The Pulpit Commentary — Joshua — Section 15

Boolts being filled with the reigns of Saul and David. The including of Eli and Samuel in this series rather than in the Book of Judges would seem all the more strange, if (as some suppose) all these five books were compiled about the same !ime, and possibly by the same hand. And yet the arrangement is perhaps not only a justifiable one but the best that could have been made. For (lJ the judgeship of Eli and Samuel is a very different office from that which was held by Gideon, Ehud, or Samson ; (2) the importance of Samuel does not consist in his closing the list of Judges, but in his preparing the way for the monarchy, and in particular for David, the type and most notable progenitor of the Messiah. The judgeship of Eli and Samuel was permanent, sacerdotal, and perhaps, in virtue of its connexion with the sacerdotal office, was intended to be hereditary. The office of the earlier judges was the reverse of all this. It was exceptional and provisional; like the dictatorship among the Romans, a temporary concentration of the power in the hands of one man in order to meet a crisis. Moreover, it had no connexion with the priesthood; not one of the earlier Judges was of priestly descent. The attempt of Abimelech, the son of Gideon, to inherit some of his father's power failed. In what way the office became so changed as we find it in Eli's hands is unknown. Between Samson's overthrow of the Philistine temple at Gaza and the Philistines' overthrow of the sanctuary at Shiloh, there is a blank in the sacred narrative which we cannot fill. How did Eli, who belonged to the family of Ithamar, Aaron's second son, become high-priest, although the line of Eleazar, the eldest son, was not extinct? How did Eli come to be both high- priest and judge? These are questions which we cau only answer conjecturally. But it may easily have been the case that Eli was elected judge for exploits against the Philistines early in life, and that, being a descendant of Aaron, the fact of his being judge led to his obtaining the high-priesthood also. The kincl-hearted old man whom we find sitting at the entrance to the sanctuary of Shiloh, when the narrative begins again, can scarcely be one who gained office by violence or fraud. Nothing of the kind is laid to his charge, when for his sons' iniquity and his weak- ness in not restraining them his family is brought to ruin. But the great in:fluence which he enjoyed is shown by the fact that, even after the heavy blow fell upon his house, we find his descendants, Ahijah with Saul, and Abiathar with Dand, in honourable priestly offices. Nothing shows more clearly the depth of the mo1·al degradation into which the people had fallen during the time of the Judges than the conduct of Eli's sons. In the very sanctuary itself, and in the ministers to it, we find the most barefaced cupidity and wantonness. Hophni and Phinehas are the prototypes of grasping and sensual ecclesiastics throughout all ages ; and the consequences of their sins, to the congregation, to the sanctuary, and to themselves, are warnings of the judg- ment which must fall sooner or later upon corruption and profligacy in high and sacred places. Micah's Levite in the Book of Judges is a similar though less glaring instance. And yet, great as the plague-spot is, one sees that Ismel is still sound at heart. The conduct of the priests is felt to be a scandttl; it is not ignored or laughed at: " men abhorred the offerings of the Lord." The depth has not yet been reached when "My people love to have it so" (Jer. v. 31). The superstitious carrying of the ark of the covenant into the field of battle is another aign of the corruption of the timeB; and it again has its counterpart in more modern timea in the carrying of the consecrated host as a sort of charm against danger. The guilty priests, having no spiritual or moral influence with the people, JOBUUA. b XYiii INTRODl'CTION TO THE HISTOUICAL DOOKS: