Deeper Commentary
1Sa 15:1 Samuel said to Saul, Yahweh sent me to anoint you to be king
over His people Israel. Now therefore, listen to the words of Yahweh-
We could interpret Samuel as meaning that he had anointed Saul to be
king, and God had set Saul up for success. Yet he had been rejected from the
kingship due to his impatient disobedience in 1 Sam. 13. But despite that,
which apparently happened early in his reign (1 Sam. 13:2), he remained
king. The fact God didn't immediately depose him may simply have been
because he was being given a chance to repent. And perhaps now with the set
of instructions given him regarding Amalek, he was being given an
opportunity to prove he had learned the lesson, and to undo his mistake. He
fails spectacularly, but we marvel all the same at God's grace in trying by
all means to save him. We note too that Saul's calling began with sets of
detailed instructions from Samuel, which he obeyed. Circumstances repeat in
our lives, as God seeks to help us learn the lessons.
The Hebrew is literally "Listen to the voice of the words of
Yahweh". See on :22. His "voice" was to be heard, but instead Saul heard
the "voice" of the people (:24) and the "voice" of the bleating sheep
which Saul coveted as his own (:14). And there we have it- the power of
God's voice in His word must be louder than the voice of human opinion and
the call of materialism and self-enrichment. This is the power of
accepting God's word in the Bible as indeed His inspired voice. Hence
:22,23 accuse Saul of not listening to the voice of Yahweh.
1Sa 15:2 Thus says Yahweh of Armies, ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what
they did to Israel, opposing them when they came up out of Egypt-
It was God who was to do this; Saul is being invited to be His agent on
earth, and not rule and fight in his own strength and to his own glory. For
this was his problem. Saul's desire for personal vengeance upon his enemies
in 1 Sam. 14:24 was sadly deficient in any desire to see God's glory. God
patiently now tries to correct him by now asking him to work for Him, as His
agent, in executing His
vengeance or punishment upon
His
enemies, in respect of His people Israel. And yet Saul fails, because he is
more interested in showing off the best animals he has captured and to have
a powerful king whom he has conquered publically paraded. Rather than
slaying the king and the animals as requested.
1Sa 15:3 Now go and attack Amalek and utterly destroy all that they have;
don’t spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and nursing baby, ox
and sheep, camel and donkey’-
The reason for this command was because God wanted the glorification of
His Name and His people, and if these things and persons were preserved,
then they would have been paraded to Saul's glory. See on :2. And that was
indeed his motive in preserving them.
"Utterly destroy" translates the word used for religious devotion.
Amalek was to be devoted to Yahweh in its condemnation, and the murder of
everything living was to be seen as a sacrifice to Him. To keep some of
His offerings for himself was therefore effectively Saul thieving from
God.
Perhaps the command to destroy even the memory of Amalek meant that even their animals should be destroyed, lest any should even think "This is an Amalekite sheep". The call to spiritual mindedness means making similar decisions at times.
Despite his rejection by God in 1 Sam. 13 and poor behaviour to
Jonathan in 1 Sam. 14, God now gives Saul a mission. Elijah likewise was
relieved of his ministry on Horeb, and yet God still worked with him and
gave him work to do for Him. We too must sense God's refusal to give up
with man and His intense desire to work with us, even if on a lower level
than what we were potentially capable of.
1Sa 15:4 Saul summoned the people and numbered them in Telaim-
'Place of lambs'. The area was known for sheep and animals; the very
best of the very best was kept by Saul for himself when clearly it was
intended for devotion to Yahweh.
Two hundred thousand foot soldiers and ten thousand men of Judah-
The proportion of the men of Judah is very small. It could be that Saul
was seen as showing nepotism to the tribe of Benjamin and his support
within Judah was waning. "Thousand" more likely refers to a brigade or
family.
We note that the large numbers who now came to Saul contrast
with the 600 men he managed to summon in 1 Sam. 13, and the impression
that many of his soldiers drifted away from him. Saul now seems to command
Israel's loyalty again. Although it was Jonathan's exploits that had for a
time reduced the Philistine threat, Saul perhaps had taken credit for that
as he did for Jonathan's exploits in 1 Sam. 13:3,4. Despite his rejection
from the "kingdom" in 1 Sam. 13, God is still clearly open to using him
and giving him opportunities for obedience- and perhaps that is why He
moved the men of Israel to loyal support of Saul at this time.
1Sa 15:5 Saul went to the city of Amalek and laid wait in the valley-
I have noted earlier that Saul tried to emulate the examples of
faithful men like Moses and Gideon. Here he is copying Joshua (Josh. 8:4).
But he was emulating on a surface level only, with no real spiritual
attention.
