Summary: In approximately 1,100 B.C., Elkanah, a descendant of Levi (1 Chron. 6:16-30), navigated the complexities of ancient family life with his two warring wives: Peninnah and Hannah. While Peninnah bore children, Hannah faced the anguish of barrenness. Her pain was compounded by societal pressures—namely, offspring signified security and legacy (vv.1-2). Peninnah’s taunts exacerbated Hannah’s suffering (v.6), echoing the cultural significance of fertility.
In desperation, Hannah fervently prayed for a child, vowing to dedicate him to the Lord’s service (vv.9-11). Her commitment extended to fulfilling the Nazarite Vow, symbolized by her pledge not to cut her son’s hair. Eli, the priest, initially misinterpreted her intense supplication as drunkenness, but upon clarification, he empathized with her and offered his support (v.13, 17). Encouraged by Eli’s understanding, Hannah found consolation and comfort (v.18).
After Hannah’s earnest prayer, God intervened. She conceived and bore a son named Samuel, whom she dutifully presented to Eli for consecration to the priesthood (v.20, 27-28; cf. 1 Sam. 2:11).
Why does the book open with this one particular family? This small family would change the course of Israel’s history, because the prophet Samuel would come through this family and this one woman’s prayer. Hannah was “bold enough to believe that God would hear and answer her prayer for a son.”[]
(1:1) There was a certain man from Ramathaim, a Zuphite from the hill country of Ephraim, whose name was Elkanah son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite.
Elkanah came from Ramathaim or “Ramah” (1 Sam. 1:19; 2:11; 7:17). Chronicles states that Samuel was from the tribe of Levi (1 Chron. 6:16, 22, 31-33). Bergen harmonizes this by stating that “Samuel was geographically an Ephraimite but genealogically a Levite.”[] Indeed, the Levites lived in the greater region of Ephraim (Josh. 24:33).
(1:2) He had two wives; one was called Hannah and the other Peninnah. Peninnah had children, but Hannah had none.
Hannah (ḥannāh) literally means “grace.”[] Peninnah (peninnāh) literally means “ruby.”[] In the ancient world, childlessness was tragic, because this meant the end of your family line. This contributes to the ongoing theme of “barrenness” in the OT (e.g. Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel; Gen. 11:30; 25:21; 29:31; Judg. 13:2).
(1:3) Year after year this man went up from his town to worship and sacrifice to the LORD Almighty at Shiloh, where Hophni and Phinehas, the two sons of Eli, were priests of the LORD.
Shiloh. The priests held the Ark of the Covenant here at this time (1 Sam. 4:3-4).
Eli was a priest there. His two sons both had Egyptian names: Hophni (“Tadpole”) and Phinehas (“The Nubian”).[]
(1:4-6) Whenever the day came for Elkanah to sacrifice, he would give portions of the meat to his wife Peninnah and to all her sons and daughters. 5 But to Hannah he gave a double portion because he loved her, and the LORD had closed her womb. 6 Because the LORD had closed Hannah’s womb, her rival kept provoking her in order to irritate her.
Elkanah understood that Hannah’s infertility was the result of God’s providence (cf. Gen 15:3; 16:2; 20:18; 30:2). Even though Hannah wasn’t bearing children, Elkanah loved her more than Peninnah.
It’s obvious that Elkanah’s polygamy led to a dysfunctional family. He favored Hannah over Elkanah by giving her a “double portion.” And this led to Peninnah taunting Hannah (v.6). The Bible doesn’t condone everything that it records.
(1:7) This went on year after year. Whenever Hannah went up to the house of the LORD, her rival provoked her till she wept and would not eat.
Peninnah would pour the insults thick during the annual festival, because this was a time when Hannah’s infertility was most prominent. Bergen writes, “These insults appear to have been particularly poignant during the annual festival times at Shiloh because the family sacrificial meal that rewarded Peninnah’s maternal blessings also insulted Hannah’s unproductive womb.”[]
Peninnah’s bullying of Hannah was so vicious that Hannah couldn’t even enjoy her food. Even though she received a “double portion” of food from her husband (v.5), it didn’t matter because Peninnah’s taunting made her lose her appetite. This journey was supposed to be a time of worship, but it turned into a dysfunctional and hostile family gathering. Interestingly, many family holidays (e.g. Thanksgiving, Christmas, Easter, etc.) are still this way today in modern culture.
