaasu lekal Yisrael ha’baim sham beshiloh – “Just so, they will do to all Israel, the ‘coming there in Shiloh.’” Referring to what was just said, the words begin with kakhah, just so. This accentuates that what was said is specifically as it was. Saying it was “to all Israel,” reveals the ongoing and all-encompassing nature of the offense.

It wasn’t just the lowly people or those from a particular tribe or some other identifier. Rather, it was done to everyone. All were treated with equal disrespect.

Finally, the words “the ‘coming there’ in Shiloh” leave no doubt that the transgression was against those coming to the Lord for fellowship or restoration at His sanctuary. The sons of Eli were abominable in their treatment of those desiring to worship Yehovah. Shiloh means Tranquility. Continuing…

15 Also, before they burned the fat,

The verb contains a paragoge: gam beterem yaqetirun eth ha’khelev – “Also, in before they will (surely) cause to smoke the fat.” Everything about the wording shows a total disregard for the sanctity and honor of the Lord.

The “also” is given to highlight that it wasn’t just the people who were being ill-treated, while the paragoge (surely) is given to emphatically draw attention to the offense.

The words are referring to the mandate of Leviticus 3 & 7 concerning the fat of the peace offering. Minute detail is given there concerning specific portions of fat on the animal that were to be burnt to the Lord. This detail is summed up with these words –

“…and the priest shall burn them on the altar as food, an offering made by fire for a sweet aroma; all the fat is the Lord’s.
17 This shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings: you shall eat neither fat nor blood.” Leviticus 3:16, 17

These particular fat portions were set aside, each picturing the Person and work of Jesus Christ. To treat these with contempt is to mar the types and pictures of Christ. Even if Eli’s sons didn’t know this, the law was specific. The fat belonged to the Lord, and the people were not to eat it. Despite this, even before burning the fat…

15 (con’t) the priest’s servant would come and say to the man who sacrificed, “Give meat for roasting to the priest,

u-va naar ha’kohen veamar la’ish ha’zoveakh tenah vasar litsloth la’kohen – “and he came, lad the priest, and he said to the man, the sacrificing, ‘You must give it – meat to roast – to the priest.’” Here, a rare word, tsalah, is introduced. It signifies to roast. It will only be seen again in Isaiah 44:16 & 19.

This is at the point when the animal has been sacrificed, but the fat has not been removed. Also, it is assumed that the animal has not yet been divided up between the priest and the offeror according to their portions. And more, it has not yet been cooked. One can imagine them saying, “I will go get some meat so I can have a barbecue tonight.”

15 (con’t) for he will not take boiled meat from you, but raw.”

v’lo yiqakh mimekhah basar mevushal ki im khai – “and not he will take from you flesh being boiled, but with living.” The meaning of living is that they wanted the meat fresh and moist, not after it had been boiled.

If they wanted meat for roasting, they could take it from their own flocks and herds. Instead of this, they greedily took what belonged to the Lord and the people from the sacrificial offerings in an unapproved manner. The people knew this was inappropriate and responded accordingly…

16 And if the man said to him, “They should really burn the fat first;

The words are emphatic, containing another paragoge. One can almost sense the trepidation of the offeror: vayomer elav ha’ish qater yaqetirun kayom ha’khelev – “And he will say unto him, the man, ‘Smoke, they must (surely) cause to smoke, according to the day, the fat.’”

It is a day of sacrifice, not a regular day where an animal is being dined on as a regular meal. Therefore, the sacrifice must be handled according to the law, which demanded that the fat be removed first. This is carefully detailed in Leviticus 7 –

“Speak to the children of Israel, saying: ‘He who offers the sacrifice of his peace offering to the Lord shall bring his offering to the Lord from the sacrifice of his peace offering. 30 His own hands shall bring the offerings made by fire to the Lord. The fat with the breast he shall bring, that the breast may be waved as a wave offering before the Lord. 31 And the priest shall burn the fat on the altar, but the breast shall be Aaron’s and his sons’. 32 Also the right thigh you shall give to the priest as a heave offering from the sacrifices of your peace offerings. 33 He among the sons of Aaron, who offers the blood of the peace offering and the fat, shall have the right thigh for his part. 34 For the breast of the wave offering and the thigh of the heave offering I have taken from the children of Israel, from the sacrifices of their peace offerings, and I have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons from the children of Israel by a statute forever.’” Leviticus 7:29-34

