PRIESTHOOD (1)
[p. 462] PRIESTHOOD (1)
1 Samuel 1:9 - 18; 1 Samuel 1:24 - 28; 1 Samuel 2:1 - 10; 1 Samuel 7:5 - 11
JT This book calls for a change of priesthood and, whilst the priesthood that is brought in does not formally replace Eli and his house, it does so in principle. So there is a striking analogy between this book and the inauguration of christianity inclusive of the incarnation. Priesthood appeared in the same way, not at first officially but nevertheless in reality, and in due course the official priest came into evidence. The brethren will see that there is great practical instruction in all this as making the way for younger believers who might hesitate at the thought of priesthood attaching to them. They need not shrink from it but should understand that it is essential to the prosperity and continuance of the testimony that they take it up. It begins in Hannah, that is, in a sister in this book; then it is seen in Samuel and more particularly, as to what is in mind, in David. In David it links on directly with the New Testament for it says: “For it is clear that our Lord has sprung out of Juda” (Hebrews 7:14), although Moses had said nothing about priesthood as attaching to that tribe. The change of the priesthood, and the fact that it is seen in David in this book, points to Christ who sprang out of Juda, and to whom now the priesthood belongs; but it began in Him not formally, not officially.
EGMcA Is the priesthood seen here in Hannah, in the offering that she offered to the Lord in Samuel?
JT First of all in her prayer. The Spirit of God gives it very briefly in chapter 1, verses 10,11: “And she was in bitterness of soul, and prayed to Jehovah, and wept much. And she vowed a vow, and said, O Jehovah of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thy handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thy handmaid, but wilt give unto thy handmaid a man [p. 463] child, then I will give him to Jehovah all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head”. Then it says, “And it came to pass as she continued praying ...” We are not told how long she continued but we see from this that priestly exercises and services may go on amongst the people of God without any show, but nevertheless in true reality.
EGMcA Hannah felt with God in the breakdown of the priesthood as seen in Eli.
JT There cannot be a doubt that she would have a judgment about it. Whether she understood it fully or not, her prayer, and how she prayed, and the result, show that she was providing for what was needed.
JD Verse 9 says: “And Hannah rose up after they had eaten in Shiloh, and after they had drunk; (now Eli the priest sat upon the seat by the doorpost of the temple of Jehovah;) and she was in bitterness of soul, and prayed to Jehovah, and wept much”. God had Hannah in mind and her state was agreeable to Him; and so light comes in.
JT There was a new beginning without any ostentation, and Eli is brought in in the parentheses very significantly. “Now Eli the priest sat ...” He was not doing anything. He sat; he was lazy. There was no thought that priests were to sit in the house of God.
JWD “... and there shall no razor come upon his head”. Do you think Hannah apprehended a deficiency in connection with Eli?
JT That is what I thought. This man child, as she calls him, was not to be brought up for her honour. The growth of hair on the man would mean that he was not asserting himself on natural lines at all. He was not like Absalom who would poll his hair every year and make much of that. As the apostle says: “for when I am weak, then I am powerful”, 2 Corinthians [p. 464] 12:10.
EHT Do you think Hannah was a woman who pondered things in her heart as to the situation?
JT She was “a woman of a sorrowful spirit”, and it arose from the fact that she was under governmental restrictions. Jehovah had not given her children. She was suffering governmentally and the whole nation was suffering governmentally, and her prayer expresses the exercise that rose up in those circumstances. She is like any brother or sister who thinks for God when things are not right. She is going through things secretly.
JD It is wise to accept the governmental dealings of God without getting into despair.
JT It was acute in Hannah’s case. God was preventing what she so ardently desired, a male child, a man according to God, not according to human ambition, but according to God, in weakness and dependence.
JD Would the idea be in Matthew, that the Lord accepts the governmental ordering of God with the whole nation and identifies Himself with them in the way out?
JT I think so. He identifies Himself with a repentant remnant: “for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness”, Matthew 3:15.
WB Is the whole nation in your mind at this point as needing a change in the priesthood?
JT Yes; God has revived among His people the true thought of priesthood, as over against the priesthood according to man that prevails in christendom.
GAT You said last night that what was official did not recognise what was real. Eli would criticise what was real. I thought in considering a locality, that God might raise up amongst us those that are real and yet might not be much in appearance, and those who are not real might criticise such.
