1Samuel by Gary Kukis. All rights reserved. The Birth and Dedication of Samuel

Transcription

1 1Samul 1 1Samul 1: by Gary Kukis. All rights rsrvd. Th Birth and Ddication of Samul Outlin of Chaptr 1: vv. 1 5 Th rligious rituals of Elkanah and his family vv. 6 8 Hannah s Grif vv Hannah s Vow vv Eli confirms Hannah s vow vv Samul is born to Hannah vv Hannah ddicats hr son, Samul, to th Tnt of God all his lif Charts, Maps and Short Doctrins: Introduction An Altrnat Outlin Introduction Clark s Summary of 1Sam. 1 v. 1 Th Lin of Samul th Propht v. 2 A Fw Points on Polygamy v. 2 Thr was a man namd Elkanah... v. 2 Introv rt d Parall lism of 1Sam. 1:2 v. 2 Formrly Barrn Womn v. 3 Scofild on th Titl th Lo of Hosts (Jhovah Sabaoth) v. 3 Which Fast is Bing Clbratd in 1Sam. 1? v. 5 Ancint Translations of 1Sam. 1:5a v. 5 Modrn Translations of 1Sam. 1:5a v. 5 What Ar Popl Saying about Hannah s Portion of Mat? v. 9 Just How Bad Can a Commntary B? v. 11 Similaritis Btwn th Nazarits and Our Lo v. 11 Diffrncs Btwn th Nazarits and Our Lo v. 16 Th Lss Litral Translations of 1Sam. 1:16a v. 19 Barrn Womn Who Hav Prayd to God for a Child v. 22 Th Argumnts for and Against Samul Bing a Nazarit v. 24 How th Ancint Txts Disagr about 1Sam. 1:24 v. 24 Spcific Old Tstamnt Offrings and Thir Occasion of Us Doctrins Cov Doctrins Alludd To Ancint Txts of th Old Tstamnt Womn of th Old Tstamnt a Chart Th Goddss Ashtorth Fastday Chart Th Extrmination of th Popls of Canaan Doctrin of Pray r Comparativ Chronology Chart

2 1Samul Chaptr 1 46 Introduction: 1Sam. 1 covrs th gnalogy and birth of Samul. What w hav hr is his birth and background. His fathr is Elkahnah, a man with two wivs, Hannah and Pninnah. Hannah was th wif that h lovd, but sh was barrn. On of th most important background issus, which is nvr discussd in this chaptr, is that ths ar Lvits who ar living as Ephraimits. Crtainly, thy wr a mix from thos two tribs, but Hannah has always flt a pang on conscinc ralizing that thy hav a spiritual dstiny as wll as a spiritual rsponsibility, and no on in thir family sms to b awar of that. So, whn sh coms up barrn, hr first thought is thir unfulfilld spiritual rsponsibilitis. So, sh asks God for a son, but thn promiss that sh will giv this son up to Him. Th parallls hr btwn Samul and our Lo ar normous (w will covr that in 1Sam. 2). Onc sh has mad hr vow, sh has a child, Samul, and sh will bring this child to th Tnt of God, ddicats this child to Jhovah thir God, and thn lav him with Eli, th High Prist to Isral. Most of this chaptr is vry asy to translat. Not only is it narrativ, but it is vry simpl narrativ. Unlik th book of Job or any of th psalms, whr w xamind th maning and morphology of narly vry wo, w will look at about vry thi wo or so. Whn a sntnc is so asy to translat, thn thr is littl nd to carfully intrprt it and prhaps adjust th translation to fit mor prfctly with th intrprtation. For th most part, this is prtty straightforwa. W gnrally find short thoughts and sntncs intrsprsd with a larg numbr of wâw conjunction s or wâw conscutiv s. Th vrbs ar common and oftn rpatd through this chaptr. Thrfor, it is difficult to undrstand th glaring diffrncs btwn th Sptuagint (th arly Grk translation of th Old Tstamnt) and th Massortic txt. For instanc, in v. 11, th Sptuagint adds that th futur son of Hannah would drink no win, a phras not found in th Hbrw at all; th phras with concivd is in v. 19 in th Sptuagint and in v. 20 in th Hbrw (it is actually in a diffrnt plac in th two txts); at th nd of v. 20, w hav Y howah in th Hbrw, but Lo of th Sabbath in th Grk. In th lattr cas, that mayb by way of offring a translation of th 1 unspokn Nam of God. (to indicat that th txt is Y howah in th original rathr than Lo). in this chaptr, w hav two wos or phrass introducd this is th first tim w hav th titl, Jhovah of th Armis, which is xtnsivly usd throughout Scriptur from hron in. Also, in this chaptr of Samul, whn rfrnc is mad to th Tnt of God, th wo usd is tmpl. Obviously, Solomon, who was not born yt, had not built a Tmpl to God yt. On might suggst that this u sa g implis a post-solomon authorship; howvr, it implis just th opposit. Onc Solomon built a Tmpl of Jhovah, thn th us of th wo tmpl rfr to that spcific structur and no on of his tim priod or latr would hav confusd th Tmpl of Jhovah with th Tnt of Jhovah. Howvr, prior to th building of th Tmpl, this was a wo usd for mor prmannt structurs, which, as w will s in v. 9, was rasonably applid to what th Tnt of God had bcom. On this topic, Kil and Dlitzsch suggst: Originally, whn th tabrnacl was simply a tnt, travling with th popl from plac to plac, it had only curtains at th ntranc to th holy plac and court. But whn Isral had bcom possss of fixd houss in th land of Canaan, and th dwlling-plac of God was prmanntly rctd at Shiloh, instad of th tnts that wr pitchd for prists and Lvits, who ncampd round about during th journy through th dsrt, thr wr rctd fixd houss, which wr built against or insid th court, and not only srvd as dwlling-placs for th prists and Lvits who wr officiating, but wr also usd for th rcption and custody of th gifts that wr brought as offrings to th sanctuary. Ths buildings in all probability supplantd ntirly th original tnt-lik nclosur around th court; so that instad of th curtains at th ntranc, thr wr folding doors, which wr shut in th vning an opnd again in th morning. It is tru that nothing is said about th rction of ths buildings in our historical books, but th fact itslf is not to b dnid on that account. In th cas of Solomon s tmpl, notwithstanding th laborat dscription that has bn givn of it, thr is nothing said about th arrangmnt or rction of th buildings in th court; and yt hr and thr, 2 principally in Jrmiah, th xistnc of such buildings is vidntly assumd. Thr ar som things which tak plac historically that thos of that ra, and vn soon aftr, do not raliz th significanc of, and thrfor mak no mntion of it in thir writings. If you wr to writ down what happnd to you in th past yar or so, you might lav out a grat many dtails of your cultur that somon ls, a cntury latr, would hav bn mor intrstd in. God had said nothing to th Isralits about changing 1 This is not a farftchd thory, as th KJV, NASB and NKJV all do that by splling Lo in small caps. 2 Kil & Dlitzsch s Commntary on th Old Tstamnt; 1966 Hndrickson Publishrs, Inc.; Vol. 2, p. 396.

