1 Samuel 2:1-36

The Sons of Eli

1Sa 2:17

ELI was high-priest of the Jews when the ark of the Lord was in Shiloh. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, were priests of the Lord. Their office was holy, but their character was corrupt. They touched sacred things with unworthy hands. "The sons of Eli were sons of Belial; they knew not the Lord." Their administration of the priestly office was characterised by the most rapacious selfishness. Hence we read "the sin of the young men was very great before the Lord." Their evil dealings were the subject of public remark and censure. Eli himself heard of these evil dealings on every hand.

"And he said unto them, Why do ye such things? for I hear of your evil dealings by all this people. Nay, my sons; for it is no good report that I hear: ye make the Lord's people to transgress" ( 1Sa 2:23-24 ).

The incident shows but too plainly the vital difference between the spiritual and the official. Hophni and Phinehas were officially amongst the highest men of their day. They bore a holy name, they pronounced holy words, they were clothed in emblematic robes. Yet Hophni and Phinehas were men of Belial. The outside was beautiful; the inside was full of corruption and death. "This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me."

Is there not a lesson here to teachers of Christian truth? It is possible for a man to have a pulpit, and to have no God; to have a Bible, and no Holy Ghost; to be employing his lips in uttering the eloquence of truth, when his heart has gone astray from all that is true and beautiful and good; at the very moment his lips are fired by the words that ought to have converted himself, his heart is not in his work, it is wandering far off yonder, buying and selling and getting gain, sucking in poison where it ought to have extracted honey, making the word of God of none effect, and causing the people to blaspheme and alienate themselves from the Most High!

Is there not a lesson here to professors of Christ? We bear the holy name, and men have a right to expect the holy deed. We are to know a discipline that is more than decent, more than socially irreproachable. We need instruction upon the great question of spiritual discipline. When a man who professes to know Christ is found drunk in the streets, we expel him from the Church, and call that discipline; when a man is convicted of some heinous crime, we cut him off from the fellowship of the Church, and call that the discipline of Christian fellowship. It is nothing of the kind; that is mere decency. There is not a club in the world that cares one iota for its own respectability that would not do the same thing. Ours is to be Christian discipline. When Christian discipline comes into play amongst the priests and the professors of Christ, when the covetous man shall be blown away by a whirlwind of righteous indignation; and the man who spoke but one unkind word shall be seen to be a murderer, and shall be driven from the circle of God's people who then can stand? Where are Christians, if such be the rule? If an unholy thought be lust, if the turn of an eye may be practical blasphemy, if the momentary entertainment of an evil thought, the flash of an evil passion, if that be held before God to be crime incipient, crime in the germ, crime in reality who then can stand?

The accusation does not come from an enemy. We are not entitled to say, "It is a foe who speaks, therefore we heed not his calumnious words." God himself brings charges against his nominal Church. "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate;" "having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." Unto the wicked God saith, "What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth?" So the indictment comes with irresistible force, and we who best know ourselves are dumb before God.

Yet even here is a mystery, a strange and wondrous thing. Hophni and Phinehas, officially great and spiritually corrupt; minister after minister falling, defiling his garments, and debasing his name; professor after professor pronouncing the right word with the lips, but never realising it in the life. Such is the history of the Church. In the face of all this, God still employs men to reveal the truth to other men, to enforce his claims upon their attention. Instead of in a moment of righteous anger sweeping the Church floor, so that not a footstep of man might remain upon it, and then calling the world around him, and speaking personally face to face, he still employs men to teach men, to "allure to brighter worlds and lead the way." We have this treasure in earthen vessels. We are called upon to bear testimony concerning truth, though we are weak, blundering, incomplete, and very foolish, though we hardly ever say one sentence as we ought to say it, though we preach a noble doctrine and then throw it down by an ignoble life. Yet God hath not withdrawn that comfort from us. He still says, "Son, go work today in my vineyard." He still says to Peter with the scars all upon him, unhealed, and never to be taken away, memorials of a great apostasy "Feed my lambs, feed my sheep." He still says to the men who forsook him and fled, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." It is not an indication of our weakness when we are called to that daily continual trust, without which neither high-priest nor doorkeeper is safe, the fervent eternal prayer, "Hold thou me up, and I shall be safe."