JT “Eli the priest sat upon the seat by the doorpost of the temple of Jehovah”. Who made that seat we do [p. 465] not know. There was no provision for it in the specifications of the tabernacle. He is observing this woman. Why did he not observe his sons in this way? They were flagrant in their conduct right before him, even in the temple at Shiloh. Why did he notice this woman so carefully? It says in verse 12: “And it came to pass as she continued praying before Jehovah, that Eli marked her mouth”. It would seem that he was looking for evil and was ready to impute it.
EGMcA It is outside of his own family.
JT That is not a priestly act. A priest ought to look for evil if there is some evidence of it, but not otherwise.
GAT If he were spiritual, he would not be thinking along those lines.
JT It is very difficult to see how you could impute evil to a woman because of the movement of her lips. Although a sister is to be silent in the assembly, that does not mean she is not to pray in the assembly. Why should she not pray in her heart and move her lips? That would not necessarily mean that she made a sound.
JD That he misjudged her witnesses to how far Eli had departed from the mind of God.
JT You are tested by such circumstances as to how your mind is running.
SMcC Apart from the flagrant conditions connected with Eli’s house, was there not something lacking in Eli himself? He is of the family of Ithamar but Eleazar is the line to which God had committed Himself and which is reinstated under Solomon’s ministry.
JT That is very important. Eleazar and Ithamar had had real experience themselves. They are called the priests that were left. Ithamar’s posterity ought not to be wanting for he had had experience and served well as far as we can see, although Eleazar had the great promises and was made high priest afterwards. It is remarkable how God sets limits in the beginning [p. 466] that ought to have worked out as real experience in the posterity.
GWH In the crisis, in which the governmental dealings of God are evident, the wife of Phinehas collapsed (1 Samuel 4:19 - 22), but Hannah goes forward constructively.
JT Yes. Chapter 2 brings out the powerful spirit of priesthood in her, issuing in poetic and prophetic form. It is called a prayer but it is really a spiritual celebration.
JWD Would there be an analogy in principle between this and Paul travailing in birth in the epistle to the Galatians?
JT Yes, the idea of travail is constantly used throughout Scripture.
FRA What is the difference between this and Cain’s birth? Eve says, “I have acquired a man with Jehovah”, Genesis 4:1.
JT Eve’s remark is significant too, because she says, “I have acquired a man with Jehovah”. That is, she acquired him with the help of God. She is the first person to use the term ‘Jehovah’, and it seems as if there is some light in her soul. She had never seen a babe; the only male she had seen was Adam and he was never a babe. He was a man when he was formed. She would have in mind that that is what God intended. A babe brings out the weakness of the position, but the great result is a man. In truth, every male that is born has manhood in prospect. I believe Eve had that thought.
JD Do you think it would be too much to say that Hannah had real priestly feelings here? In her reply to Eli she says: “No, my lord, I am a woman of a sorrowful spirit: I have drunk neither wine nor strong drink, but have poured out my soul before Jehovah. Take not thy handmaid for a daughter of Belial: for out of the abundance of my grief and provocation have I spoken hitherto”. It is the result of having witnessed the breakdown of everything [p. 467] in connection with what was official, and God takes account of that.
JT Whatever her intelligence may have been, the instincts were there that fitted in with the current need. Similarly Jacob, when he supplanted Esau, could not have told you why he did it. The mind of God proceeds not only through acquired knowledge in His people, but through instinct.
EGMcA Priestly instincts and feelings may not be able to perfectly analyse the situation, but they lead Godward.
JT The exercises of Hannah here answered in result to the mind of God.
SMcC In connection with what you were saying as to priesthood finding expression in poetic form, would there not be an analogy between what we have here and the opening chapters of Luke in that priesthood there finds poetic expression?
JT The analogy between Hannah and the mother of our Lord is very remarkable. The official priest there is dumb.
JB Eli answered Hannah: “Go in peace; and the God of Israel grant thee thy petition which thou hast asked of him”. Would not that confirm Hannah?