3 47 Th Book of Samul any of th laws or th apparanc of th Tabrnacl or anything ls. Howvr, it will bcom clar in ths nxt fw chaptrs that, ovr th past svral hund yars, such changs wr mad. Sinc ths changs wr not a part of God s xprssd will, thr was rally no rason to includ spcific rfrncs to ths changs in Scriptur. On of th intrsting things in this chaptr is th sacrific of Hannah, which sh brings along with Samul to th Tnt of God. On th surfac, it appars as thos sh grabbd a fw things from around th hous and off thm up. Howvr, during th tim that sh was nursing, Hannah thought long and ha about what sh should offr on this grat occasion of th liflong ddication of hr only son Samul. O n a prsonal not: whn I bgan this chaptr and saw how asy th Hbrw was by comparison to what I h a d bn working on (Job and various psalms), I prtty much xpctd thr to b a lot lss by way of xgsis. First of all, I did not hav to xamin ach and vry Hbrw wo, nor did I hav to spnd a grat dal of tim xplaining what was actually going on or what th author was saying. Howvr, dspit this chaptr s lack of dnsity, it still rquirs a grat dal of tim and xplanation for what occurs. Th author may b a rlativly simpl man (lik Earnst Hmingway, for instanc) and what h says sms to b both simpl and simply put; howvr, this is mislading. In or for us to undrstand fully what is occurring hr (and I man mor than a simpl narrativ xplanation), w ar going to hav to fill in a lot of gaps. On of th things which has bn all but igno in othr xpositions of this passag is Hannah s motivation, for what sh offrs in this chaptr will sm, at last to most mothrs, a bit xtrm. Hr gnalogy will xplain a grat dal of hr rasoning. Lt m add that if you ar rading through th Bibl in a yar, or you hav this littl Bibl study group on th sid and vryon shars how thy fl about this passag, thn you won t gt vn a tnth of what is hr. So, givn th simplicity of th Hbrw and th straightforwanss of th txt, w would xpct th xgtical portion of this study to b minimal. Howvr, just th opposit has bn th cas. I hav spnt as much tim and ffort in xplaining ach vrs of this chaptr as I hav through th most difficult portions of th book of Job. Now and again, in th bginning of a chaptr, I mak rfrnc to a particular sourc with I us. Unlik Bob Thim, who was my right pastor for many yars, I dpnd havily upon som commntaris as a rsourc (howvr, most of thm ar just so much trip, as Bob will tll you). On of th grat hlps to m has bn Kil and Dlitzsch s Commntary of th Old Tstamnt. It is a tn volum st filld with xcllnt and mostly a c c u r at commntary. On th wak sid is it is particularly dns. If I was to rad fiv or six pags of it in a row, I would crtainly los my concntration and los track of what I was rading. Furthrmor, I would los a lot of th mat which is in this commntary. Th scond waknss of this commntary is that it assums th radr knows Grk, Hbrw, Latin, Grman and English (at last for th English translation). Howvr, Kil and Dlitzsch mak crtain argumnts and tak crtain stands which opn up many passags to m. I typ 2-3 hours pr day whn I study God s Wo. Whn prusing thir commntary, it may tak m a full typing priod to gt through 2 or 3 pags of thir commntary. I might not gt, in that 2 or 3 hours, mor than a pag worth of information. Howvr, I find that information oftn invaluabl to my undrstanding of th passags at hand. In fact, oftn I com upon a viw point or an argumnt which I would hav not consid had it not bn for Kil and Dlitzsch. Thrfor, I rcommnd this commntary for srious xgts of God s Wo. For thos of you who find my xgsis too pondrous, you will find thirs vn mor so. Do not, undr any circumstanc, gloss ovr thir footnots. Thir footnots ar filld with important information. An outlin is oftn somthing which is drapd ovr a pic of writing in or to hlp us organiz our thoughts and to gt an ovrall viw of what w ar to rad. This chaptr can also b xamind from th prspctiv of th various Fasts to God. An Altrnat Outlin I. Introduction (vv. 1 3) II. What has transpi in prvious Fasts of God (vv. 4 7). III. Th grif of Hannah coms to a had during a particular unnamd fast (vv. 8 18). IV. Hannah s prayr is answ. Sh sits out svral fasts whil nursing hr son (vv ). V. Hannah gos to Shiloh to worship God and to giv hr son to Eli at th Tnt of God. This dos not

4 1Samul Chaptr 1 48 ncssarily occur during a fast day (vv ). An Altrnat Outlin Rturn to Chaptr Outlin Rturn to Charts, Maps and Short Doctrins Also, Clark givs us an asy-to-follow summation of this chaptr, which I will quot blow: Clark s Summary of 1Sam. 1 Som account of Elkanah and his two wivs, Pninnah and Hannah (1Sam. 1:1 2). His annual worship at Shiloh and th portions h gav at such tims to his wivs (1Sam. 1:3-5). Hannah, bing barrn, is rproachd by Pninnah, spcially in thir going up to Shiloh; at which sh is sorly grivd (1Sam. 1:6 7). Elkanah comforts hr (1Sam. 1:8). Hr prayr and vow in th tmpl, that if God would giv hr a son, sh would conscrat him to His srvic (1Sam. 1:9-11). Eli, th high prist, indistinctly haring hr pray, chargs hr with bing drunk (1Sam. 1:12-14). Hr dfns of hr conduct (1Sam. 1:15 16). Eli, undcivd, blsss hr; on which sh taks courag (1Sam. 1:17 18). Hannah and Elkanah rturn hom; sh concivs, bars a son, and calls him Samul (1Sam. 1:19 20). Elkanah and his family go again to Shiloh to worship; but Hannah stays at hom to nurs hr child, purposing, as soon as h is wand, to go and offr him to th Lo, accoing to hr vow (1Sam. 1:21-23). Whn wand, sh taks him to Shiloh, prsnts har child to Eli to b conscratd to th Lo, and offrs thr bullocks, an phah of flour, and a bottl of win, for his conscration (1Sam. 1:24-28).* * Adam Clark, Commntary on th Bibl; from -Swo, 1Sam. 1 Introduction. Rturn to Chaptr Outlin Rturn to Charts, Maps and Short Doctrins Th Rligious Rituals of Elkanah and His Family Slavishly litral: And so h was a man, on, from th Ramathaim-zophim from hill country of Ephraim and his nam, Elkanah bn Jroham bn Elihu bn Tohu bn Zuph, an Ephraimit. 1Samul 1:1 Modratly litral: Thr was a crtain man, from th Ramathaim of th Zuphits from th hill country of Ephraim and his nam [was] Elkanah b n Jroham son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of Zuph, an Ephraimit. Thr was a crtain man who livd in Ramathaim of th Zuphits in th hill country of Ephraim, and his nam was Elkanah bn Jroham, who was a dscndant of Elihu, a dscndant of Tohu, a dscndant of Zuph an Ephraimit. Author s Not: My formatting and approach to xgsis changd radically from th bginning of this book to th nd. Whn I bgan this book, my Hbrw xgsis was mixd in with th xplanation and discussion of ach vrs; and somtims that mant that radrs without any background whatsovr in Hbrw would litrally plow through an xplanation of ach vrs. Bcaus of a rmark mad by a frind midway through this book, I bgan to put th Hbrw xgsis into tabls, so that, on could skip ovr thm asily nough; but on could also go back and xamin this wo or that phras, if so movd. About thr-fourths th way through this book, I bgan to organiz my translations and mor critically xamin th Hbrw in th light of th othr availabl translations. What I would lik to do is, go back and o th first dozn or so chaptrs of this book, so that th organization and formatting matchs th nd of this book. On th othr hand, I don t know if I can forc myslf to do that. Thrfor, I do not know how far I will gt with this rorganization or how fast I will procd with it. Thrfor, you may find, midway through this or som othr chaptr, that my approach appars to hav dgnratd