(1:8-9) Her husband Elkanah would say to her, “Hannah, why are you weeping? Why don’t you eat? Why are you downhearted? Don’t I mean more to you than ten sons?” 9 Once when they had finished eating and drinking in Shiloh, Hannah stood up. Now Eli the priest was sitting on his chair by the doorpost of the LORD’s house.
Elkanah didn’t stop Peninnah’s caustic antagonizing of Hannah. Instead, he asks Hannah why she is so sad. In a sense, he is asking her, “Am I not good enough for you?” This statement doesn’t seem very comforting, but it seems to have been a “current idiom.”[] At the end of the book of Ruth, women told Naomi, “Your daughter-in-law… has been better to you than seven sons!” (Ruth 4:15 NLT).
(1:10) In her deep anguish Hannah prayed to the LORD, weeping bitterly.
Typically, when we feel “deep anguish,” we mope and complain. Not Hannah. She took her distress to God.
(1:11) And she made a vow, saying, “LORD Almighty, if you will only look on your servant’s misery and remember me, and not forget your servant but give her a son, then I will give him to the LORD for all the days of his life, and no razor will ever be used on his head.”
Hannah must be dedicating him with a Nazarite Vow (see Numbers 6). Chuck Smith’s mother had a scare where she thought that she would lose Chuck as a young boy. She prayed something similar. It wasn’t until he was a grown man and wanting to pursue full-time vocational ministry that Chuck Smith’s mother told him about this.
God doesn’t answer prayers based on our vows for him, but based on his own will (1 Jn. 5:14-15). Hannah wasn’t asking for a son for her own purpose, but for God’s purposes. For instance, if a person vowed, “God, give me a brand new car, and I’ll promise to follow you forever!” God wouldn’t answer this. However, if someone said, “God, give me a reliable car, so I can serve in a high school Bible study on the weekends,” this would be different. If you’re vowing to give what you get to God’s purposes, this is qualitatively different. Like Hannah, we would be asking for something, so that we could put it to God’s purposes—not our own.
(1:12-13) As she kept on praying to the LORD, Eli observed her mouth. 13 Hannah was praying in her heart, and her lips were moving but her voice was not heard. Eli thought she was drunk.
God can hear inaudible prayers that are spoken “in the heart.”
(1:14) He said to her, “How long are you going to stay drunk? Put away your wine.”
This shows how badly Eli misinterpreted what was happening. He thought she was drunk, but in reality, she was changing the course of salvation history with the birth of Samuel. This foreshadows how corrupt the worship in Israel had become, and it “tells us something about the problems he frequently had to contend with.”[]
(1:15-16) “Not so, my lord,” Hannah replied, “I am a woman who is deeply troubled. I have not been drinking wine or beer; I was pouring out my soul to the LORD. Do not take your servant for a wicked woman; I have been praying here out of my great anguish and grief.”
She wasn’t pouring herself drinks; she was pouring herself out to God. She wanted to clear her reputation with Eli, the priest. The expression “wicked” woman is the same term used of Eli’s sons being “wicked” men (1 Sam. 2:12).
(1:17-18) Eli answered, “Go in peace, and may the God of Israel grant you what you have asked of him.”
18 She said, “May your servant find favor in your eyes.”
Then she went her way and ate something, and her face was no longer downcast.
“Her face was no longer downcast.” This prayer changed her depressed heart (v.10).
(1:19-20) Early the next morning they arose and worshiped before the LORD and then went back to their home at Ramah. Elkanah made love to his wife Hannah, and the LORD remembered her. 20 So in the course of time Hannah became pregnant and gave birth to a son. She named him Samuel, saying, “Because I asked the LORD for him.”