1Sa 15:6 Saul said to the Kenites, Go away from among the Amalekites so
that I don’t destroy you with them, for you showed kindness to all the
Israelites when they came up out of Egypt. So the Kenites departed from
among the Amalekites-
He could have been commanded to do this by God through Samuel. But if
not, this shows some spiritual awareness and familiarity with Biblical
history- which makes his sins all the more culpable. By doing this, Saul
lost the advantage of making a surprise attack. But he put grace and care
for people first (or perhaps at least Samuel insisted he did), and won the
victory all the same.
1Sa 15:7 Saul attacked the Amalekites from Havilah to Shur east of Egypt-
This is not the Havilah near Yemen. It means "circle" and must refer to
some spot in the south of Judah. "Shur" is literally "the wall", referring
to the wall which ran from Pelusium past Migdol to Hero, resulting in the
name "Mizraim" for Egypt, meaning 'the enclosed / fortified'. The idea is
that Saul destroyed them to the Egyptian border.
1Sa 15:8 He took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly
destroyed all the people-
"Agag" is the same consonants as "Gog", the leader of the latter day
invasion of Israel in Ez. 38. But it is a generic name for the ruler of
Amalek, like "Pharaoh". "Utterly destroyed" is the word for sanctification
/ devotion to Yahweh. The idea isn't that every Amalekite was destroyed,
as David later fights with them. It could be argued that by keeping the
best of the animals, and needing to care for them and not over drive them,
Saul's men therefore didn't destroy as many Amalekites as they otherwise
could have done.
We wonder why Saul spared Agag. Maybe Saul was so narcissistic he fancied having a great long as his personal slave. We wonder why otherwise Saul would have wanted to keep Agag alive.
1Sa 15:9 But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best of the sheep,
cattle, fat calves and lambs and all that was good, and wouldn’t utterly
destroy them; everything that was bad and worthless they destroyed
utterly-
I suggested on :2,3 that
the reason for this command was because God wanted the glorification of
His Name and His people, and if these things and persons were preserved,
then they would have been paraded to Saul's glory. And that was indeed
Saul's motive in preserving them. By having a live, conquered king and
impressive fat animals, Saul could boast of his personal military prowess.
And the whole exercise he had been given in fighting Amalek had been
designed to help him unlearn his personal pride, and work on God's behalf
to God's glory, rather for his own. He failed totally. He ended up
offering to God that which was "bad and worthless". And then trying to lie
his way out of it. "Bad" is the word for "despise", and is used about how
Eli and his sons had despised Yahweh's offerings (1 Sam. 2:30). Saul was
intended to replace Eli but he had not learned from history. The relevance
for the exiles was that they were in exile because they had likewise
despised Yahweh's offerings (Ez. 22:8).
We observe that Saul spared Agag, although he was under the
ban, and had to be slain; and yet had been so eager to kill his own son
Jonathan. Clearly personal jealousy issues were huge in Saul's mind,
rather than any obedience to Yahweh. We see too how Saul's disobedience
was also because of materialism. He wanted those fine sheep for himself,
just as he enters the record obsessed with lost donkeys.
1Sa 15:10 Then the word of Yahweh came to Samuel saying-
Samuel was apparently not with Saul at this time (:12), although
hovering nearby.
1Sa 15:11 It grieves Me that I have set up Saul to be king-
God 'repented' (AV), He changed His mind about setting Saul up as king.
And yet He gave them a king in His wrath, warning Israel how Saul would
work out, although He set Saul up for success. And yet when indeed Saul
fails, God changes His mind and as it were regrets having made Saul king.
We have here an insight into how God feels. He enters fully into the human
situation, limiting His omniscience and omnipotence to do so; and
therefore has such conflicted feelings within Him, just as His many
changes of mind within Him were kindled together in Hos. 11:8.
For he has turned back from following Me and has not obeyed My
commandments-
"Turned back" suggests God did consider Saul to have initially followed
Him.
Samuel was
troubled and he cried out to Yahweh all night-
God
tells Samuel of His rejection of Saul, implying this opportunity to change
His earlier rejection of Saul in 1 Sam. 13 has again not worked out; and Samuel cries to Him all night.
I think the implication is that Samuel was pleading with God to consider
another future with Saul (1 Sam. 15:11,35; 16:1). We should be awed by
Samuel's love for Saul and desire to make him work out spiritually. Amos 7:1-6 is another
case- God reveals His intention regarding Israel, but then Amos makes a
case against this and is heard. In fact, these and other examples suggest
that this is almost a pattern with God- to devise His purpose, and then in
the 'gap' until its fulfillment, be open to the persuasion of His covenant
people to change or ammend those plans. This could be what Am. 3:7 is
speaking of: "Surely the Lord God does nothing without revealing His
secret to His servants the prophets". It's as if He reveals His plans to
them so that they can then comment upon them in prayer.