5 49 Th Book of Samul somwhat. That simply mans that I hav not finishd updating th arly chaptrs of this book. I bgan to xgt ach and vry wo in a Hbrw tabl midway through 1Sam. 12; and I sparatd th translations into groups in 1Sam. 20. Having bn convincd that this is th way to go, I will attmpt to go back and corrct this in th prvious chaptrs of Samul. In changing th format, you will find a littl mor Hbrw mntiond in th xplanation of th vrss in this and th nxt 10 chaptrs, than you will in 1Sam Onc you gt to 1Sam. 12, thr will b vry littl mntion of th Hbrw languag apart from th xgsis, which will mostly b confind to th Hbrw xgsis tabls. Hr is how othrs hav translatd this vrs: Ancint txts (quit obviously, this will b th English translation of th ancint txts): At this point, I am going to bgin to ngag in a mor systmatic approach to txtual criticism and xamin th diffrncs btwn th ancint txts. For this rason, it might b a good ida to xamin Ancint Txts of th Old Tstamnt. In that doctrin, thr is a chart which givs us an ida as to th familis of manuscripts. W might b quick to assum that th MT is corrct bcaus it is oftn in agrmnt with th Pshitta (Syriac) and th Vulgat (Latin). Howvr, if you xamin th chart, you can s that th Pshitta, th Latin Vulgat and th Masortic txt all stm from th sam family of manuscripts and that th Sptuagint coms from anothr group. Thrfor, w should xpct that much of th tim, th LXX will b at odds with th othr 3. Masortic Txt Sptuagint Significant diffrncs: And so h was a man, on, from th Ramathaim-zophim from hill country of Ephraim and his nam, Elkanah bn Jroham bn Elihu bn Tohu bn Zuph, an Ephraimit. Thr was a man of Armathaim Sipha, of mount Ephraim, and his nam was Hlkana, a son of Jrml th son of Elias th son of Thok, in Namib Ephraim. Zuph is mntiond in th MT; somhow that was morphd in Namib in th LXX. As is oftn th cas, whatvr diffrncs xist btwn th MT and th LXX ar gnrally minor and affct no important doctrins (in fact, usually, thr is no affct upon any doctrin, major or minor). Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrass: CEV TEV Elkanah livd in Ramah, a town in th hill country of Ephraim. His grat-gratgrandfathr was Zuph, so Elkanah was a mmbr of th Zuph clan of th Ephraim trib. Elkanah s fathr was Jroham, his grandfathr was Elihu, and his gratgrandfathr was Tohu. Thr was a man namd Elkanah, from th trib of Ephraim, who livd in th town of Ramah in th hill country of Ephraim. H was th son of Jroham and grandson of Elihu, and blongd to th family of Tohu, a part of th clan of Zuph. I want you to undrstand how long I hav com sinc bginning this xgsis of Scriptur. Whn I bgan, I would hav nvr thought of quoting th Good Nws Bibl, bcaus it is simplistic and a paraphras. Howvr, thr ar tims whn it mor clarly stats what is hr, vn though w do not find this in th original (I should add that th NLT is almost idntical). Mostly litral rndrings (with som occasional paraphrasing): JPS (Tanakh) Thr was a man from Ramathaim of th Zuphits, in th hill country of Ephraim, whos nam was Elkanah son of Jroham son of Elihu son of Tohu son of Zuph, an Ephraimit.

6 1Samul Chaptr 1 50 Litral, almost wo-for-wo, rndrings: NASB Now thr was a crtain man from Ramathaim-zophim from th hill country of Ephraim, and his nam was Elkanah th son of Jroham, th son of Elihu, th son of Tohu, th son of Zuph, an Ephraimit. With this chaptr and book, I hav dcidd to introduc Young s Updatd Litral Translation, which is not an official translation; in fact, it dosn t vn xist as of this tim (although such a projct should b attmptd by somon). I hav simply changd th archaic vrbs lik hath to has, givth to givs; and simpl wos, such as: thy to your; y to you [all], tc. Onc and awhil I will rplac an archaic vrb or two, and somtims I will 3 rarrang th vrs (although that kind of chang will b minimal). My thinking hr is that this will mak it a mor radabl translation without sacrificing its painstaking accuracy. Young's Updatd LT And thr is a crtain man of Ramathaim-Zophim, of th hill-country of Ephraim, and his nam is Elkanah, son of Jroham, son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of Zuph, an Ephrathit,... What is th gist of this vrs? W introduc Elkanah with th vrs, and his gnalogy and hom ar all notd. This is th first book whr I attmpt to us this Hbrw xgsis chart (of my own dsign). I prtty much follow Own s Analytical Ky to th Old Tstamnt, making corrctions whr ncssary and noting ths corrctions. 4 I wish I could vouch for ach and vry ntry; howvr, in rrading som of this, I hav found a fw placs whr I will indicat that thr is a suffix, but thr was non; or somthing along thos lins. My litral translation should rflct wo-for-wo accuracy with th Hbrw txt. If you not a discrpancy, I would rally lik to know about it, so that I can mak th propr changs. 1Samul 1:1a Hbrw/Pronunciation Common English Manings Nots/Morphology Numbrs wa or va ( åç) [pronouncd wah] and so, and thn, thn, and wâw conscutiv BDB #253 hâyâh (ä éè äè ) [pronouncd haw-yaw] to b, is, was, ar; to bcom, to com into bing; to com to pass 3 prson masculin singular, Qal imprfct Strong's #1961 BDB #224 îysh ( é àò) [pronouncd sh] a man, a husband; anyon; a crtain on; ach, ach on, vryon masculin singular noun Strong's #376 BDB #35 châd (ã çè à ) [pronouncd h- KHAWD] on, first, crtain, only; but it can also man a composit unity numral Strong's #259 BDB #25 min (ï îò ) [pronouncd min] from, off, out from, out of, away from, on account of, sinc, than, mor than prposition of sparation Strong's #4480 BDB #577 3 In fact, I simply us a macro to chang th txt of Young s translation. 4 I do mak rrors as wll; this is why I not vry corrction that I mak, no mattr how trivial.