The lad, however, came forward and demanded meat before this process was complete. The offeror doesn’t argue about what meat after that. In fact, he says…

16 (con’t) then you may take as much as your heart desires,”

veqakh lekha kaasher teaveh napshekha – “And you must take to you according to which it will desire, your soul.” After the burning of the fat, the priest was entitled to the breast of the wave offering and the right thigh of the heave offering. The offeror, however, could give him anything he wanted in addition to that, but only after the Lord’s portion had been offered. However…

16 (con’t) he would then answer him, “No, but you must give it now; and if not, I will take it by force.”

veamar lo ki atah titen veim lo laqakhti vekhazeqah – “And he answered to him, ‘For now, you will give! And if not, I took in vehemence.’” The carefully explained process for the sacrifices was ignored, the Lord’s portion of it was denied Him, and the offering of the people was therefore defiled.

Everything about the account shows utter contempt for the mediatorial role Eli’s sons held in their priestly duties toward the Lord and on behalf of the Lord’s people…

17 Therefore the sin of the young men was very great before the Lord,

vatehi khatath ha’nearim gedolah meod eth pene Yehovah – “And it was, sin the lads, whopping – very – faces Yehovah.” Almost all translations have three categories of people listed in the verses thus far. They have Eli, the sons of Eli, and servants separate from the sons in verses 13 and 15. This is incorrect.

The word naar can be a young man (a lad) or it can indicate a servant. In this case, the word naar is used as a descriptor referring to either one of the sons of Eli in verses 13 and 15. The plural, lads, is used here to refer to both of them.

Individually, they were acting irresponsibly before the Lord. Together, their sin was whoppingly great before Him. Because of the confusion in the translation, the next words are widely rendered…

17 (con’t) for men abhorred the offering of the Lord.

The translation is incorrect because it leaves off the definite article: ki niatsu ha’anashim eth minkhath Yehovah – “For they scorned, the men, present Yehovah.” Because of the confusion concerning two categories of people as opposed to three, the NKJV thinks this is saying that the offering of the Lord was abhorred by men in general.

Several versions continue to translate the word naar (lads) as servants, explaining why the NKJV reads as it does, such as, “Therefore, the sin of the servants was exceedingly great before the Lord. For they drew men away from the sacrifice of the Lord” (Catholic Public Domain Version).

Understanding that the lads, meaning the sons of Eli, are those being referred to in all of the verses, clears this up. As such, the words are reflective of Cain’s offering –

“And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the Lord. 4 Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the Lord respected Abel and his offering, 5 but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell.” Genesis 4:3-5

Hebrews 11 says that it was by faith that Abel offered a more excellent sacrifice than Cain. Cain’s lacked faith. This is certainly true with the sons of Eli. They didn’t believe there would be consequences for their actions. Thus, they scorned the Lord by scorning His offerings. On the other hand, a contrast to them is provided…

18 But Samuel ministered before the Lord,

u-shemuel meshareth eth pene Yehovah – “And Samuel, ministering faces Yehovah.” While the sons of Eli did not know Yehovah, making their sin great before Him, Samuel was there ministering to Him. His name means Asked from God. He was…

18 (con’t) even as a child, wearing a linen ephod.

naar khagur ephod bad – “Lad being girded ephod – linen.” It is the white linen priestly garment described in Exodus 28:40-43, which included a girdle for securing it around the waist. Because Samuel was dedicated to the Lord, he was set apart to Him for service in the sanctuary as any priest would be.