1Sa 15:12 Samuel rose early to meet Saul in the morning-
There is a much repeated characteristic of God's servants: that they
'rose up early in the morning' and did God's work. In each of the
following passages, this phrase is clearly not an idiom; rather does it
have an evidently literal meaning: Abraham (Gen. 19:27; 21:14; 22:3);
Jacob (Gen. 28:18); Job (1:5); Moses (Ex. 8:20; 9:13; 24:4; 34:4); Joshua
(Josh. 3:1; 6:12; 7:16; 8:10); Gideon (Jud. 6:38; 7:1); Samuel (1 Sam.
15:12); David (1 Sam. 17:20; 29:11); Hezekiah (2 Kings 19:35; 2 Chron.
29:20). This is quite an impressive list, numerically. This can be a
figure for being zealous (Ps. 127:2; Pr. 27:14; Song 7:12; Is. 5:11; Zeph.
3:7). God Himself rises up early in His zeal to save and bring back His
wayward people (2 Chron. 36:15; Jer. 7:13,25; 11:7; 25:3,4; 26:5; 29:19;
32:33; 35:14,15; 44:4). Yet the above examples all show that men literally
rose up early in their service to God; this was an expression of their
zeal for God, in response to His zeal for us. I'm not suggesting that zeal
for God is reflected by rising early rather than staying up late; but it
wouldn't be too much to suggest that if we are men of mission, we won't
waste our hours in bed. Get up when you wake up.
And he was told:
Saul came to Carmel and he set up a monument for himself, then went down to
Gilgal-
We see here Saul's vanity, wishing to memorialize his own great
victory, although that victory had been given by God. We must be warned by
this not to glory in and seek to memorialize that which was given us by
God's grace and as part of His wider purpose.
"Monument" can mean "altar", so we note again Saul's love of building altars and sacrificing, as if to undo or disprove his condemnation for earlier offering offerings without Samuel. See on :22.
1Sa 15:13 Samuel came to Saul, and Saul said to him, Yahweh bless you! I
have obeyed the commandment of Yahweh-
Saul speaks of "Yahweh your God" in :15, as if he felt unable to say
that Yahweh was fully his God, even though he here uses the Yahweh Name as
a formality. Personal relationship with God is not the same as
using the right Hebrew names for Him and the correct religious language.
1Sa 15:14 Samuel said, Then what is this bleating of sheep in my ears? What
does this lowing of cattle mean?-
We sense through the record how angry Samuel is that Saul can tell such
a childish lie; we hear the bleating and lowing of cattle coming down
through the centuries, such is the power of the inspired word.
The Hebrew in :1 is literally "Listen to the voice of the words of Yahweh". See on :22. His "voice" was to be heard, but instead Saul heard the "voice" of the people (:24) and the "voice" of the bleating sheep which Saul coveted as his own (:14). And there we have it- the power of God's voice in His word must be louder than the voice of human opinion and the call of materialism and self-enrichment. This is the power of accepting God's word in the Bible as indeed His inspired voice. Hence :22,23 accuse Saul of not listening to the voice of Yahweh.
1Sa 15:15 Saul said, They have brought them from the Amalekites, for the
people spared the best of the sheep and cattle to sacrifice to Yahweh your
God. We have utterly destroyed the rest-
Saul had defeated the Amalekites in the south, near the border with
Egypt
(:7), had then gone up to Carmel in the north to build a memorial
(:12), and was now in Gilgal (:12). This must have required at least a
week. And the animals were still alive. Saul's story was clearly untrue.
We note he speaks of "Yahweh your God", as if he felt unable to say that
Yahweh was fully his God, even though he uses the Yahweh Name as a
formality (:13). Saul excuses himself by blaming it on the people, as if
he is not really king. And further, he reasons that they devoted "the
rest" to Yahweh. He refuses to see that the commandment was to devote all
to Yahweh. But he considers he devoted something, so that, surely, was
good enough. And this is not so far from our own weakness, faced with the
demand for our all, and total devotion after the pattern of the crucified
Christ.
1Sa 15:16 Then Samuel said to Saul, Stop! I will tell you what Yahweh said
to me last night. He said to him, Tell me-
Samuel as a child had to tell Eli of God's rejection of him, a message
he also heard at night, and His replacement of him with someone else. This
prepared Samuel for doing this very same thing years later, with Saul (1
Sam. 15:16); and to some extent, he too failed in ways similar to Eli, and
was in a sense replaced. Whilst it's impossible to attach meaning to
events at the time they happen, they potentially prepare us for later use
by God if we are willing to be used.
1Sa 15:17 Samuel said, When you were once little in your own sight,
weren’t you made the head of the tribes of Israel? Yahweh anointed you
king over Israel-
"Little" is the word Saul earlier used in saying that he was
from the littlest / smallest tribe in Israel.