JT It would. Eli had some right instincts too. But it is helpful to bring Luke in here because it shows how God sets aside the official priest, bringing in dumbness. In the meantime we have Mary introduced. She corresponds with Hannah; she is able to speak as to what is inside her. “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Saviour”, Luke 1:46,47. All that she says is mainly the outcome of formation. Elizabeth is said to be filled with the Spirit. Formation in Hannah is shown by her poetic production. You cannot write poetically except by a sense of balance, and you understand the features that you can call upon: “all that is within me”, Psalm 103:1. The analysis of Romans 7 enables us to understand what there is within us that can be used in the worship of [p. 468] God.
JD The instinct has begun to take shape intelligently when she says: “I will wait until the child is weaned”. It was after that that she went up with the bullocks and the flour and the wine. She would not identify herself with the official thing.
JT That is beautiful. Any parent that brings his child into the assembly and thinks he is controlling there, is unintelligent to say the least. The intelligent person says, Now the child is to be developed from Christ the Head. All in the assembly must be of Christ and for Christ. I believe that is spiritually the thought in weaning.
EGMcA That is the day she had looked forward to — when he would rely upon God for his resources.
JT “And the woman abode, and gave her son suck ...”. That is the proper nourishment up to a point but not beyond that point. She nursed him and then she weaned him.
JWD It was the nursing of such a mother.
JT Yes. What a constitution she would impart!
GAT Would you look for such a spirit among sisters today that this exercise would be found amongst them, that their offspring might be brought in as material for the assembly?
JT Quite so. The refusal of the razor means that. The kind of constitution that the child is to have is received from the mother up to a point, but henceforth he is to be for God.
EGMcA The child receives nourishment up to a point from its mother. He would receive the kind of nourishment that would move him into the house of God and produce an appreciation of the body of Christ. Hannah would nourish her child, not that he might shine here, but that his constitution might develop along spiritual lines.
JT The formula nowadays for bringing up babies is modernism. Maternal feeding is the primary thought; by extension of thought it is what is of God in the [p. 469] mother handed on, as it was to Timothy. It says, “And she took him up with her when she had weaned him, with three bullocks, and one ephah of flour, and a flask of wine, and brought him to the house of Jehovah to Shiloh; and the boy was young”. (Notice the word ‘boy’ is used, not ‘child’. This implies potentiality. If he were eating manna, he would have the same measure as his father or mother had.) “And she said, Oh my lord, as thy soul liveth, my lord, I am the woman that stood by thee here to pray to Jehovah. For this boy I prayed; and Jehovah has granted me my petition which I asked of him. And also I have lent him to Jehovah: all the days that he lives, he is lent to Jehovah”.
JD Speaking of Hannah’s intelligence, it says, “... then will I bring him, that he may appear before Jehovah, and there abide for ever”. Do you think that would be the end of all priestly work that the saints might appear there?
JT “Appear before Jehovah, and there abide for ever”, do you mean? Quite so. The word “lent” here means that it is a definite transaction, a committal; as if to say, I have handed him over, but as weaned, because the weaning enters into that. Hannah had fully developed thoughts in her mind. This is not a mere childish movement. It is not the movement of a mother who would make much of her boy — my boy is going to shine. He is not her boy and that is what she is making plain. She is acting on great lines — “three bullocks, and one ephah of flour, and a flask of wine, and brought him to the house of Jehovah to Shiloh ...”. We have to see how priestly she is but her mind is running on great things — three bullocks. On the way up how her mind would be on these things. And one ephah of flour; whether she understood it or not is not the point, it is what the Spirit of God puts down here. It is the humanity of Christ.
WB Referring to verse 21: “And Elkanah her [p. 470] husband, and all his house, went up to sacrifice to Jehovah the yearly sacrifice and his vow”. What would that mean?
JT Well, there was not much behind it. There is nothing against the man but he thought considerably of himself: “Am not I better to thee than ten sons?” He was a good Israelite, you know. But it says of Hannah that she did not go up. This is the spiritual element.
WB He fitted in with the official but not with the spiritual.
GAT Going back again about the mother making much of her boy. Have I not a right to put my boy in a position in this world in which my neighbours are putting their boys in order that he might be given a chance and brought to the front?
JT That is just the danger with us. We have in mind to make a boy distinguished and we have to watch that. We have to be fair to our children but we have to watch that. Hannah’s example here would help us to see that spiritual advancement is the only advancement to be desired.
