1Sa 8:19-20

And they said, Nay, but we will have a king over us.

A king desired

If we were asked what is the prevailing feeling which the study of this history is calculated to produce, we should answer in one word–disappointment.

I. The request of the Israelites brings before us a melancholy view of the progress of degeneracy in a community. It requires no effort to perceive in this desire of the Israelites the renewed manifestation of the discontented and rebellious disposition which prevailed in the camp at the Red Sea, and on subsequent occasions in the wilderness; but now it was marked by a greater fixedness of criminal resolve and of God-dishonouring purpose. It was the sin of the fathers living over again, but with greater intensity, in the persons of the children. This view of the case is, in a high degree, admonitory. None of us, perhaps, think enough of the connection between ourselves and the future. Each age exerts a very considerable influence on that which succeeds it, and the men of any particular age are responsible to God in a very large and affecting measure for the characteristics of the period which may come after them The degeneracy of communities is after all the degeneracy of individuals; and he who makes the effort to prevent in the conduct of a single individual the continuance of sin–who attempts in the case of a single individual to raise the tone of morals, does so far provide a better State of things for the age that shall come after him. If looking at the clamorous assembly which the narrative brings before us as now surrounding Samuel and asking a change in the form of government, we inquire whence learnt they those low thoughts of God which led them so much to dishonour Him as to wish to put Him aside in order to make room for an earthly ruler? the only proper and correct reply would be, From those who went before them. We live for a future age, and virtually we have the character of that age in our hands, whether as it concerns the nation, the church, or the family

II. The scene brought before us by this demand of Israel for a king, teaches us the perilousness of allowing our thoughts to run in an improper direction and our wishes to centre upon a wrong object. And this for a reason which is very distinctly conveyed to us in the tenour of the narrative–the absorbing effect of one wrong thought, and its consequent power to throw into oblivion all those counteracting thoughts and objects which from any other source might be suggested. Trace the progress of this one wrong desire, in Israel, of having a king. Was there nothing to be said on the other side? Rather we might ask, Is it not exceedingly easy to conceive of the counteracting effect which at the first stage might have been presented to such a wish by a recollection of their actual privileges at the moment? There is a matchless sublimity–the sublimity of condescension and graciousness–about the very idea of a theocracy. But if its sublimity did not appeal to their moral sense, its peculiar advantageousness might have appealed to their self-regard. The God-honouring wish grew stronger and stronger. At least, however, it might have been expected that they would be moved by a vivid delineation of the unwelcome consequences which God declared would attend on the new arrangement. Yet, after all, this is but a picture of real life, applicable to every age. It contains a faithful warning. It says–Beware of the first wrong desire, give it no encouragement. Beware of the first misdirection of thought. Be sure you are right at first in your plans and purposes, because afterwards, by reason of the very force with which wrong thoughts indulged exclude all suggestions to the contrary, it may be too late to alter. To the young it especially says–In the purposes you cherish, the plans you propose, the changes you contemplate, the objects on which you allow your affections to rest, beware of a mistake at the first.

III. It is of importance that we should carefully study the essential evil of the motive which here operated in the minds of the Hebrew nation. That motive was–that they might be like other people. And if in a thoughtful mood we take a survey of the causes which have wrought to produce moral desolation in communities from that day until the present, there will appear none whose operation has proved more widely mischievous, more intensely active to harm than this–a desire to be like others. Many a time has that young man left the house of God full of conviction, and ready to resolve that, whatever others did, he would serve the Lord. But he turned to take another look at the world, and the thought came along with the look, float much of his worldly interest depended upon the friendship of those around him, and that if he expected them to be his friends, his opinions and his habits must not be opposed to theirs. He gave in to the principle of being like them; and, having resembled them in time, his lot now throughout eternity resembles theirs too. Alas! the wreck of souls which this principle involves! and, we must, add, the wreck of earthly comfort, too. (J. A. Miller.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 19. The people refused to obey] They would have the king, his manner and all, notwithstanding the solemn warning which they here receive.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

They said, Nay, i.e. these things shall never be, these are but vain suppositions to affright us from our purpose. Thus they are not ashamed to give Samuel the lie, of whose modesty, integrity, and prophetical spirit they had so great assurance, as if he had reigned those pretences merely to keep the power in his own and his sons hands.