Pride was Saul's problem. A fair case can be made for his humility in
not punishing those who initially mocked him, his hiding amongst the
baggage, his not telling his uncle about his calling. But David in the
Psalms frequently complains of Saul's pride. Saul appears to have changed
his name to ‘Paul’, “the little one”, at the time of his first missionary
journey- in order to not be like Saul in his later life, but "little". His
preaching of the Gospel was thus related to his own realization of
sinfulness, as reflected in his name change. And so it has ever been. Saul
becomes Paul in so many lives. True self-abnegation, recognition of our
moral bankruptcy, our desperation, and the extent of the grace we have
received…these two paradoxical aspects, fused together within the very
texture of human personality, are what will arrest the attention of others
in this world and lead them to the Truth we can offer them.
Another take is that we can translate: "Are you so little in your own eyes?". The argument is that 'You are the king of Israel, you are over the people not beneath them. So you can't claim to be king, and yet also argue that the people made you do what you didn't want to do. In fact you are very big in your own eyes, rebellious and stubborn, and not so little as you are now making out to be'.
1Sa 15:18 and Yahweh sent you on a mission and said-
"Mission" is AV "journey". It is the word used of how Saul went on his
"way" to find the lost donkeys (1 Sam. 9:6,8), and as part of his calling
process he was sent on journeys and was obedient. But now he had not been
obedient. And yet Saul arrogantly insists that he has gone on the
"mission" or "way" (:20 s.w.).
‘Go, and utterly destroy those sinners the Amalekites, and fight
against them until they are destroyed’-
The mission had been total destruction of the Amalekites. But Saul was
content with just a tokenistic victory. We learn here that he was told
they were "sinners". He was asked to manifest Yahweh's judgment against
sin. But he ignored that dimension, and saw himself as simply glorifying
himself.
1Sa 15:19 Why then didn’t you obey the voice of Yahweh-
Israel did not obey / hearken to the voice of Yahweh, and He did not
hearken to their voice in prayer (Dt. 1:45; 9:23; 28:15; Josh. 5:6; Jud.
2:20; 6:10 cp. Dt. 8:20 s.w.). 2 Kings 18:12 states this specifically. God
hearkened to Joshua's voice in prayer (Josh. 10:14) because Joshua
hearkened to His voice. It was to be the same with Saul.
He didn't hearken
to God's voice (1 Sam. 15:19) and God didn't hearken to Saul's voice in
prayer in his final desperation at the end of his life (1 Sam. 28:18,
although he hearkened to the voice of the witch, 1 Sam. 28:23). If God's
word abides in us, then our prayer is powerful, we have whatever we ask,
because we are asking for things according to His will expressed in His
word (Jn. 15:7). See on :23.
But took the spoils
and did what was evil in the sight of Yahweh?-
Sins of omission, serving God partially and not wholly, for the sake of
appearance, are described here as "evil". And they are our most likely
form of sin.
1Sa 15:20 Saul said to Samuel, But I have obeyed the voice of Yahweh, and
have gone on the mission which Yahweh gave me and have brought Agag the
king of Amalek-
This is Saul at his most inexcusable, seeking to save face before
Samuel by lying when the evidence of the bleating animals was for all to
hear in the background. He had indeed "gone on the mission" given by
Yahweh, but had not fulfilled it as required. We too can have the
illusion that because we are involved in God's work, have "gone on the
mission", that we are thereby justified. But God works through all manner
of sinful people, and awareness of His activity in and around our lives
doesn't mean we are therefore pleasing to Him.
And have utterly destroyed the Amalekites-
He had not utterly destroyed them, for David later had to smite them
(s.w. 2 Sam. 1:1). Saul was empowered to smite the Amalekites but he
didn't completely do this. As often happens, God then passed on the job to
another, in this case David. We can see His hand working in similar ways
today. This seems to be the idea of Esther 4:14. If she had not saved her
people, then God would have pursued another plan to the same end.
1Sa 15:21 But the people took sheep and cattle from the plunder, the best of
the devoted things, to sacrifice to Yahweh your God in Gilgal-
This is alluded to by Solomon in Prov. 21:27: "The sacrifice of the
wicked is an abomination: how much more, when he brings it with a wicked
mind!".
Solomon may have in view Saul's rejection from the kingship for his
wrong attitude to sacrifice (1 Sam. 15:21,22). Likewise the attempts of
Absalom and Adonijah to take the throne from David and Solomon involved the
offering of sacrifices (2 Sam. 15:12; 1 Kings 1:9). What Solomon says in the
Proverbs is true on one level, but he harnesses Divine truth to justify
himself and his own agendas; just as we can.
Again we note "Yahweh your God". Not "our God" or "my God". Yet he freely uses the Yahweh Name in addressing Samuel in :13. It was as if he felt unable to say that Yahweh was fully his God, even though he here uses the Yahweh Name as a formality. Personal relationship with God is not the same as using the right Hebrew names for Him and the correct religious language.