19 Moreover his mother used to make him a little robe,

u-meil qaton taaseh lo imo – “And robe, little, she will make to him, his mother.” The priest didn’t always wear priestly garments. Rather, they were only worn when they ministered to the Lord, as implied in Exodus 28:43. At other times, Samuel would have a special little mommy-made robe to wear…

19 (con’t) and bring it to him year by year when she came up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice.

vehaalethah lo miyamim yamimah ba’alothah eth ishah lizboakh eth zevakh ha’yamim – “And she caused to ascend to him, from days days-ward, in her ascent with her husband to sacrifice sacrifice the days.” As there were three annual pilgrim feasts, it may be that she made him up to three garments a year. As fast as little boys grow, this might be the case. This is speculation, but he got at least one a year to bless her firstborn…

20 And Eli would bless Elkanah and his wife,

u-verakh eli eth elqanah veeth ishto – “And he blessed, Eli, Elkanah and his wife.” The words are from the high priest. As such, it is more than a blessing from Eli, but a blessing from the Lord through him. Elkanah means God Has Acquired (meaning Redeemed). This is the last time he is mentioned in the narrative.

20 (con’t) and say, “The Lord give you descendants from this woman for the loan that was given to the Lord.”

veamar yasem Yehovah lekha zera min ha’ishah ha’zoth takhat ha’sheelah asher shaal leYehovah – “and he said, ‘May He give, Yehovah, to you seed from the woman, the this, under the asking which he asked to Yehovah.’” The noun sheelah, a petition, is from the verb shaal, to ask. Both words are used in this verse. Thus, translating it literally would be an asking.

It refers to Samuel. Being preceded by the definite article, he is the asking. Therefore, the meaning of the words is –

May He give, Yehovah, to you seed (one or more children) from the woman, the this (your wife, Hannah), under (meaning after) the asking (Samuel) which he asked (She asked for him in order to give him. The single word conveys both meanings.) to Yehovah.

Eli is making the same play on the name Samuel that prompted the name in the first place. With that blessing upon them, it says…

20 (con’t) Then they would go to their own home.

Rather: vehalekhu limeqomo – “And they walked to his place.” It is the place of Elkanah, God Has Redeemed, that they returned to.

21 And the Lord visited Hannah, so that she conceived and bore three sons and two daughters.

ki phaqad Y’hovah eth khanah vatahar vateled sheloshah vanim u-shetei vanoth – “For visited, Yehovah, Hannah. And she conceived and she bore three sons and two daughters.” Rather than “and,” it says “for.” In other words, the words of Eli were fulfilled according to his utterance. This is the last mention of Hannah in the narrative.

The numbers three and two signify divine perfection and difference. However, being joined in one thought, they also equal five, grace.

21 (con’t) Meanwhile the child Samuel grew before the Lord.

vayigdal hanaar shemuel im Yehovah – “And he grew, the lad Samuel, with Yehovah.” While the other children of Elkanah and Hannah grew up in their house, Samuel grew up before the Lord. With that portion of the narrative complete, it now returns to Eli’s house…

Seed for Grace has been promised to come
Children of God prophesied in advance
I may not be smart, but I not be dumb!
Because of prophecy, this isn’t by chance

God has spoken the word
He has revealed to us what He would do
Seed for Grace is what you have heard
Children of God, and not just a few 

Something the law was incapable of doing
Is found in the coming of grace
If Jesus is who we are pursuing
We shall someday behold God’s glorious face

II. If to Yehovah He Will Sin (verses 22-26)

22 Now Eli was very old;

veeli zaqen meod – “And Eli, he was aged, very.” It seems like an unnecessary addition, but it is intended to 1) give an immediate but inexcusable sense of why he doesn’t restrain his sons, and 2) to provide typological meaning to be considered later.

22 (con’t) and he heard everything his sons did to all Israel,

The words contain a paragogue: veshama eth kal asher yaasun banav lekhal Yisrael – “And he heard all which they (surely) will do, his sons, to all Israel.” This refers to the shameful conduct concerning the sacrifices mentioned in verse 14. But more…

22 (con’t) and how they lay with the women who assembled at the door of the tabernacle of meeting.