7 51 Th Book of Samul 1Samul 1:1a Hbrw/Pronunciation Common English Manings Nots/Morphology Numbrs Râmâthayim Tsôwphîm ( íéô ö í é ú îè. ò - øè ) [pronouncd raw-maw- THAH-yim tzoh-feem hights of th Zophim; and is translitratd Ramathaim- Zophim Propr singular noun; location Strong s #7414 & 7436 BDB #928 Translation: Thr was a crtain man, from th Ramathaim of th Zuphits... W bgin this vrs with th wâw conscutiv, as though w ar picking up this book from lswhr. Th book of Ruth took plac during th tim of th judgs, although w ar ha-prssd to plac it xactly (s th Introduction to th Book of Ruth for a full discussion of this). Howvr, this book of 1Samul picks up mor or lss whr th book of th Judgs lft off at last from a topical standpoint. Th book of th Judgs is not in chronological or, as th last coupl incidnts occur arly on in th history of th judgs. Howvr, it would b logical to go from th book of th Judgs to hr, stopping for a brif look back into th priod of th judgs at th book of Ruth. And so w bgin with th book of Samul (which is calld I and 2Samul in th English Bibls and I and 2Kings in th Grk Sptuagint). Thn w hav from th followd by th propr noun and gntilic adjctiv Ramathaim-Zophim, a dsignation found hr and only hr. I think that th rndring of th JPS givs us th bttr ida of what w hav hr: Ramathaim of th Zuphits. Ramathaim appars to b quivalnt to Ramah of Bnjamin, rfr hrto for as th Ramah (which mans th hight). Although thr ar som vry imaginativ scholars who tach that Ramathaim of th Zuphits and th Ramah ar diffrnt placs, this maks littl sns. Elkanah is said to b from Ramathaim of th Zuphits in this vrs, and is said to hav a hom in Ramah in v. 19 and 1Sam. 2:11. Now, it is tru that Ramathaim is a dul noun, which could man that th city is built in two sctions, or that it is build upon two hills (th Rabbis tll us that thr wr two watchtowrs which lookd towa on anothr). Whatvr th rason (th two hills, two sctions to th city, an old and nw sction prhaps), Ramathaim is two of somthing. Th only possibl rason that on might try to distinguish Ramah from Ramathaim of Zophim is that Ramathaim is said to b in Ephraim and Ramah is said to b in Bnjamin, so lt s discuss that: you may rcall th absolutly vil thing which occur in th book of th Judgs whn a Lvit brought his concubin back through th trritory of Bnjamin and stoppd for th night in Gibah (thy wr going to stop in Gibah or in Ramah). Thy wr takn in by an old man who only workd in that city occasionally; suddnly, that night, th dgnrat mn of th city of Gibah cam to th hom of this old man and dmandd that th mal Lvit b snt out so that thy could hav forcd homosxual rlations with him. Although th old man rfusd, as a compromis, th old man and th Lvit snt out th Lvit s concubin (or mistrss), who was thn rapd continually by ths mn until sh did. Th rst of Isral was contactd concrning this dd and dmandd th xtradition of ths dgnrats for trial and crtain xcution. Th trib of Bnjamin rfusd, which bgan a civil war. Th civil war rsultd in th trib of Bnjamin bing almost wipd out (all this can b found in Judgs 19 21). Th problm with th Bnjamits was not just th dgnracy of th mn of on city, but th fact that th othr Bnjamits would shltr thm from lgitimat proscution. On of th rsults of any war is th chang of ownrship of crtain trritoris. Sinc Ephraim is th narst trritory to Bnjamin, w would xpct Ephraim to absorb at last th northrn portion of Bnjamin. That would includ th city Ramah and th hill country that w ar spaking about and this xplains why th sam city is somtims said to b a part of Ephraim and othr tims to b a part of Bnjamin.

8 1Samul Chaptr Samul 1:1b Hbrw/Pronunciation Common English Manings Nots/Morphology Numbrs min (ï îò) [pronouncd min] from, off, out from, out of, away from, on account of, sinc, than, mor than prposition of sparation Strong's #4480 BDB #577 har (ø äç ) [pronouncd har] hill; mountain, mount; hill-country masculin singular construct Strong s #2042 (and #2022) BDB #249 ph rayim (í éòøôà) - [pronouncd f-rahyim] translitratd Ephraim masculin propr noun Strong s #669 BDB #68 Translation:...from th hill country of Ephraim... Thr ar a st of hills which bgin in Ephraim, go through Bnjamin and trminat in Judah. Ths ar calld th hill country of Judah and th hill country of Ephraim, dpnding upon whthr w ar looking at th northrn or southrn portion of this mountain rang. In Joshua 17:17, th northrn portion of this mountain rang was givn to Ephraim and Manassh, th two sons of Josph. Thy wr told to clar it of forst and of Canaanits and to occupy it. Part of that was also givn ovr to th trib of Bnjamin, who likly lost it by thir aformntiond dgnrat bhavior. My point in all of this is that Ephraim, during th tim of th judgs, took possssion of most of Bnjamin, which includd th city of Ramah (Joshua 18:25). Thy possibly rnamd it Ramathaim, which could b rasonably intrprtd as Ramah of Ephraim. Sam city; nw ownrs. 5 ZPEB trats ths as diffrnt citis, although it is most likly that thy ar idntical. Ramathaim of th Zuphits is 6 simply calld Ramah in 1Sam. 1:19 and 2:11. Kil and Dlitzsch assum that Bnjamin still occupis this ara and that Ramathaim-zophim is in th hill country of Ephraim, which xtnds into th trritory of Bnjamin. I bliv th trritoris to b lss static, but, in any cas, thr is no contradiction hr; w simply do not know if th trib of Bnjamin controlld this ara at this tim or not. I don t think that thy did; Kil and Dlitzsch sm to think that 7 8 thy did. For m, th fact that Elkanah is calld an Ephraimit sttls th mattr. Th long nam for th city is givn hr, along with its location. Onc it has bn has bn stablishd, th shortr nam, Ramah, will b usd throughout th first book of Samul. Lt m giv you on mor rason why th Ramah that w ar spaking of was in Bnjamin, but is spokn of as bing in th hill country of Ephraim. Early, in th tim of th judgs, th last fw chaptrs of th book of Judgs occur. I cov this in grat dtail in th introduction and in th xgsis of this book. Th judg Dborah usd to st up hr hadquartrs to judg btwn Bthl and Ramah in th hill country of Ephraim. Bthl and Ramah wr both countris blonging to Bnjamin (Joshua 18:21 25), yt thy ar spokn of as bing in th hill country of Ephraim Judgs 4:5. Th asist xplanation is th on which I hav givn you: Bnjamin was narly compltly wipd out as a nation bcaus of thir bhavior in Judgs 19 20; Ephraim, bing dirctly north of Bnjamin, would 5 Th Zondrvan Pictorial Encyclopdia of th Bibl; Mrrill Tnny, d., Zondrvan Publishing Hous, 1976; Vol. 5, p Thy do favor ths citis as bing idntical. Kil and Dlitzsch, Commntary on th Old Tstamnt; from -Swo; 1Sam. 1:1 8. Kil and Dlitzsch also offr up som of th othr faulty thoris, which you will just hav to chck for yourslf, if you ar intrstd. 7 Th location of this ara is furthr supportd by th fact that Dborah, an arly judg, livd in th hill country of Ephraim btwn Bthl and Ramah (Judgs 4:5). 8 Obviously, h could b an Ephraimit living in th trritory of Bnjamin, which is controlld by Bnjam its but our most likly scnario is that h is living as an Ephraimit in a trritory of th Ephraimits, formrly controlld by th trib of Bnjamin. Now, Elkanah is also said to b a ds cndant of Lvi as wll, as w hav studid in 1Chron. 6 (in fact, thr ar svral Elkanah s in that lin).