The incident shows the deadly result of corruptness in influential quarters. All quarters, indeed, are influential; yet some are known to be more influential than others, therefore we adopt this form of expression. The priests were sons of Belial. What was the consequence? The people abhorred the offering of the Lord. The minister is a bad man. What is the consequence? His character is felt through all the congregation. Men laugh at his speech, jeer at his arguments, and return his persuasions to his own hollow heart. We are commonly advised to consider what is said, rather than look at the person who says it. We should ask, What is the doctrine? not, Who is the preacher? This advice is partly sound, and partly fallacious, fallacious because superficial and incomplete.

We should remember three things in connection with this advice. First: The natural tendency of men to religious laxity and indifference. This makes us glad of any excuse to move further in that direction. Men are not naturally looking out for spurs and encouragements in the way of righteousness, self-crucifixion, and self-discipline. Their nature rather seems to say, "Eat, drink, and be merry, for to-morrow we die." We eagerly snatch at anything that will afford us a momentary though we know it to be unsound justification of laxness, indifference, and even contempt of religious duty and service.

We should remember secondly: The effect of insincerity upon doctrine. Sincerity is itself an argument. Men who hear us, look for sincerity in us; otherwise, they have a right to say, "This man cannot teach the true doctrine, if in teaching it day by day he is continually hypocritical, insincere, unaffected by his own speech." Take some very high theory about the business, and we may be contradicted. But remember what Christian doctrine is; then you will see that the moment it enters into the hearer's mind that the speaker is insincere, that consideration has of necessity a powerful and legitimate influence upon the doctrine. Is it possible to speak the truth with a liar's heart? We know that we are to hear what men say who are in Moses' seat, yet not to do as they do. We know that, speaking ideally and abstractly, we ought continually to distinguish between truth and the speaker of truth, when his character is corrupt and inconsistent with his speech. At the same time there is a sense, profound and terrible, in which a man may be answering his own doctrine, overturning his own argument, and writing folly upon his own philosophy. If his lips pronounce the truth, if his heart contradict it, and his life blaspheme it, what wonder if men who have a natural tendency towards religious indifference should believe the life and deny the teaching!

Then we should remember thirdly: The peculiarity of moral teaching in requiring personal illustration. Men cannot understand merely theoretic morals; they must have them personified; they must have them taught by incarnation; and be illustrated in daily life. The artist may teach you to. paint a beautiful picture; yet he may have no regard for moral truth. His non-regard for moral truth may not interfere, so far as you can see, with his ability and earnestness as a mere artist. You may go to learn a trade, and your chief in business may be able to teach you so completely as to give you a position in the commercial world, useful, influential, and profitable; yet that man may tell lies every hour of his life, may break all the commandments of God, and in doing so he may not affect his ability to teach your trade, or artifice, or profession. It is not so in the Church of God. A man's character is his eloquence; a man's spiritual reality is the argument that wins in the long run; the soul afire with God's love; the life that brings out in their beautiful and impressive relief God's exhortations, these are the things that are most logical, most poetical, most pathetic, most persuasive.

The lesson is to Churches. What are we in our corporate capacity? Are we holy? If not we are helping to debase and ruin the world; we have taken God's leverage to help to undo God's work! The lesson also applies to heads of houses. If the father be the only bad character in the family, how then? It is hard work for the sons to be fighting always against the supreme influence of the house. How if the father of the family be continually sending out of him vicious, blighting influences, corrupting young life and chilling young hope? It applies to principals in business; it applies to leaders of all kinds. In proportion to the volume of our being and the elevation of our position is our power to extend hurtful influences upon the circles that are round about us. The terribleness of a moral leader falling! The awfulness of a standard-bearer dropping down! Well may men cry, "Howl, fir tree; for the cedar is fallen." Is there no solemn call to preachers, teachers, heads of families, principals in business, leaders of circles, great or small? When one man falls he may jeopardise a whole community. There are men who can fall, and their falling seems to produce but very little vicious influence upon society. There are other men so eminent in position, so established in reputation, whose falling would seem to bring down the pillars of civilisation, would seem to bring down the very fabric of God's Church! Herein is another mystery. When priests fall, and ministers play the coward and the liar, and heads of houses eat of the forbidden tree, and influential men go astray, yet even then God interposes for the truth; he saves in society the redeeming element, hands it on from the unworthy to the successor who may be more worthy. Thus he preserves the light of the world and the salt of the earth. So God never wants a generation to bless him; the Redeemer has always near him some who hold his name dearest of all!