1Sa 15:22 Samuel said, Has Yahweh as great delight in burnt offerings and
sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of Yahweh? Behold, to obey is better
than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams-
The point was that God didn't need the sacrifices of themselves. The
essence He sought was an obedient heart toward His voice. So often, form
comes to eclipse content with religious people; the external sacrifices
are seen as of supreme importance, rather than the attitude behind them. We
recall how Saul earlier had thought that he couldn't go to Samuel unless
he had a gift for him; and likewise it seems he thinks here that sacrifice
of itself can somehow save him. David learnt from this and reflects this
spirit after his sin with Bathsheba, when he accepts that God takes no
pleasure in burnt offerings of themselves (Ps. 51:16,17). We too are to
learn from these historical records, because there surely will come times
when the essence of the lesson and the issues surfaces in our life
experience.
The Hebrew in :1 is literally "Listen to the voice of the words of Yahweh". His "voice" was to be heard, but instead Saul heard the "voice" of the people (:24) and the "voice" of the bleating sheep which Saul coveted as his own (:14). And there we have it- the power of God's voice in His word must be louder than the voice of human opinion and the call of materialism and self-enrichment. This is the power of accepting God's word in the Bible as indeed His inspired voice. Hence :22,23 accuse Saul of not listening to the voice of Yahweh.
The reference may be to Saul's love of building altars and offering voluntary sacrifices. He is being told that this cannot replace obeying Yahweh's actual commands. Saul's stubbornness was in refusing to accept he had sinned. His own pride and ego thus became his idol, for there is no reference to Saul worshipping actual idols.
David may be referring to this when he condemns Saul in Ps. 119:150: "They draw near who follow after wickedness, they are far from Your law". "Draw near" is a common idiom for offering sacrifice and worshipping God. But that sacrifice must be from men who are near to God's law, and not offering just as mere tokenistic ritualism. He may be alluding to Saul's insincere sacrifices and religious rituals which led to his rejection and David's choice as the next king (1 Sam. 14:36,38; 15:22).
The words of Mk. 12:33 allude to a number of OT passages which also
show the superiority of knowledge and practical service over sacrifices (1
Sam. 15:22; Hos. 6:6; Mic. 6:6-8). Putting them together we find the
following parallels:
To obey God’s word
To listen to God’s word is better than sacrifice
To show mercy
To know God is better than sacrifice
To be humble and just
is better than sacrifice
To understand God is better than sacrifice
Understanding God, hearing His word, knowing God in ongoing personal relationship (all acts of the intellect) are therefore paralleled with practical things like loving out neighbour, showing mercy, justice etc. These practical things are an outcome of our correct knowledge of / active relationship with God.
1Sa 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is
as the evil of idolatry-
We wonder if he destroyed all witchcraft in order to transfer
onto the witches his own sin of rebellion and the punishment for it. This
is again a psychological classic- to transfer personal guilt and need for
punishment onto others. The sin of omitting obedience was as bad as committing witchcraft (1
Sam. 15:23). Even though Saul partially obeyed God's commandments (1 Sam.
15:20), his omissions of some of them led to God declaring that Saul had
in fact turned back from following His commandments (1 Sam. 15:11). Sins
of omission are our strongest temptations. We note that Saul does
commit the sin of witchcraft at the end of his life. When Samuel has
taught him here that this sin is one of the greatest sins he could commit.
But at this point, Saul had cut off all or killed all the witches he could
find in Israel. He is being told that his sin of rebellion is as bad as
the very sin he so hates and prosecutes.
Because you have rejected the word of Yahweh, He
has also rejected you from being king-
Our attitude to God's word becomes His attitude to us; see on :19. We later read that God's "soul" departed from Israel, because "the Lord
has rejected you" (Jer. 6:8,30). The connection is because these
historical records were intended for the exiles to learn from. This is the same language used about
Saul- God rejected him, and so His spirit departed from him (1 Sam. 15:23;
16:14). The implication was that God's very soul / spirit is "with" us,
and therefore He can be so terribly wounded by us in His heart by the
rebellions of those in covenant relationship with Him. For His heart /
soul / spirit is
so close to us His beloved people.
1Sa 15:24 Saul said to Samuel, I have sinned-
The very words of Judas (Mt.27:4). Again, we see clearly David as a type
of Christ. David said these same words to Nathan and was accepted, but
Saul wasn't. Clearly the words were like so much in his life, a mere
religious formality and not from the heart.
I have transgressed the commandment of Yahweh and your words because I
feared the people and obeyed their voice-
This fear of the people contrasts with the warning given to
him in 1 Sam. 12:14: "If you will fear Yahweh and serve Him, listen to His
voice and not rebel against the commandment of Yahweh, then it will be
well with both you and the king who reigns over you". He feared the people
rather than Yahweh. And so many likewise fear the opinion of others rather
than feel the depth of their personal relationship with God.