9 53 Th Book of Samul 9 hav absorbd, at th minimum, th northrnmost citis, which would hav includd Bthl and Ramah. Now, if you look in th back of your Bibl or in a small atlas to find Ramah, you will not that Ramah is probably not vn placd on th map. That is bcaus its location is strongly disputd. Bing calld a part of two diffrnt trritoris is why but, as you s, th xplanation is simpl: somtims Ephraim controlld it and somtims Bnjamin controlld it. An altrnat xplanation would b, vn though Ramah (Ramathaim) is in Bnjamin, it is in th hills of Ephraim (which run through th middl of Bnjamin and bcom th hills of Judah on th othr sid of Bnjamin). Bcaus it lookd as tho u gh th trib of Bnjamin might b wipd out compltly, ths hills wr always known as th hills of Ephraim in th north and th hills of Judah in th south, vn though btwn thm, th hills ar in Bnjamin. Now, prhaps, you might undrstand why w hav spnt so much tim in passags which you had dmd worthlss. W wnt through th citis of Isral nar th nd of th book of Joshua a scond ara of Scriptur which you might hav thought to b as dull as any gnalogy around and thos chaptrs hlpd us to put it altogthr. This travlogu combind with th history of Judgs tlls us (1) why two citis of Bnjamin ar said to b in th hill country of Ephraim and, (2) why somon who livs in ths citis is calld an Ephraimit. What is God tlling us? God is tlling us that in His Wo, all th pics of th puzzl ar thr. H did not lav out any vital dtails or information which w nd to know. 1Samul 1:1c Hbrw/Pronunciation Common English Manings Nots/Morphology Numbrs w (or v ) (å) [pronouncd wh] and, vn, thn; namly; whn; sinc, that; though simpl wâw conjunction BDB #251 shêm (í Å ) [pronouncd sham] nam, rputation, charactr masculin singular noun with th 3 prson masculin singular suffix Strong s #8034 BDB #1027 El qânâh (äð È È ì à) [pronouncd l -kaw- NAW] God has cratd or God has takn possssion of; it is translitratd Elkanah Masculin singular propr noun Strong s #511 BDB #46 Translation:...and his nam [was] Elkanah... Elkanah mans God has cratd or God has takn possssion of. 1Samul 1:1d Hbrw/Pronunciation Common English Manings Nots/Morphology Numbrs bên (ï Å ) [pronouncd ban] son, dscndant masculin singular construct Strong s #1121 BDB #119 Y rôchâm (íçè Éøé) [pronouncd y -roh- SHAWM] may h b compassionat; and is translitratd Jroham Masculin singular propr noun Strong s #3395 BDB #934 bên (ï Å ) [pronouncd ban] son, dscndant masculin singular construct Strong s #1121 BDB #119 9 This, by th way, is prtty much in agrmnt with most modrn authors. Edrshim divrgs from th pack and placs Ramah du ws t of Shiloh, which is in th midst of Ephraim. His primary rason is that ths folks ar all calld Ephraimits. I think that this causs us problms whn w xamin th rout of Saul and his donky sarch in 1Sam. 9. Thrfor, I am going along with th majority on this on.

10 1Samul Chaptr Samul 1:1d Hbrw/Pronunciation Common English Manings Nots/Morphology Numbrs Tochûw ( ç ) É [pronouncd TOH-khoo] translitratd Tohu Masculin singular propr noun Strong s #8459 BDB #1063 bên (ï Å ) [pronouncd ban] son, dscndant masculin singular construct Strong s #1121 BDB #119 tsûwph (ó ö) [pronounc tzoof] honycomb; and is translitratd Zuph Propr singular masculin noun Strong s #6689 BDB #847 ph râthîy (éú. È ø ôà) [pronouncd f-raw- THEE] to bar fruit, to b fruitful and is translitratd Ephrathit gntilic adjctiv Strong s #673 BDB #68 Translation:...bn Jroham son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of Zuph, an Ephraimit. You will rcall from th vrs abov, that th lin of Ephraim to Samul gos through Zuph. W rally know littl or nothing about Zuph, apart from his nam, which mans honycomb. His family primarily sttld Ramah, so it is thrfor calld Ramathaim of th Zuphits. Elkanah (th fathr of Samul) is rprsntd hr as bing a Ephraimit. In 1Sam. 6:22 26 and 33 35, Zuph is calld a Lvit from th family of Kohath (h is calld Zophar in 1Chron. 6:26 and Zuph or Ziph in 1Chron. 6:35. And th land around thr will latr b calld th Land of Zuph (1Sam. 9:5). So, what s th dal? Why is any of this important? This is important bcaus Samul and his Samul and his family ar dscndd from Lvits family ar dscndd from Lvits, accoing to 1Chron. 6, and from Ephraimits accoing to this vrs. Huh? you commnt. Th Lvits had a tndncy to wandr about, particularly whn thy wr without a job or function, and thy hookd up with othr tribs providing a varity of functions (w find this in Judgs 17, 19, whr w hav two diffrnt Lvits living in th country of Ephraim, ssntially to find work). So did som Lvits intrmarry with th Ephraimits? Thr is no rason to assum that thy did not (th Lvit s concubin in Judgs 19 was from Judah). Th most rasonabl xplanation is that Zuph is th product of a mixd marriag btwn Ephraimits and Lvits. At th bginning of this chaptr, Elkanah and family ar living lik Ephraimits and not participating in any way in thir Lvitical hritag and rsponsibilitis, which bothrs at last Hannah. Samul will assum th Lvitical rsponsibilitis of th family, and thrfor, whn a gnalogy looks at Samul, thy s a Lvit, bcaus (1) h is dscndd from th Lvits; and, (2) h actd lik a Lvit, accpting his Lvitical rsponsibilitis. Elkanah, his fathr, is calld an Ephraimit bcaus (1) h is dscndd from th Ephraim, and, (2) h bhavd lik an Ephraimit, doing nothing which dirctly rlatd to his spiritual hritag as a Lvit. (3) Furthrmor, thr is alrady a prcdnt for calling a Lvit by th nam of anothr trib, dpnding upon whr h livd or who h was rlatd to (Judgs 17:7). In othr wos, what w hav hr is not complx nor is it som sort of contradiction. Did you know that practically no on studis th first nin chaptrs of Chronicls? Why? Bcaus it is all gnalogis. Popl wondr if th Bibl is th Wo of God, why includ all ths friggin gnalogis. It s simpl. This provids us a grat dal of background for th tribal mixturs which took plac and allows us som paralll passags which w can us to hang our hats, so to spak. It is th background found in this passag compa to th information found in 1Chron. 6 which hlps to xplain th bhavior of Hannah, th wif of Elkanah. I must admit that whn I bgan to think about working on th first fw chaptrs of Chronicls, I dradd it, bcaus it was nam aftr nam aftr nam. Thn thr was th problm of, how do w mak th lins in Chronicls jiv with th lins mntiond lswhr? Although thr wr crtain difficultis, most of thm having to do with splling, Chronicls 1 9 givs us a marvlous background for th Bibl, taking us all th way from th cration of Adam to th disprsion of Isral. I bliv only th book of John has a widr scop.