“The LORD remembered her.” This doesn’t mean that God forgets anything. Rather, this is an anthropomorphism for God choosing to act and intervene (Gen. 8:1; Ex. 2:24).
“Elkanah made love to his wife.” God also worked through a natural process (“Elkanah had relations with Hannah”).
Samuel’s name literally means, “The Name of God.”[]
(1:21-23) When her husband Elkanah went up with all his family to offer the annual sacrifice to the LORD and to fulfill his vow, 22 Hannah did not go. She said to her husband, “After the boy is weaned, I will take him and present him before the LORD, and he will live there always.”
23 “Do what seems best to you,” her husband Elkanah told her. “Stay here until you have weaned him; only may the LORD make good his word.”
So the woman stayed at home and nursed her son until she had weaned him.
“Do what seems best to you.” Elkanah could’ve annulled Hannah’s vow (Num 30:10-15), but he followed his wife’s step of faith.
Once Hannah gave him over to the Lord’s priestly service, she wanted this to be a clean break. If she gave him now, he would still need to breastfeed, and this was before the time of baby formula. Babies were breastfed for two or three years during this time (2 Macc. 7:27), so she would’ve only had a couple of years with this sweet little boy. Imagine how hard it would be to follow through on this vow—especially after you had wept for years to have a son!
(1:24-25) After he was weaned, she took the boy with her, young as he was, along with a three-year-old bull, an ephah of flour and a skin of wine, and brought him to the house of the LORD at Shiloh. 25 When the bull had been sacrificed, they brought the boy to Eli.
The bull was meant to be sacrificed (v.25), but what was the flour and wine for? There is only one mention of flour being used as a sacrifice, and this is in a very unique situation (Num. 5:15). More likely, Hannah was “packing her son’s lunch” so he could “go away to school.” It’s like she was putting him on the school bus for the final time, saying goodbye.
(1:26-28) She said to him, “Pardon me, my lord. As surely as you live, I am the woman who stood here beside you praying to the LORD.” 27 I prayed for this child, and the LORD has granted me what I asked of him. 28 So now I give him to the LORD. For his whole life he will be given over to the LORD.” And he worshiped the LORD there.
“I am the woman who stood her beside you praying to the LORD.” Hannah shares the incredible story about this answer to prayer with Eli.
“The LORD has granted me what I asked of him.” Her words echo what Eli had said to her years earlier (v.17). Hannah must have treasured those words and believed them.
“So now I give him to the LORD.” Hannah didn’t view this as giving her son to Eli, but giving her son to God himself. One scholar comments, “We should not overlook the sacrifice made by Hannah; but her loss was to be Israel’s gain, and she felt amply compensated.”[]
Why was Peninnah taunting Hannah? She probably thought that Hannah was being looked down upon by God. As it turns out, God used Hannah’s descendants more than Peninnah. In fact, we don’t even know the names of Peninnah’s children. Similarly, we sometimes feel scorned by our world for not having worldly blessings, but this isn’t a sign of God’s disfavor.
Hannah gave her most precious desire over to God. Some preachers will teach this passage by saying, “If you pray for your desire, God will give it to you.” But this isn’t the point. Hannah was willing to give her desire over to God and trust him with it. God isn’t a sadist who wants to take our pleasure from us (Ps. 37:4). Instead, he wants to give us good things. Indeed, while God accepts Samuel as an offering in the priestly service, in the next chapter, God gives Hannah five more kids (1 Sam. 2:21). At this point in the narrative, we learn that Hannah could trust God with her desire. What deep desire do you hold back from God that you aren’t willing to give over?
Joyce G. Baldwin, 1 and 2 Samuel: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 8, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 54.
Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 64.
Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 571.
Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 571.
Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 571.
Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 67.
Joyce G. Baldwin, 1 and 2 Samuel: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 8, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 56.
Joyce G. Baldwin, 1 and 2 Samuel: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 8, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 57.
Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 574.
Payne, I and II Samuel, 12. Cited in Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 73.
James is an elder at Dwell Community Church, where he teaches classes in theology, apologetics, and weekly Bible studies.