On the other hand, we cannot admit the plea that bad leaders are excuse enough for bad followers, when that plea is urged in relation to Christian teaching and life. Nor can we allow that exceptional inconsistency should vitiate the whole Church. There are some persons who are only too glad to avail themselves of this plea. The bad man will say, "Why should I care about religious truth or religious observance, when ministers themselves are false to their own doctrine? Why should I call upon myself to be consistent and true?" First, such a theory is inadmissible everywhere else. Why, then, should we allow it to affect the Church? There is not a circle in the world where such a theory would be thought tenable for a moment. Why then should we apply it in the highest spiritual relations? We go into an orchard and point to one piece of blemished fruit, and say, "Because there is a blemish upon that piece of fruit the whole orchard is decayed and corrupt." Who would believe it? There can be found a light coin in every currency in civilisation. Suppose we took up a standard coin under weight and said, "Because this is not of the standard weight, your whole currency is defective, and, as a nation of financiers, you are not worthy of trust." Who would believe it? We find a man who turns commerce into a species of gambling, and because so found gambling, we say, "The commerce of Britain is founded upon an illegitimate basis, and is not worthy of a moment's consideration." Would you think that sound reasoning, or a fair and noble method of dealing with such questions? Yet this is exactly how many persons deal with the Church of God. They say, "Look at Hophni and Phinehas; look at the minister who fell; look at the Church officer who was expelled from Church fellowship because of his dishonourableness and untruthfulness." Because of these exceptional cases they argue that the doctrine is wrong, that every Christian exhortation is a word that ought to be unheeded.

Secondly, such a theory is instantly destroyed by the fact that Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church. We do not say, "Look at Christians." We say, "Look at Christ." It is to Christ that we appeal continually; and in that appeal is our strength as Christian advocates or expounders of Christian truth. When a man says, "Look at the minister," we say, "Look at the Master!" When a man says, "What do you call this? "we say, "We call it a copy: yonder is the original look at that!" When we are told that Christian professors are very unstable and inconsistent, we say, "True; but they are not bad because of their Christianity, but because of their want of it." Find in Jesus Christ one instance of selfishness; find in him one moment's wandering from the right way; point out in his speech one unhallowed word or one ungenerous dishonourable expression. His life is before you! Be just and true and manly and right! Find in Christ's life one thing upon which you can lay your finger and say, "This is unholy," then you may pray God's lightnings to strike his Church and consume that which bears his name. When will men look at Christ, and not at Christians; at the sun, and not at the little taper? When will they look at the Redeemer, and not at the half-educated, incomplete, struggling, and oft-blundering Church?

Then, thirdly, such a theory is never urged but by men who are in search of excuses for their own corruptness. Who will undertake to repeat that on 'Change, and in the warehouse? That is a sermon in a sentence. Such a theory is never urged but by men who are in search of excuses for their own corruptness. A man says, "When that one who professed so much Christianity failed in business, I was on the point of giving up churches and chapels altogether." Doubtless that would be virtuous on his part O fool, and slow of heart to believe the truth of God! When a man who is all skin and bone, who never felt volcanic fire in his heart, never was led away by any dominating tyrannic passion, hears of another kind of man straying from the right way, he instantly almost makes up his mind what he is pleased to call his mind to leave the Church. O fool, and slow of heart! Didst thou profess the name of the servant or the name of the Master? Didst thou enter the Church because of the high and illustrious example of the members of the Christian community, or because, convicted of sin, thou didst crawl to the cross and feel the healing effect of that falling blood? Where is reasoning where is common-sense when men say they have given up their Christian profession because some Christian professors are fickle, untrue, and inconsistent? We never yet knew a man who made much ado about Christian people's inconsistency who was not more or less subtly, it might be, with more or less of self-concealment of purpose in the matter seeking excuses for his own deficiencies, or seeking from his criticism of other people's vice to make his own virtue the more conspicuous.