EGMcA Is there not a great danger in desiring to have my boy shine not only in the world but also amongst the brethren?
JT That is the point in regard of the weaning, that she has relinquished her claim in every way. He is now to live by God.
EGMcA This offering of Hannah’s is a remarkable thing. She exceeds anything we find in the first chapters of Leviticus. She brings three bullocks instead of one; and for the meat offering they used only part of an ephah of flour whereas she uses a whole ephah. There was that in reserve that would continue the thing.
JT These large measures mean her own measure spiritually — what she apprehended.
EGMcA In the intelligence of the Spirit we understand that she gave out of the greatness of her [p. 471] own idea of things; she gave for the maintenance of this spiritual system for God.
JD Speaking of the natural, in John 2:4 when the Lord’s mother comes to Him when the wine runs out, He says to her, “What have I to do with thee, woman?” as if to say that what is going on now is absolutely spiritual.
JB “To whom coming, a living stone, cast away indeed as worthless by men, but with God chosen, precious”, 1 Peter 2:4. Would there be any analogy between what Hannah brought and what the apostle had in his mind?
JT There is the analogy of spiritual power, “to whom coming”. The offering of the three bullocks, and the flour and the flask of wine means there would be holy stimulation for Jehovah. There would be, so to speak, a wonderfully good time!
EGMcA In the wine is there a figure that the way we offer to God really moves His emotions?
JT That is right. It is a figure, God coming down to our way of thinking. What good meetings we would have if all the brethren came together with these thoughts in their hearts!
GAT The Spirit of God would expect that.
JT He is working for that. It says: “And he worshipped Jehovah there”. It is force of example. If I am preceding you on the line of the Spirit, I am sure to have influence. Influence is a great matter.
EGMcA Eli was roused from his apathy and was influenced to worship.
JT Just so. The testimony of the Thessalonians sounded out afar. The point is influence. The Lord says, “... make disciples”, Matthew 28:19. That would be by example.
JD Peter was a poor one in John 21:3 when he said, “I go to fish”.
JT What a poor example that was!
GAT He was a good one in Acts 2.
GWH Samuel’s sons did not carry this out at all.
JT That is a sad reminder. Great man as Samuel was, he did not pass on this principle of influence. You get men whom God uses and yet their families do not carry on what they have.
GWH If Samuel’s sons did not answer, his grandson did — Heman. It is beautiful to see that if the first generation does not answer, the second generally does, so that the line is carried on. What Hannah desired was not seen in her grandson, but in her great grandson. Was he not appointed to a very wonderful position when the ark was brought up?
JT That is very good. The line is carried on anyway. The divine way of carrying the genealogy is often to omit certain members of it.
EGMcA Does it not limit natural expectancy?
JT That is good, for after all we have to count on God.
GAT What does it mean to lend your child to Jehovah?
JT I do not think she expected to have him back. He was to remain there for ever. The word “lent” would mean a definite transaction.
GAT That she would have no claim on him from now on?
JT If we are to make anything of the word “lend”, it would be God’s way of recompensing such a service.
Ques Would it bring in the thought of baptising our children, lending them to the Lord?
JT Baptism enters into this. It is allied with it very strongly, but what is in mind in the use of the word “lend”? Sometimes it implies that you get a return; of course you will get a return. Hannah would find in her own soul’s enrichment that there was a return.
GWH Is the thought that the subjective state of the meeting considers for God and makes provision so that things are maintained in priesthood?
JT That is the practical lesson for us — what [p. 473] a sister can do in a meeting. She does not say, ‘This is a matter for the brothers’. Hannah went to God; she saw what was needed and got it.
GAT Would you say she felt the break-up of what was official?
JT I am sure the instinct was there. God orders everything so that it could be expressed in this way.
JWD She did not seek to undermine what was official.
JT That is a good suggestion. She was not thinking of breaking things up, it was rather displacement. The thing is to bring in something better. It is not a matter of using the hammer and the axe to break things up, but of bringing in something better. That is the way God works.
WB Hannah’s offering is very remarkable in view of what it says in chapter 2, verse 17. She comes with three bullocks at a time when men abhorred the offering of the Lord.