Another paragoge is used, stressing their abominable conduct: veeth asher yishkevun eth hanashim hatsveoth petakah ohel moed – “and which they (surely) will lie with the women, the ‘massing door tent appointment.’” The women mentioned here are the same as those referred to in Exodus 38:8 –

“He made the laver of bronze and its base of bronze, from the bronze mirrors of the serving women who assembled at the door of the tabernacle of meeting.”

Nothing more is said of who these women are. They may be volunteers, family of the priests and Levites, servants of those serving at the tabernacle, etc.

Whoever they are, they would amass at the door of the tabernacle. The sons of Eli took advantage of them, thus turning the place of the Lord into a den of fornication…

23 So he said to them, “Why do you do such things? For I hear of your evil dealings from all the people.

Eli strongly objects to their conduct, using his own paragoge to highlight his displeasure: vayomer lahem lamah taasun kadevarim ha’eleh asher anokhi shomea eth divrekhem raim meeth kal ha’am eleh – “And he will say to them, ‘Why you (surely) will do according to the words, the these, which I hearing – your words – evil, from all the people, these?’” In this case, the word davar, word, isn’t referring to something they said. Rather, it signifies their deeds. The people had complained, either in general or directly to Eli, about what was going on.

The meaning is that he was either too old, as already implied, or too incompetent, which seems correct as well, to handle the situation. Instead of taking stronger action, such as calling a tribunal, he gives them an earful in hopes that they would amend their ways…

24 No, my sons! For it is not a good report that I hear.

al banay ki lo tovah ha’shemuah asher anokhi shomea – “Not, my sons! For not good the hearing which I hearing.” A new noun, shemuah, a hearing, is introduced. It is derived from the verb shama, to hear, which is also used in this verse. Eli heard the words spoken by others, and he conveyed to his sons that what he had heard was unacceptable. Because of their actions…

24 (con’t) You make the Lord’s people transgress.

maavirim am Yehovah – “causing to pass over, people Yehovah!” The meaning of the NKJV is correct. This is not speaking of guilt incurred by the sons of Eli. Rather, it is speaking of the imputation of guilt upon the people because of their actions.

The people are “passing over” the Law of Moses, meaning transgressing. The same thought was expressed in Judges 2 –

“Then the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel; and He said, ‘Because this nation has transgressed [avar: pass over] My covenant which I commanded their fathers, and has not heeded My voice.’” Judges 2:20

The actions of the sons caused the people to cross over the covenant, as if they were removed from it because of violating the law. But there is a real problem with this that extends beyond a general transgression by the people…

25 If one man sins against another, God will judge him.

im yekheta ish leish u-philelo elohim – “If he will sin, man to man, and he interceded Him – God.” The word palal is never used of God taking the action. It is always man praying, or interceding, to Him. This would be the only exception out of 84 uses. But it isn’t. Rather, the meaning is that if a man sins against another man, the man can intercede to God for relief.  On the other hand…

25 (con’t) But if a man sins against the Lord, who will intercede for him?”

The verb is reflexive. Although nobody translates it this way, it says: v’im leYehovah yekheta ish mi yithepalel lo – “And if to Yehovah he will sin, man, who he will intercede himself to Him?” As a reflexive verb, it isn’t asking if someone will intercede himself to himself. Rather, he is asking who will intercede himself to the Lord, who is God. He has sinned against God. Thus, he has no one to intercede himself to.

This is seen in the account of Job –

“Now therefore, take for yourselves seven bulls and seven rams, go to My servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and My servant Job shall pray [yithpalel: he will intercede himself] for you. For I will accept him, lest I deal with you according to your folly; because you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has.” Job 42:8

God in the first clause is set in parallel to the Lord in this clause –

If he will sin, man to man, and he interceded Him – God.

And if to Yehovah he will sin, man, who he will intercede himself to Him?

Eli is saying that there is nobody who can intercede himself to the Lord when he sins against the Lord. They are the priests. They are to intercede for the people. How much greater is their inability to intercede for themselves to Him! It is a terrifying prospect for the unrepentant soul…

25 (con’t) Nevertheless they did not heed the voice of their father, because the Lord desired to kill them.

velo yish’meu leqol avihem ki khaphets Yehovah lahamitham – “And not they will hear to voice their father. For He inclined, Yehovah, to cause to kill them.” Because of their unrepentant impudence before the Lord, He inclined, meaning favored, to kill them. Their termination was deemed appropriate to their state of being. On the other hand…

*26 (fin) And the child Samuel grew in stature, and in favor both with the Lord and men.

vehanaar shemuel holekh vegadel va’tov gam im Yehovah vegam im anashim – “And the lad, Samuel, walking and growing, and he favored with Yehovah and also with men.” While the sons of Eli were 1) offensive to the people of Israel, causing them to transgress, and 2) set on doing evil to the point that the Lord purposed to kill them, Samuel is set in stark contrast.

The meaning is that in Samuel’s walk and maturing, he was good and acceptable to the Lord and also to men. He is completely the opposite of Eli’s sons. Similar words are later applied to Jesus –

“And Jesus, He before-cut in wisdom and stature and favor with God and men.” Luke 2:52 (CG)

To get the sense of the word before-cut, think of someone with a machete clearing out all the obstructions in front of him, allowing him to excel in various ways. This is how Samuel was under the law, and it is how Jesus also was.

Who will speak for me when I sin?
And make me right with God when I do wrong?
Under the law, I am only done in
Woe from condemnation would be my eternal song 

But in Christ, I am free and forgiven
From everything I have ever done wrong
I have gone from law’s death to a’livin’
Joy in salvation will be my eternal song 

Thank God for Jesus Christ
Who came to deliver me from death’s door
Through His blood, my soul has been priced
I am saved, saved, saved! Now and forevermore

III. Living by Grace

In the passage before us, the sons of Eli, Foster Son, who represents the state of being under the law, are reintroduced into the narrative. Their names are not mentioned, but it says that they are sons of worthlessness who did not know the Lord.

As has been seen, the narrative is focused on the time of Christ’s coming, represented by Samuel. It reflects the state of those under the law who could not see Jesus for who He is. Because of this, Jesus said –

“Jesus answered, ‘You know neither Me nor My Father. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also.’” John 8:19

Those who desire to be under the law cannot understand who the Lord is, meaning His nature. The law may be His standard of righteousness, but beyond that, it doesn’t define Him. These sons come to the sacrificial offerings, picturing Christ, and they abuse them.

Taking a three-toothed fork and pulling up what they want signifies that their state (represented by the teeth) is that of attempting to achieve divine perfection (three) arbitrarily through the sacrificial system, co-opting what belongs to Christ.

The four different pots that were mentioned reflect various aspects of Christ. The kiyor, cauldron, is used elsewhere to indicate a laver, picturing sanctification. The dud, kettle, signifies to boil up, coming from dod, beloved, a word representing the Lord as the beloved of the redeemed in the Song of Songs.

The qalakhath, pot, is derived from qalakh, to flow or gush forth. It reflects the Lord from whom the Spirit gushes forth. The parur, skillet, is derived from parar, to break up, as in the breaking up or annulment of a covenant (as in Genesis 17:14, etc.). Each of these refers to the Lord or what He will accomplish.

Thus, the act of removing the sacrifice from pots as they are sacrificing demonstrates an attempt to obtain from the law what only Christ can fully deliver. Noting this occurred in Shiloh, Tranquility, signifies that in the place where there should be completeness and rest, the law only interferes with and defaces that.

Saying that they did this to all the Israelites is a way of saying that all of Israel had no ultimate benefit from the law. That is made explicit in Hebrews 9 –

“It was symbolic for the present time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience…” Hebrews 9:9

The next verses spoke of taking the meat raw, before the fat was burned. It is a way of stating that attempting to have life from the law, seen in the words “but with living,” and having the meat with the fat, is taking what belongs to God in the giving of Christ. It is what those who want to live by law are attempting to do.

They are looking to gain life (John 1:4, etc.), and be their own personal offering to God instead of trusting in Christ (Ephesians 5:2). Instead of Christ, they are attempting to take what is His by force, ignoring the fact that they are already stained with sin.