Their words, and the unspoken 'word' of their silent opinion of Saul,
struggled within Saul's mind against the words of God. And
because he
didn't have a deep seated respect for God's word as the ultimate
authority, he therefore gave in to their words. We have this same
struggle almost minute by minute in daily life. It's not only our
familiarity with the Biblical text which will assist us towards victory,
but our base, core conviction that God's words are of ultimate authority.
Saul had been anointed king of Israel, on God's behalf. His duty was to lead them, not be led by them. In this sense he is admitting his failure to be king. He had already been removed from being king but had insisted on remaining king. He is admitting his failure as a king. We need to ask: 'And what should he have now done?'. So he should have now recognized his failure as a king, resigned from the kingship, let David take over- and walk humbly with his God to ultimate future salvation. But as with so many, the pride and prejudice of the flesh took over. Saul's second rejection at this point was not simply because he didn't kill Agag and kept the cattle for himself. The essence was that he was on his own admission listening to the people, being ruled by them, rather than spiritually leading them. I suggested on 1 Sam. 13:15 that this was the same reason why he was rejected from being king then.
Saul obeyed the voice of the people and the voice (s.w.) of the sheep and oxen that he covered (1 Sam. 15:24,24). Later he obeys the voice of Jonathan and promises not to kill David (1 Sam. 19:6) the voice of the witch and of his servants who persuade him against his will to eat (1 Sam. 28:22,23). We have the impression of a man readily persuaded by voices. If he had had a fundamental commitment to obey the voice of Yahweh as he was repeatedly asked, he would not have listened to these other voices. Nor the voices in his own head. Likewise those without a fundamental commitment to God's word are open to all the other voices around them, and likewise have no moral compass nor ethical direction. The Hebrew for 'to hear' is the same as 'to obey'. Samuel had told Saul he would be made to hear or obey God's word (1 Sam. 9:27 "that I may tell you the message of God" uses the word for to hear / obey, the hint being 'that I may make you hear / be obedient to the message'). But he failed to make use of this be ause he found the voice of other things more attractive to hearken to.
1Sa 15:25 Now therefore, please pardon my sin and come back with me so
that I may worship Yahweh-
Saul's religiosity is reflected by the way in which he asks Samuel to
"pardon my sin", when he ought instead to have been asking this of God.
For Yahweh is the God who delights to pardon sin (s.w. Ex. 34:7). But
whilst Saul uses the correct vocabulary, he misdirects it- to Samuel and
not to God. And he ends up using the very phrase of Pharaoh (Ex. 10:17),
also without ultimate sincerity. And we note Pharaoh also asked Moses to
pardon his sin, rather than asking Yahweh directly. By contrast,
David asks God directly to "pardon my sin" (Ps. 25:18; 32:5). In
this we see how David was a man after God's heart and Saul wasn't. They
both sinned, but it was the response they made to their sin which
reflected the real state of their heart.
Saul's
motive is clear- he wants Samuel to return to Gilgal and publically
justify Saul by presiding over the sacrifice of the best animals at
Gilgal, although this was perhaps not what Saul had initially planned. For
he kept them for himself.
That the repentance was insincere is shown by the statement in :26 that Saul has rejected Yahweh's word, and has "turned away from following Me" (:11). True repentance would have involved still following Yahweh; the righteous man falls seven times but rises up again. And in this we see the difference with David's heart, who wanted to continue following despite his conviction of serious sin.
1Sa 15:26 Samuel said to Saul, I will not return with you, for you have
rejected the word of Yahweh, and Yahweh has rejected you from being king
over Israel-
For "rejected", see on :23. Samuel appears to have concluded that
Saul is now finally rejected and beyond the hope of reformation by
repentance. "Return" is the word usually used for repentance. Samuel
didn't see Saul's repentance as sincere, and so he would not turn again
with him. And yet he apparently gives in and does so in :31. This could
have been due to fear of Saul, who apparently got physically violent with
him (see on :27). Or it could have been because he still entertained the
desperate hope that perhaps Saul had turned again / repented. And perhaps
he is rebuked for this in 1 Sam. 16:1.
1Sa 15:27 As Samuel turned to go away, Saul grabbed the skirt of his robe
and it tore-
The translation here is misleading. He grabbed the hem, the outer
border of the garment, probably at the neck or shoulder, literally
grabbing him by the collar. It's possible that Saul intended the mantle to
tare, because it symbolized Samuel's prophetic authority. And Saul dearly
wished for God's words through Samuel to be untrue. But denial of God's
word, rejecting the inspiration of the Bible, will not save us. And we see
that such positions are ultimately motivated by a desire to demonstrate
God's judgments of us as being untrue and somehow negated by our negation
of them.
This can also be translated as Samuel tearing Saul's robe. When David does the same to Saul, he is alluding to this.