JD Is it not wonderful to think that God operates on the principle of the state of His people? David recognised that when the priests would have taken the ark with them. He says, No, take it back to Jerusalem and you go with it. That meant the overthrow of the whole system there.
JT Where trouble arises in a meeting, and a brother or sister says, ‘I will not go on there. I cannot break bread with that brother or that sister’, they are ignoring what God can do. Let God work the thing out. That is very fine in David. We shall come to that later, his sending back the ark. David was no partisan; he would leave everything with God. Even though the meeting is not what I think it should be, God will work out His thoughts.
GAT You would stand by the meeting regardless of what is being taught there?
JT People say, I will withdraw; I will not go on with that. Of course if iniquity is there it will come [p. 474] out, but otherwise go on. There was not only the ark but wise men all around it. You go back and stay there.
GAT “... but they that wait upon Jehovah shall renew their strength”, Isaiah 40:31.
JT It is a very poor thing to think of withdrawing because what is there does not suit you. God has His own way.
FRA Sometimes you find there is more than one principle involved in it.
JT God takes time to work out His thoughts, especially if the meeting is dull or heavy. But if God is patient, why am I not?
SWP At the end of the book of Judges it says: “In those days ... every man did what was right in his own eyes”. In 1 Samuel it speaks of that day, as if the day had arrived for God.
JT Just so. This second chapter brings that out. Hannah is so triumphant. Where do people get this ability they have? See how beautifully she speaks here. It is called a prayer but really it is a celebration in beautiful, poetic form: “And Hannah prayed, and said, My heart exulteth in Jehovah, my horn is lifted up in Jehovah; my mouth is opened wide over mine enemies; for I rejoice in thy salvation. There is none holy as Jehovah, for there is none beside thee, neither is there any rock like our God” (verses 1,2).
EHT Was that all a result of her appreciation of Jehovah, that she had such spiritual resources?
JT The Spirit of God came in. And it is as in assembly that you are carried forward beyond anything that you might have. The power of the Spirit carried her forward in this wonderful production, probably beyond anything she could ever have devised. God is making her competent as if to honour her, for she had suffered keenly. It is to bring out what is possible, that is, a production like this in a dark day such as this chapter contemplates.
Ques Is the secret of Hannah’s power seen in the third verse: “For Jehovah is a God of knowledge”?
JT The great place she gives Jehovah, you mean? She says, “There is none holy as Jehovah, for there is none beside thee, neither is there any rock like our God”. Then it goes on to say in verse 3: “Do not multiply your words of pride, let not vain-glory come out of your mouth”. What a rebuke that is to all that is current today — vain words. What can you say? It is to shut man’s mouth. See what has come out in the last hundred years religiously! “For Jehovah is a God of knowledge”. They do not get their knowledge from Him; in fact they do not care to retain Him in their knowledge.
GAT What are vain words?
JT What do not proceed from God. It is very interesting to count up all the things He is God of. He is a God of knowledge, for one thing.
JD Hannah here almost rises to the height in 1 Chronicles 29.
JT Very nearly.
JWD She turns from addressing Jehovah directly to more general ideas. Why is that?
JT It is an attack of the enemy: “Do not multiply your words of pride”. That would be the enemy. That comes into your mind in prayer. “Let not vain-glory come out of your mouth; for Jehovah is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed. The bow of the mighty is broken, and they that stumbled are girded with strength. They that were full have hired themselves out for bread; and the hungry are so no more: Even the barren beareth seven, and she that hath many children is waxed feeble. Jehovah killeth, and maketh alive; he bringeth down to Sheol, and bringeth up. Jehovah maketh poor, and maketh rich, he bringeth low, also he lifteth up: He raiseth up the poor out of the dust; from the dung-hill he lifteth up the needy, To set him among nobles; and he maketh [p. 476] them inherit a throne of glory; For the pillars of the earth are Jehovah’s, and he hath set the world upon them. He keepeth the feet of his saints, but the wicked are silenced in darkness”. A person led on in the power of the Spirit of God can say marvellous things. What a knowledge she had of the stability of the universe!
GWH She speaks about the greatness of Jehovah and then about His bringing down to Sheol and bringing up.
JT It is what faith relies upon. These vain words refer to men who have acquired a place in the profession without God, who have climbed up to the pinnacle of power. That is what it means in our day.