Therefore, it said that this was a whopping sin before the Lord because they scorned the “present Yehovah,” signifying the offering of Christ. This is exactly what law observance does. It rejects what God did and looks to replace it with one’s own meritless deeds.

In contrast to that, Samuel was reintroduced as ministering before the Lord. This is what Christ did. Samuel was girded in a linen ephod, which refers to Christ’s righteousness, as explained in the Exodus sermons.

A m’iyl, robe, made by his mother, was brought up year after year for him. The word comes from ma’al, to cover. However, it is only used figuratively, as in acting unfaithfully or committing a trespass. The symbolism is that no such unfaithfulness is found in Christ.

Eli’s words and prophecy look to Elkanah (God Has Redeemed) and Hannah (Grace) being blessed. The state of being under the law, under prophecy, utters that the Lord is to give Grace seed [zera] “under the asking which he asked to Yehovah.”

In other words, because of the son who was asked for was then being asked for to the Lord (Jesus being asked for and promised to be under the law), the state of the law prophesies that seed will be born under Him. That is exactingly reflected in Isaiah 53 –

“Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed [zera], He shall prolong His days.” Isaiah 53:10

Immediately after that, but at some point in the future from the time of the narrative, Hannah had three sons and two daughters, the numbers of divine perfection which signifies the totality of the church age redeemed, and difference, Jew and Gentile. They contrast, and yet they confirm the totality of those in the church. Together, they equal five, the number of grace. It is reflective of John’s words –

“And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace.” John 1:16

The final words of verse 21 are an exacting description of Jesus’ incarnate life, “And he grew, the lad Samuel (Asked from God), with Yehovah.”

Verse 22 noted Eli was aged, very. It refers to the age of the law when Christ came. It was old and ready to be replaced. At this time, the sons of Eli (the state of the law) were in a state of apostasy, reflected in the abuse of both the sacrifices and the women at the door of the tabernacle.

Eli’s admonitions to his sons were a strong warning. His words, saying, “causing to pass over, people Yehovah” could not be a better description of the sons of the state of the law. It is all the law can do. As Paul says, “by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Romans 3:20). It is also what Paul speaks of in detail in Romans 7 concerning the law’s reviving of sin in man.

Eli’s final words to his sons were concerning man sinning against man and man sinning against Yehovah. In the case of the latter, there is none to intercede himself to God. The law is incapable of this. Because a violation of the law is a transgression against the Lord, there is none who can actually intercede to God in such a case.

As it says in Hebrews, it is “not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins” (Hebrews 10:4). This can only come through Christ, as our closing verse will reveal. Despite the appeal by Eli, his sons would not hear his voice, “for He inclined Yehovah, to cause to kill them.”

This is the difference between law and grace. As Paul says, “the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Corinthians 3:6). Therefore, the Lord was inclined from eternity to bring an end to the law. Lastly, the final verse was about Samuel stating words essentially repeated by Luke about Jesus.

The difference between “Yehovah and also men” as opposed to “God and men” is that Jesus is Yehovah. He is the Son of God. Thus, we have an exacting parallel. Jesus’ mission was to come, replace the law with the New Covenant, and offer grace to the children of Grace.

Understanding this, do not try to earn what God freely offers. Leave law observance behind and reject those who teach it. They are warped and self-condemned. They are asking you to focus on yourself, not Jesus and what He has done.

But God is constantly and consistently instructing us to look to Jesus, to trust in what He has done, and to reject the law that can only further separate us from Him. If you want to please God, then put your hope and trust solely in Jesus. Glory in what He has done. That is the sweet spot. May it be so for you now and always. Amen.