It were nothing to kill a man, stab him right through his heart and let him die. But when he is struggling towards light, towards God, and has to fight with all these demoniacal passions and influences round about, over which he seems to have little or no control, when he just stumbles on the road and they point at him and say, "Ha, ha! that is your Christianity, is it?" that is thrice dying, that is intolerable pain! We know we are inconsistent, we know we are selfish, we cannot boast of ourselves. Yet it hath pleased God to be more merciful to us than men are. It is better to fall into the hands of God than into the hands of men. When he smites it is that he may recover; when he puts his sword through a man it is that he may slay, not the man, but the disease that is in him; when he is sharpest with us there are tears in his eyes; when he punishes us most terribly, when he takes away the one ewe lamb, and barks the fig tree, and sends a blight on the wheat-field, and turns our purposes upside down, it is that he may save the man. When men criticise us and are harsh with us, by reason of their incompleteness, their criticism often degenerates into malice. When they point a finger at us, it does not always indicate a fault, but oftentimes a triumph over an inconsistency.

We are not to be followers of Hophni and Phinehas. The priest is not God; the minister is not Jesus Christ; the professor is not the Redeemer of the world. We must, therefore, insist upon the honest investigation of great principles on the one hand, and specially insist upon the calm, severe scrutiny and study of our Saviour's own personal life and ministry. We have a written revelation. To that revelation our appeal must be made; to the law and to the testimony must be our challenge. As for those whose satire is so keen, and whose wit is so fluent when it is employed in criticism upon Christian character, wherein they do it and are able to point out something in us that is wrong, let us receive the lesson with all meekness; they may be right, and we may learn something from an enemy. It is lawful, according to an ancient maxim, to learn even from a foe. Wherein their criticism is the result of malice, or brief acquaintance with our character seeing only edges and glints of us and not the whole nature let us remember that our sufferings are not to be compared with the sufferings of Jesus Christ. When he was reviled he reviled not again, when he suffered he threatened not; he gave his back to the smiters and his cheek to them that plucked off the hair. "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you." "If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf." "If we suffer, we shall also reign with him." What have we suffered? Who can show one blemish for Christ? We may think a great deal of our little sufferings when we view them in themselves; but when we write them out and put them in parallel columns with the sufferings of our Lord Jesus Christ, we shall be glad to draw them back again and put them away, and look upon ourselves as spoiled children. We may try them again in another parallel column with the sufferings of the apostle Paul, and the same feeling will return, and we shall desire to change the subject.

Blessed are they that are reviled for the sake of their goodness. Not many have attained that high nobility. We say the age of persecution is now gone. Alas, all ages seem to have gone; there is nothing left but insipidity. The age of miracles gone: the age of persecution gone: the age of speaking with unknown tongues gone: the age of the devil gone! It seems that we ought to be going too. Presently we shall be dying of weariness, we shall be overcome by this intolerable insipidity. The age of persecution has gone, has it? Why? Perhaps because the age of godliness has gone!

Prayer

Almighty God, it is a fearful thing to fall into thy hands! Thy throne is established in righteousness and judgment. The liar and the evil person shall not live in thy sight; thou art angry with the wicked every day; thou givest no peace unto them; thou withholdest all enduring blessings from those whose hearts go astray from righteousness. Thou dost drive the priest from priesthood, the minister from his pulpit, the head of the house from his family circle. Thou drivest out the evil-minded man, thou scourgest those who know not thy purity and thy love, thou vindicatest the righteousness of thy name by terrible judgments in the earth. We come to thee as the God of mercy as well as of judgment. We are now on praying ground; we may now plead mightily with thee for the exercise of thy pardoning mercy, lest we too be condemned and carried in the whirlwind of thy just anger; God be merciful unto us, sinners! save us in the hour of temptation; deliver us when the enemy would carry us away captive at his will; and when the great enemy of souls would come in as a flood, do thou lift up thy Spirit as a standard against him. If thou dost hold us up we shall be safe; if thou dost loose thine hand from ours, behold, we cannot stand! Have us in thy holy keeping; establish our hearts in the precepts and statutes of all thy will, and grant that, having served our day and generation with all simplicity, trust, meekness, and strength, we may be called to enter into the rest eternal as thine own being! Amen.