11 55 Th Book of Samul If you will notic, Ramah is calld Aramathaim in th Grk. By th tim w gt to Nw Tstamnt tims, this is shortnd to Arimatha, and w find it in connction with a crtain Josph who providd th tomb in which our Lo s body would lay (Matt. 27:57 60). Givn th clos proximity of Ramah (latr Arimatha) and Jbus (latr Jrusalm), it would not b unusual for a businss man to mak his way from th smallr Arimatha into Jrusalm to conduct a grat dal of his businss. That h would purchas a tomb in th city of Jrusalm is also 10 rasonabl. Ramah is furthr idntifid with th hill country of Ephraim. Th first wo is th masculin singular of har (ø äç ) [pronouncd har], which mans hill, mountain, hill-country. It can b usd to man mountain whn usd in connction with a spcific propr noun; hr, it simply rfrs to th hill country. Strong s #2042 (and #2022) BDB #249. As mntiond, thr is a mountain rang which runs along th wst sid of th Joan, which xtnds all th way from Northrn Dan past th Sa of Galil (in fact it continus north from thr) all th way along th wst sid of th Salt Sa, divrging slightly to th wst about half way down th Salt Sa (thr is anothr shortr and lowr mountain rang which picks up along th coast of th Salt Sa and continus down past th Gulf of Aqaba. Ths mountain rangs ar not organizd, not vry prominnt, and oftn mandr off into high plains. Givn this lack of structur and prominnc, I don t vn know that this mountain rang has a nam. Dpnding upon whr w ar, it is simply known as th hill country of Judah or of Ephraim or of Galil. Th lin of ascnt looks lik this: Ephraim Zuph Tohu Elihu Jroham Elkanah. In btwn ach pair of nams, w hav a son of (which is bn in th Hbrw). In 1Chron. 6, w hav th lin of th Lvi, th brothr 11 of Ephraim. Mor spcifically, w ar daling with th lin of Kohath, on of Lvi s thr sons. Howvr, w ar told clarly that Samul coms from a family of Ephraimits. Again, som of th trib of Kohath wand into Ephraim looking for work and intrmarrid, confusing thir spiritual purpos, a fact which was apparnt to som of th dscndants of Zuph. Sinc w hav th lin of Samul givn lswhr, w should xamin that lin: 10 Thr ar othr opinions concrning th actual location of Ramah, but I hav givn you what I bliv to b th most likly location. S Th Zondrvan Pictorial Encyclopdia of th Bibl; Mrrill Tnny, d., Zondrvan Publishing Hous, 1976; Vol. 5, p. 32 for furthr discussion. 11 Th modrn-day quivalnt of Kohath is Cohn.

12 1Samul Chaptr 1 56 Th Lin of Samul th Propht 1Sam. 1:1 2, :2 1Chron. 15:17 Zuph Tohu Elihu Jroham Elkanah (and wif Hannah) Samul Jol and Abijah Hman In or to proprly plac this lin of Lvi in tim, w nd to mov ahad prmaturly to th lin of Samul. Samul is mntiond twic in this chaptr and what w nd to dtrmin is whthr this is Samul th judg/propht/prist. You will not that th lin of Samul is rmarkably similar to in both cass, and that thr is, at most, a slight problm with th splling of two nams. Thr ar svral implications of this: (1) th lin of Kohath is a fairly complt lin. W hav 21 gnrations from Jacob (Isral) to Samul, which would covr a priod of roughly 800 yars. Whras, this is by no mans 1Chron. 6:33 35a Zuph Toah Elil Jroham Elkanah 4 Samul Jol Hman xcssiv, it maks th lin of Kohath rlativly complt. (2) Evn though Samul is calld an Ephraimit, h is, in rality, a Lvit. In this particular lin (in 1Chron. 6), h is a Lvit. Howvr, bcaus his family livd in Ephraim, thr was vry likly intrmarriag among his ancstors with th Ephraimits. Furthrmor, in rading th first chaptr of Samul, you can s that his parnts wr not raising th othr sons as Lvits with rligious rsponsibilitis, but mor as Ephraimits (or, bttr, as non-lvits). Thrfor, it is rasonabl to viw Samul as both a Lvit and an Ephraimit. Givn th mothr s prayr and bhavior, it appars, at last on th surfac, that sh is th Lvit, and that sh ralizs that hr sons should b raisd as Lvits, with thir Lvitical dutis. Howvr, a rasonabl argumnt could b mad for both parnts bing Lvits or vn th fathr bing a Lvit (his wif ralizs th consquncs of his not pursuing his propr vocation). (3) Givn th numbr of gnrations cov in this particular branch of th Kohathits, w should xpct that th diffrncs ar mor likly divrgnc as opposd to missing and supplid gnrations. (4) Givn th importanc of th man, Samul, w should not b surprisd to find two lins listd hr whr contain him. 12 Although th information you find hr was dvlopd bit by bit from Scriptur, John Darby and othrs also mak mntion of Samul s Lvitical background. Rturn to Chaptr Outlin Rturn to Charts, Maps and Short Doctrins You no doubt noticd th diffrncs btwn th nams in th lin of Samul. This lin is mntiond also in 1Chron. 6:26 28, which provids vn gratr diffrncs. W hav compa ths diffrncs alrady in 1Chronicls 6:25 27 in a chart and w hav alrady givn a short biography of thm all in 1Chron. 6. Th lins givn in 1Chron. 6 ar also mor dtaild; but, sinc that has alrady bn cov, w don t nd to go into any mor dtail hr. I should mntion that thr is no rason to vr assum that any particular lin givn is complt. Barns hr rronously assums that w ar found complt gnrations of Isralits in th land, which is about 130 yars by his calculation. W should xpct during th tim of slavry to Egypt and during th tim of th judgs to find gaps in th gnrational lins givn. In any givn lin, th typical Isralit should know th nam of his trib, what branch of th trib h is in, and his parnts, grandparnts and prhaps som of his grat grandparnts. Sinc thy obviously kpt bttr rcos of such things than w do, thy might know on or two mor in thir lin. This dos not man that thy trac thir lin through ach and vry gnration, howvr. Now, for thos of you who know a littl about th background of th Lvits, raliz that crtain citis throughout Isral wr givn ovr to thm, not to own, xactly, but to occupy. Howvr, vn though Ramah is givn as a city of Bnjamin (Joshua 18:25), it is not on of th citis givn ovr to th Lvits (Joshua 21:17 19). In th book of th Judgs, w hav two instancs of Lvits who did not sm to b involvd in th srvic to th Aaronic 12 John Nlson Darby, Synopsis of th Old and Nw Tstamnts; from -Sw o, 1Sam. 1:1. Also Dr. John Gill, John Gill s Exposition of th Entir Bibl; from -Swo, 1Sam. 1:1 and Matthw Hnry, Commntary on th Whol Bibl; from -Swo, 1Sam. 1:1 8..