Closing Verse: “My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.” 1 John 2:1, 2

Next Week: 1 Samuel 2:27-36 It’s what happens when everything’s out of control... (To Languish, Your Soul) (6th 1 Samuel Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He alone is the perfect example of love – untarnished, unblemished, and completely pure and holy. He offers this love to you. So, follow Him, live for Him, and trust Him, and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

 

1 Samuel 2:12-26 (CG)

12 And sons Eli, sons worthlessness. Not they knew Yehovah. 13 And verdict, the priests with the people: all man sacrificing sacrifice, and he will come, lad the priest, according to boil the flesh, and the fork – three the tooth – in his hand. 14 And he will cause to strike in the caldron, or in the pot, or in the kettle, or in the skillet all which he will cause to ascend the fork – he will take, the priest, in him. Just so, they will do to all Israel, the ‘coming there in Shiloh.’ 15 Also, in before they will (surely) cause to smoke the fat, and he will come, lad the priest, and he will say to the man, the sacrificing, “You must give it – meat to roast – to the priest, and not he will take from you flesh being boiled, but with living.”

16 And he will say unto him, the man, “Smoke, they must (surely) cause to smoke, according to the day, the fat. And you must take to you according to which it will desire, your soul.” And he will answer to him, “For now, you will give! And if not, I took in vehemence.”

17 And it was, sin the lads, whopping – very – faces Yehovah. For they scorned, the men, present Yehovah.

18 And Samuel, ministering faces Yehovah. Lad being girded ephod – linen. 19 And robe, little, she will make to him, his mother. And she will cause to ascend to him, from days days-ward, in her ascent with her husband to sacrifice sacrifice the days. 20 And he will bless, Eli, Elkanah and his wife, and he will say, “May He give, Yehovah, to you seed from the woman, the this, under the asked which he asked to Yehovah.” And they walked to his place.

21 For visited, Yehovah, Hannah. And she conceived and she bore three sons and two daughters. And he grew, the lad Samuel, with Yehovah.

22 And Eli, he was aged, very. And he heard all which they (surely) will do, his sons, to all Israel, and which they (surely) will lie with the women, the ‘massing door tent appointment.’ 23 And he will say to them, “Why you (surely) will do according to the words, the these, which I hearing – your words – evil, from all the people, these? 24 Not, my sons! For not good the hearing which I hearing: causing to pass over, people Yehovah! 25 If he will sin, man to man, and he will intercede Him – God. And if to Yehovah he will sin, man, who he will intercede himself to Him?” And not they will hear to voice their father. For He inclined, Yehovah, to cause to kill them.

26 And the lad, Samuel, walking and growing, and good with Yehovah and also with men.

 

1 Samuel 2:12-26 (NKJV)

12 Now the sons of Eli were corrupt; they did not know the Lord. 13 And the priests’ custom with the people was that when any man offered a sacrifice, the priest’s servant would come with a three-pronged fleshhook in his hand while the meat was boiling. 14 Then he would thrust it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot; and the priest would take for himself all that the fleshhook brought up. So they did in Shiloh to all the Israelites who came there. 15 Also, before they burned the fat, the priest’s servant would come and say to the man who sacrificed, “Give meat for roasting to the priest, for he will not take boiled meat from you, but raw.”

16 And if the man said to him, “They should really burn the fat first; then you may take as much as your heart desires,” he would then answer him, “No, but you must give it now; and if not, I will take it by force.”

17 Therefore the sin of the young men was very great before the Lord, for men abhorred the offering of the Lord.

18 But Samuel ministered before the Lord, even as a child, wearing a linen ephod. 19 Moreover his mother used to make him a little robe, and bring it to him year by year when she came up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice. 20 And Eli would bless Elkanah and his wife, and say, “The Lord give you descendants from this woman for the loan that was given to the Lord.” Then they would go to their own home.

21 And the Lord visited Hannah, so that she conceived and bore three sons and two daughters. Meanwhile the child Samuel grew before the Lord.

22 Now Eli was very old; and he heard everything his sons did to all Israel, and how they lay with the women who assembled at the door of the tabernacle of meeting. 23 So he said to them, “Why do you do such things? For I hear of your evil dealings from all the people. 24 No, my sons! For it is not a good report that I hear. You make the Lord’s people transgress. 25 If one man sins against another, God will judge him. But if a man sins against the Lord, who will intercede for him?” Nevertheless they did not heed the voice of their father, because the Lord desired to kill them.

26 And the child Samuel grew in stature, and in favor both with the Lord and men.