SWP Does she show greater intelligence than Eli in calling Him “Jehovah”? Eli says “the God of Israel”.
JT She seems to rise to the full height of what was available. It was only she who apparently did so at this time and she stands out as laying hold of what was available. What a far-reaching production this is! What a knowledge she had! She got it from God. Like the man in John 9 — he got it as he went on.
EGMcA Would this correspond to the offerings in Leviticus? In the first verse of her prayer there is a portion for God, and the next is really a portion for her own soul. There were portions that the priests offered to God and portions that they ate themselves.
JT Well, it works out that way. We ought to learn from it that God may take up anyone in a day like ours and make them far beyond the greatest there is as to production. This is a classic, a classic that will remain. It is what God can do. How the Holy Spirit comes in as you make room for Him! God takes up the vessel, and see what He makes out of her! You do not get a production like this earlier, not even in Miriam or Deborah.
FRA There is the thought of the king at the end of what Hannah [p. 477] says.
JT She speaks first of the pillars of the earth — that He set the world on them. “For the pillars of the earth are Jehovah’s, and he hath set the world upon them. He keepeth the feet of his saints”. They are preserved. Then in verse 9: “But the wicked are silenced in darkness; for by strength shall no man prevail. They that strive with Jehovah shall be broken to pieces; in the heavens will he thunder upon them. Jehovah will judge the ends of the earth; and he will give strength unto his king, and exalt the horn of his anointed”. There will be a king and the anointed is the king.
EGMcA The priesthood would be maintained in divine power.
JT It is the king first.
SMcC Is it not interesting that she speaks in her song of the barren bearing seven, not just one, as if there is an end to the exercise she had passed through.
JT Seven is always a spiritual thought.
JWW Would this connect in any way with the end of Luke’s gospel: “they ... were continually in the temple praising and blessing God”, Luke 24:53?
JT I think so. This song, or prayer, of Hannah’s is a contribution to the wealth of the house of God. Her son was a great contribution, but in truth, this lasts longer. This is a great spiritual contribution to the house of God — as David later provided for the treasuries of the house whatever they were.
GAT Her words are an encouragement for us today.
JT They are. The production of hymns — a poetic means of serving God — is all wealth of the treasury.
JB This goes far beyond the confines of Israel.
JT No one but God could take up a woman like Hannah and cause her to speak like this.
JD She touches both sides. “They that were full have hired themselves out for bread ...” — is education [p. 478] as to the ecclesiastical position around us. She recognised what the whole official system really was.
JWD “Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs”, Ephesians 5:19. That is your own production, not the hymn book, is it?
JT I should not exclude the hymn book. They are there, no doubt; they are contemplated as there. I think that this would be in mind as a contribution to the wealth of the house, that Israel would be engaged in this sort of thing. Deuteronomy 32 is formally said to be that, not only written but put into the mouths of the people. It was to be in the mouths of the people of God — a remarkable testimony to them (Deuteronomy 31:19).
Rem Wisdom has built her house.
JT Yes. This is one of the great contributions to the Lord’s house. David later takes account of all these contributions and carefully provides that they should be kept in treasuries.
WB Would you say a word as to verse 11: “And Elkanah went to Ramah to his house”.
JT It is just to bring out the position of the boy.
WB Was Elkanah there all this time with her?
JT Quite so. The point is the boy ministering to Jehovah and we get it right through here: in verse 18, “And Samuel ministered before Jehovah, a boy ...” that is a potential man. Then we are told in verse 26: “And the boy Samuel grew on”. In chapter 3, verse 1: “And the boy Samuel ministered to Jehovah”. In verse 19: “And Samuel grew” (no longer the boy), “and Jehovah was with him, and let none of his words fall to the ground”. There you have a man.
EHT What about God being with him?
JT What would He be otherwise? God took him on. All this growth was, as it were, from what was inside, in the house. His constitution was formed by that.
EGMcA The development of what is priestly [p. 479] maintains things for God and for the brethren, “and Jehovah was with him”.
JT The full thought in the priesthood in Samuel is in the verses we read.
This production brings out what she got from the lending really, something beyond anything she had ever contemplated.
EHT There was a certain period in Samuel’s history when God was with him. Would he have to reach that first?
JT There was a time when he did not know the Lord. It was all by external supervision so far.