13 57 Th Book of Samul pristhood and on of thm was actually fr-lancing his srvics. Furthrmor, thy did not ncssarily liv in th aras dsignatd for thm. Now I raliz that you ar probably bo to tars with th concpt of gnalogy, particularly as it prtains to a bunch of old dad guys who ar not rlatd to you; and thn mntioning passags which sm to just giv ndlss lists of citis I man, what s that all about? You r thinking, who th hll cars? Lt s just gt on with th story. Howvr, it is Samul s gnalogy and th background of his family which hlps to xplain his mothr s prayr and his mothr s willingnss to giv up hr son accoing to hr vow. What appars to b th cas, as prviously discussd, is that Hannah and Elkanah wr both probably Lvits living as Ephraimits. Thy wrn t in th citis givn to thm by God; thy wrn t srving th Aaronic pristhood. Thy had forsakn thir uniqu ancstry as Lvits and livd just lik anyon in th trib of Ephraim. Thy apparntly had nough Lvi blood in thm to qualify thm as Lvits (and thy could hav bn pur almost pur Lvits, with rfrnc to thir ancstors) and this apparntly wighd on th mind of Hannah, which will xplain som of hr bhavior in this chaptr. Sh wants badly to hav a child by hr husband, Elkanah. Elkanah, bing a man, is fin with whatvr is going on. If thy hav a kid, fin; if thy don t, fin. Not a big dal to him. H liks Hannah; h has anothr wif who bars him childrn, so vrything is a-okay with him (although, h crtainly is not plasd with th bickring btwn th two womn, which no doubt hlps to account for his strong rligious tis). Not so with Hannah. Sh knows that sh is a Lvit and that hr family has not takn on th dutis of th Lvi trib for svral gnrations. It could b infr that sh blivs that is th rason for hr barrnnss. Thrfor, sh wants so badly to bar a child that sh is willing to plac this child at th Tabrnacl (th Holy Tnt of God) to b raisd. Givn hr hritag as a Lvit who dos not srv God, th vow that sh maks, to giv hr child ovr to God if God givs hr a child, maks a grat dal of sns. In your program to rad th Bibl in on yar, you rad this vrs in about 3 sconds. It took us ovr four pags of commntary to covr th sam vrs. On to v. 2: And to him two womn: a nam of on, Hannah and a nam of th othr, Pninnah. And so h was to Pninnah childrn and to Hannah not of childrn. 1Samul 1:2 And to him, two wivs: th nam of on [was] Hannah, and th nam of th oth r [was] Pninnah. And so thr wr to Pninnah childrn and to Hannah, without childrn. And h had two wivs. Th first on s nam was Hannah, and th scond was namd Pninnah. Pninnah had childrn but Hannah did not. Hr is how othrs hav translatd this vrs: Ancint txts: Masortic Txt Sptuagint Significant diffrncs: And to him two womn: a nam of on, Hannah and a nam of th othr, Pninnah. And so h was to Pninnah childrn and to Hannah not of childrn. And h [had] two wivs; th nam of th on [was] Anna and th nam of th scond, Phnnana. And Phnnana had childrn, but Anna had no child. Non. Whn this is th cas, w can b about 99.5% assu that this txt is accurat. Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrass: CEV Elkanah had two wivs, Hannah and Pninnah. Although Pninnah had childrn, Hannah did not hav any. Mostly litral rndrings (with som occasional paraphrasing):

14 1Samul Chaptr 1 58 God s Wo Elkanah had two wivs, on namd Hannah, th othr Pninnah. Pninnah had childrn, but Hannah had non. Litral, almost wo-for-wo, rndrings: NASB Young s Updatd LT And h had two wivs: th nam of on was Hannah and th nam of th othr Pninnah; and Pninnah had childrn, but Hannah had no childrn....and h has two wivs, th nam of th on is Hannah, and th nam of th scond Pninnah, and Pninnah has childrn, and Hannah has no childrn. What is th gist of this vrs? Elkanah has two wivs; Hannah is his first, who has born him no childrn; and Pninnah is his scond who has born him childrn. 1Samul 1:2a Hbrw/Pronunciation Common English Manings Nots/Morphology Numbrs w (or v ) (å) [pronouncd wh] and, vn, thn; namly; whn; sinc, that; though simpl wâw conjunction BDB #251 lâmd (ì) [pronouncd l ] to, for, towas, in rgas to dirctional/rlational prposition with th 3 prson masculin singular suffix BDB #510 sh tayîm (í é Ç ò ) Ó [pronouncd sh TAH- yim] two, two of, a pair of, a duo of fminin numral construct Strong s #8147 BDB #1040 nâshîym (íé. Èð) [pronouncd naw- SHEEM] womn, wivs fminin plural noun; irrgular plural of Strong s #802 Strong s #802 BDB #61 Translation: And to him, two wivs:... This givs us: And to him, two of womn. Or, slightly lss litrally: And to him, two wivs. Thr ar som who rad this first phras and conclud that God approvs of polygamy. Not tru. Th popl found in Scriptur ar prsntd with all of thir flaws and sins. Just bcaus God tlls us that Elkanah had two wivs, this dos not man that God thrfor approvd. This fact is prtinnt to undrstanding th motivation of Hannah, th mothr of Samul. As many an xgt has pointd out: th Bibl quots Satan whn h tmpts our Lo in th dsrt wildrnss dos that man that Satan s misapplication of Scriptur is accurat? Satan is quotd in Gn. 3 as lying to th woman dos that mak his lis truth? Crtainly not. Th Bibl simply givs us th ncssary background to undrstand th narrativ and th issus prtaining thrto. If somon othr than our Lo was portrayd as sinlss in Scriptur, thn w would b much mor suspicious of th vracity of th rco (vn th two gratst mn of Scriptur, Moss and Paul, ar prsntd with flaws and chinks in thir armor). Howvr, it was clar that th Law allowd for mor than on wif. Givn that, w ought to invstigat this mattr mor carfully: A Fw Points on Polygamy 1. God did not provid Adam with svral wivs. H provid Adam with on wif (Gn. 1 3). In cas you do not undrstand, this mans that God has st a prcdnt. 2. Th scond, and most important point, is that thr ar rlativly fw polygamous rlationships alludd to