1Sa 15:28 Samuel said to him, Yahweh has torn the kingdom of Israel from
you this day, and has given it to a neighbour of yours who is better than
you-
Put this together with later verses in :29,35: "The Lord hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee
(Saul)... and hath given it to (David)... the strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for He is not a man, that he should repent... and the Lord repented that He had made Saul king over Israel"
(AV). This juxtaposition of such conflicting statements seems to
intentionally give us insight into the deeply conflicted feelings of God,
which were perhaps reflected in Samuel (see on :31).
I suggested on :27 that it was Saul who had torn the Kingdom. Those who are deprived of the Kingdom will have made the decision themselves. Samuel knew that Yahweh had already decided to given the kingdom to another, as already expressed in 1 Sam. 13; and he knew that God had already selected this "neighbour"; for Bethlehem was only 12 miles away from Gibeah of Saul. But Samuel had still gone on hoping for Saul, and was apparently not proactive in seeking for this replacement- hence the implicit criticism of him by God in 1 Sam. 16:1.
Perhaps David took a cue from these words, and started thinking of Saul as his neighbour. And then his mind went to Lev. 15:18; if Saul was his neighbour, he was to love him as himself, and not take vengeance.
"Better" recalls the description of Saul in 1 Sam. 9:2: “and there was no man among the sons of Israel better than him”. David was "better" than Saul in that he was a man "after" God's own heart, i.e. he was seeking for that heart, as in "the Police are after him", "the miner is after gold". In the same way as there are to be shepherds according to God's heart (Jer. 3:15), and Eli was to be replaced by such a man: “I will raise up for myself a faithful priest who will do according to what is within my heart and within my soul" (1 Sam. 2:35). And the reason for chosing David is stated in 1 Sam. 16:7- Yahweh looks to the heart. Externally, David was not necessarily "better" than Saul, and his Psalms frequently reference his "sins and faults of youth".
1Sa 15:29 The Strength of Israel will not lie nor change His mind, for He
is not a man that He should change His mind-
We read in this very context that God has changed His mind
about Saul. Why the obvious contradiction? It is so glaring that it must
be intentional. I suggest the impression being given is that God is
conflicted within Himself. He could have not changed His mind about Saul-
He had after all predicted how Saul would be, Israel had agreed to that,
and so there was nothing more for God to do. His change of mind was in
that He didn't want His beloved people to suffer under Saul, and so He had
changed His mind about leaving them to suffer the results of their choice-
and had gone on to choose a king who would be good for them. It is the
choice of David which is wherein God changed His mind; His mind change was
in not leaving Israel to the consequences of their sin. His change of mind
was about judgment upon His people. They had absolutely consciously chosen
it for themselves despite warning- but still God feels sorry for them,
despite no real signs of repentance. From His basic pity for His people.
And such relenting from judgments, or ameliorating their effects, is to be
found all through the prophets. But this feature of God should lead us to
repentance, rather than abusing His grace. Joel 2:13 is clear- because
Yahweh does relent from judgment, therefore "Tear your heart, and not your
garments, and turn to Yahweh, your God; for He is gracious and merciful,
slow to anger, and abundant in loving kindness, and relents from sending
calamity".
God does change His mind; the Hebrew for "lie" here can mean "retract", and clearly God does often retract His judgments upon men if they repent. So these words may solely and specifically reference this case of God's rejection of Saul as king and His choice of David. Saul wants God to change His mind about this, but he is clearly being told that in his case, this isn't going to happen. Saul's "kingdom", either his personal kingship or his dynasty, had already been removed in 1 Sam. 13:13,14- but God had been open to ammending that. Saul's behaviour in 1 Sam. 14 and then with the Amalekites in 1 Sam. 15 meant that the window of opportunity was now closed. And meantime, it seems God had "found" David as a replacement; we are given the impression that God began searching in 1 Sam. 13:13,14, and then in 1 Sam. 15:28 He says that He has given the kingdom to Saul's neighbour. The statement that God will not lie i.e. retract is perhaps referencing the choice of David as a replacement: "Once I have sworn by My holiness; I will not lie to David” (Ps. 89:35- also alluded to in Ps. 110:4 "Yahweh has sworn, and will not change His mind: You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek"). His choice of David would not be changed, but this didn't mean that Saul personally was rejected from salvation. Sadly he saw only the kingship and not personal salvation and relationship with God.
And yet despite these apparently final words of rejection of Saul and replacement with David, Samuel mourns for Saul with the implication that he is begging God to even so, rethink and find a way for Saul (1 Sam. 15:31); hence God's rebuke of Samuel, "How long will you mourn for Saul... since I rejected him", 1 Sam. 16:1. He knew God well enough to know that He does rethink. We have many examples likewise in the prophets. 'This is it... no re-thinking, no about turn again... I will save you no more'. But still God does.