15 59 Th Book of Samul A Fw Points on Polygamy in Scriptur. Thr ar cults who lan towa polygamy, and rly on th Old Tstamnt for support; howvr, whras thr ar hunds and hunds of womn mntiond with rspct to thir marriag; thr ar only a handful of polygamous marriags namd. 3. Th first rcod instanc of polygamy in th Old Tstamnt was in Gn. 4:19, whr Lamch, svral gnrations down in th lin of Cain, took two wivs to himslf. Lamch was also th fathr of vigilantism (Gn. 4:23 24), thrfor, if w conclud anything, it is that only th most dgnrat of arly man was a polygamist. 4. Abraham, at th insistnc of his wif, had rlations with hr Egyptian prsonal srvant, Hagar. Although Abraham was nvr officially marrid to Hagar, h had a son by hr whom God had to protct, bcaus of th conflict which aros undr Abraham s roof (Gn. 16, 21). Th nd rsult was, Sarah, Abraham s wif, dmandd that Hagar and hr son b thrown out of th hous. 5. Jacob, Abraham s grandson, had two wivs and, in a mannr of spaking, two mistrsss (th two prsonal slavs of his two wivs). Jacob had bn trickd into marrying th first wif (whom h did not lov). H was thn abl to marry th woman that h did lov (whos lif was rlativly short). Nothing is said with rgas to right or wrong concrning this instanc of polygamy, and, to b fair, Jacob did not start out with th intntion of marrying svral wivs; h was in lov with Rachl, but was trickd into marrying hr oldr sistr first. Both of his wivs thn convincd him to hav sxual rlations with thir mistrsss, which Jacob wnt along with (th Bibl rports but dos not ncssarily condon this). In any cas, God did bring from ths two wivs and two mistrsss th tribs of Isral. What is clar is that Jacob rarly xhibitd what w would think of as xmplary bhavior for a blivr (h was a chislr arly on in his lif and a slfcnt whinr at th nd of his lif). That all of Isral cam from him was God taking what thr was and making good com from it (Rom. 8:28). 6. Intrstingly nough, aftr bing raisd in a polygamous hom, non of Jacob s sons wr rcod as having mor than on wif (although Judah is rcod as having at last on xtra-marital affair Gn. 38). 7. Thr was rivalry among th two wivs probably among thir prsonal srvants; and thr was pronouncd sibling rivalry. Th oldr brothrs sold th youngst son, Josph, into slavry. 8. Th Law rcos an instanc of how to dal with th situation whn a man lovs on wif ovr anothr (Dut. 21:15 17), indicating that this practic did occur in arly Jwish socity and som aspcts of it rqui rgulation. Th law in qustion dals with favoritism whn thr is mor than on wif. It is intrsting that th Law of Moss did not forbid polygamy, xcpt to th king. 9. Th gnalogical portion of Chronicls, which is filld with family lins, rcos at last thr mn with mor than on wif: King David (1Chron. 3:1), Ashhur in th lin of Judah (1Chron. 4:5) and Shaharaim (1Chron. 8:8). 10. Gidon, on of th judgs (or saviors) in th book of Judgs, had a larg numbr of wivs (h took ths wivs on aftr his priod of spiritual gratnss). 11. Our two most famous cas historis ar David and Solomon, th lattr having 300 wivs and 700 concubins (mistrsss). Joash, anothr king of Isral (actually, on of th good ons) also had two wivs (2Chron. 24:3). All in all, this givs us fwr than 10 polygamous marriags in th Old Tstamnt. 12. David s sons and daughtrs by his diffrnt wivs hav a sortd history of civil war, powr lust and incst. 13. Solomon s hart was turnd from God from all of th forign womn that h had rlations with. 14. Furthrmor, th Law warnd against a king multiplying wivs to himslf (this is also whr w find that th king was not to us his offic for grat prsonal gain Dut. 17:17). 15. In thos rlationships that w ar allowd to xamin in dpth, thr was always a favorit wif: Jacob prfr Rachl ovr Lah and his two mistrsss. Elkanah prfr Hannah ovr Pninnah. Solomon was in lov with a woman that h could not hav (rcall that h had a thousand wivs and mistrsss). Obviously (to a woman), onc a prfrnc has bn statd or infr, thn thr will b hll to pay in that particular houshold. Prtty much any woman could pick up on an infr prfrnc. 16. Just as important as th fact that thr ar but a handful of polygamous marriags in Scriptur, is this point: in all of ths cas historis, w hav no instancs of a happy hom lif for thos involv d in polygamy. Jacob s houshold was filld with strif, as was th houshold w hav bfor us Elkanah s. On book of th Bibl is ddicatd spcifically to Solomon s frustration with falling in lov with prhaps his right woman (had h not marrid all of th othr womn first) and, as a Lothario, not bing abl to woo hr into his harm

16 1Samul Chaptr 1 60 A Fw Points on Polygamy (this is th Song of Solomon, of cours). 17. Spaking of Solomon, I should also mntion that th practic of polygamy is prtty much confind to th walthy. 18. In th Law, w do not find a prohibition against polygamy (although it is strongly discouragd for kings); howvr, w find littl to rcommnd it ithr (thr ar mor laws daling with slavry than with polygamy). 19. Evn though thr ar rgulations in th Mosaic Law govrning polygamy, this dos not grant approval for polygamous practics. Th laws that dal with polygamy ar primarily dsignd to protct th womn involvd in such marriags. 20. In th Nw Tstamnt, w find prtty much an assumption of th corrctnss of monogamy. a. A man who divorcs on woman to marry anothr, apart from th offns of adultry, was said to commit adultry (Matt. 19:3 9). In this passag, Jsus quots Gnsis, whr it rads: And th two will bcom on flsh. b. Whn th Sadducs try to trap Jsus with a qustion, thy ask about a woman who has bn marrid to svral husbands; howvr, ach husband dis bfor sh rmarris (sh marris his brothrs, accoing to th Law). Thr is a diffrnt point that Jsus maks, but th point I am making is that sh dos not marry svral mn at th sam tim (Matt. 22:23 32). c. Whras, w hav two passags in th Law daling with polygamy (thos two mntiond), all Nw Tstamnt passags dal with th marriag btwn on man and on woman (Eph. 5:22 33). d. Paul tlls Timothy that a pastor must b th husband of on wif. Although this passag is givn svral diffrnt intrprtations; it can crtainly b usd to show that polygamy is not a part of th gam plan for any pastor (1Tim. 3:2). 21. Givn that w hav no Nw Tstamnt cas historis of polygamy and that thr ar vry fw in th Old Tstamnt (and non of thos ar givn as pacful); and givn that God s original plan involvd on man and on woman (Gn. 2:24), w ar forcd to th conclusion that it is God s prfct plan for on man to marry on woman. 22. An intrsting qustion: thr is no spcific ban on polygamy in th Old Tstamnt, but thr appars to b in th Nw. Explain. a. Th propr rlationship btwn a man and a woman is on man for on woman; vn though this is not a rquirmnt of th Law, it is discouragd in th Old Tstamnt. i. By xampl: vry dtaild xampl of polygamy in th Old Tstamnt is fraught with problms. Howvr, thr wr a numbr of polygamous unions that w do not know much about (Gn. 4:19, 23 Judgs 8:13 1Chron. 4:5 8:8 2Chron. 24:3). In at last th first two, w ar sur that th familis had mor than thir shar of problms. ii. By law: th king was not supposd to multiply wivs to himslf. iii. By doctrin: th rlationship btwn God and Isral is oftn spokn of in trms of a man and his right woman. iv. Howvr, to b accurat hr, th Old Tstamnt Law dalt with polygamy: If a man has two wivs, th on lovd and th othr unlovd, and both th lovd and th unlovd hav born him childrn, and if th firstborn son blongs to th unlovd, thn on th day whn h assigns his possssions as an inhritanc to his sons, h may not trat th son of th lovd as th firstborn in prfrnc to th son of th unlovd, who is th firstborn, but h shall acknowldg th firstborn, th son of th unlovd, by giving him a doubl portion of all that h has, for h is th firstfruits of his strngth. Th right of th firstborn is his (Dut. 21:15 17). This dos not tlls us that it is right or wrong for a man to b polygamous; it just tlls us that som wr, and that Moss invokd this on rgulation concrning polygamy. b. Thr is not actually a ban in th Nw Tstamnt; it was also discouragd, howvr: i. By doctrin: all taching about marriag is confind to on man and on woman. ii. By church rquirmnts: th pastor has to b a husband of on wif. c. So actually, thr is no ban against polygamy in th Old or Nw Tstamnts. Howvr, it is strongly discouragd in both. 23. An intrsting and final qustion: why dosn t th Bibl com right out and condmn polygamy? Why is