God
does not “repent” as men do, but He can still change His mind. Samuel
therefore wept to God for Saul to change his mind, and therefore for God
to relent on His stated purpose concerning him (1 Sam. 15:11). Saul had
been rejected in 1 Sam. 13, but he was given a chance to change that (see
on :1), and continued as king. So perhaps the idea here is that God would
not any longer change His mind over Saul. The rejection of him in 1 Sam.
13 was now confirmed. Yet despite
telling Saul that “the strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he
is not a man, that he should repent”, Samuel appears to have continued
praying for a change of mind from God and Saul; we can
conclude this from the way God had to keep telling Samuel to stop (1 Sam.
15:25; 16:1). This is very similar to how God told Ezekiel that He would
not spare nor repent of His attitude to Israel, and will judge them
according to their ways (Ez. 24:14); yet according to His grace, it is
many times recorded that He did and
will spare them, and
does not judge them according to the merits of their sins.
1Sa 15:30 Then he said, I have sinned, yet please honour me now before the
elders of my people and before Israel; come back with me so that I may
worship Yahweh your God-
Again we note "Yahweh your God". See on :21. It really was
all about appearances before men in the religious group, rather than
before God. We note that all the elders of Israel were present there in
Gilgal. Perhaps there was some truth in Saul's excuse that in fact he
intended to offer the best animals to Yahweh at some big gathering
proclaimed at Gilgal; for he had had at least a week to gather the elders.
Saul had gone up to Carmel in the north of the land to proclaim his
victory (:12), and perhaps he intended to offer the best animals in front
of an Israel gathered to behold his military glory, and to view the
humbled Agag before him. What was wrong with all this was that he had
disobeyed Yahweh's commandment for the sake of his own pride, and was
using the service of God for his own ego. And this pride was so disgusting
to God, as it is to this day. Saul was therefore desperate that his
display of victory, his victory triumph, not be marred by Samuel snubbing
it.
1Sa 15:31 So Samuel went back with Saul-
"Return" or "went back" is the word usually used for repentance. In
:26, Samuel didn't see Saul's repentance as sincere, and so he would not
turn again / go back with him. And yet he apparently gives in and does so
now. This could have been due to fear of Saul, who apparently got
physically violent with him (see on :27). Or it could have been because he
still entertained the desperate hope that perhaps Saul had turned again /
repented. And perhaps he is rebuked for this in 1 Sam. 16:1.
And Saul worshipped Yahweh-
Worship like prayer can be on a surface level, or the real thing.
Saul “worshipped the Lord” merely for the sake of appearances,
because this was what his position required of him,
the hymn being sung
which he had to go along with.
1Sa 15:32 Then Samuel said, Bring here to me Agag the king of the
Amalekites! Agag came to him confidently, thinking, Surely the bitterness
of death is past-
I explained on :31 that the gathering at Gilgal had been set up as a
kind of victory triumph to Saul's glory. Saul did not intend to kill Agag,
and Agag had got that impression, that he would not taste the bitterness
of death. It had been Saul's idea to parade him live, in some kind of
Roman victory triumph- to Saul's glory. He had been commanded to kill him
immediately exactly so that this would not be the case. Samuel therefore
killed him, although it seems not at the victory triumph but privately, so
that Saul could not glory in him.
1Sa 15:33 Samuel said, As your sword has made women childless, so your
mother will be childless among women! Samuel cut Agag in pieces before
Yahweh in Gilgal-
See on :32. "Before Yahweh" implies there was a high place there, or
possibly the ark.
1Sa 15:34 Then Samuel went to Ramah and Saul went up to his house to
Gibeah of Saul-
The idea is that they both returned to their homes, for Samuel had
his home in Ramah. The fact Saul returns to his home village at this point
could suggest he was as it were resigning from being king.
1Sa 15:35 Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death-
This is proof enough that Samuel was resurrected to see Saul on the
day of his death. Ramah was less than ten miles from Gibeah
so it could be implied that Samuel went into hiding until his death.
Yet
Samuel mourned for Saul, and Yahweh grieved that He had made Saul king
over Israel-
We note the parallel in feeling between Yahweh and Samuel. Samuel's
desperate desire for Saul to repent, for the project with him to work out,
reflected that of God. And God's efforts with people are similar to this
day. And like Samuel, we should have His saving, hopeful heart for the
lost and stubborn.
Any separations from brethren are brought forth from much sorrow; Corinth
ecclesia were told that they should have mourned as they withdrew
from one who had left the faith (1 Cor. 5:2). "The whole house of Israel"
were commanded to "mourn" the necessary destruction of Nadab and Abihu
(Lev. 10:6). Samuel mourned and God repented when Saul was finally
rejected (1 Sam. 15:35). Paul wept when he wrote about some in the
ecclesia who had fallen away (Phil. 3:17-19). It must be said that 'block
disfellowship'- the cutting off of hundreds of brethren and sisters
because theoretically they fellowship a weak brother- hardly enables
'mourning' and pleading with each of those who are disfellowshipped.
Previous Chapter