We will have a king over us; we will have a king, whatsoever it cost us, although all thy predictions should be verified.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

19-22. Nevertheless the peoplerefused to obey the voice of SamuelThey sneered at Samuel’sdescription as a bugbear to frighten them. Determined, at allhazards, to gain their object, they insisted on being made like allthe other nations, though it was their glory and happiness to beunlike other nations in having the Lord for their King and Lawgiver(Num 23:9; Deu 33:28).Their demand was conceded, for the government of a king had beenprovided for in the law; and they were dismissed to wait theappointment, which God had reserved to Himself (De17:14-20).

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Nevertheless, the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel,…. The advice he gave not to think of a king, but be content with the government under which they were; but to this they would not hearken, notwithstanding all the inconveniences that would attend such a change:

and they said, nay, but we will have a king over us; they would not believe what Samuel said concerning a king, even though they were the words of the Lord he delivered to them; and though they knew Samuel was a prophet, and spoke by a spirit of prophecy, and none of his words had ever fallen to the ground: but such was their stubbornness and obstinacy, and so set upon having a king, that one they would have, let them suffer what hardships, or be at what expenses they might; at all events, and against all remonstrances, they were determined to have one.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

With such a description of the “ right of the king ” as this, Samuel had pointed out to the elders the dangers connected with a monarchy in so alarming a manner, that they ought to have been brought to reflection, and to have desisted from their demand. “ But the people refused to hearken to the voice of Samuel.” They repeated their demand, “ We will have a king over us, that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and conduct our battles.”

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

King Allowed, vs. 19-22

The elders of Israel had their minds made up before they came to Samuel. They did not intend to forego the demand for a king under any circumstances. They refused to believe Samuel’s words, adamantly insisting that they would have a king over them.

Now they prove that their real reason for requesting the king was that very dangerous one of becoming like the nations around them. Doubtless they had been embarrassed by the fact they had no king. Probably the nations around them had ridiculed them for not having a regularly established leader. So they wanted progress in their country, to have a king like the others, so he could be their judge. He could go out at the head of their armies and make them proud in leading them in their battles against the enemy. They had forgotten the lesson of Ebenezer already. Have not the Lord’s churches and His people today been weakened by wanting to adopt the secular ways of the world into their services?

Samuel was very saddened that the people would not listen to logic and reason, but again he carried it all to the Lord: Again the Lord told His faithful servant to do as they wished and make them a king. This is another example of the Lord’s permissive will. Samuel sent them home while he sought out the king the Lord would have anointed over Israel.

Lessons from chapter eight: 1) Errors by Christian leaders furnish excuses for others to commit error; 2) nothing in the world, adapted by the Lord’s people, will better His own methods; 3) the Lord often lets His children have their desires to show them His way is best: 4) when the Lord’s servants feel rejected they should remember God’s answer to Samuel.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

The People Persist. 1Sa. 8:19-22

19 Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;
20 That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.
21 And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the Lord.
22 And the Lord said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city.

8.

In what way had they rejected God? cf. 1Sa. 8:20

They had rejected God in that they wanted to be like all the nations. God had delivered them by judges. Samuel as a judge had delivered them, but they took it upon themselves. They were now saying, We must have a king. In rejecting the judges, they were rejecting God. God was King. This is the verdict of God. In declaring Samuel incapable, they were founding their arguments upon mistrust in the Lord. In the person of Samuel they rejected the Lord and His rule. They wanted a king, because they imagined that Jehovah their God-King was not able to secure their constant prosperity. Instead of seeking for the cause of the misfortunes that had befallen them in their own sin, they searched for it in the constitution of the nation itself. In such a state of mind their desire for a king was a contempt and rejection of the kingly government of Jehovah.

9.

Why did Samuel rehearse the words of the people in the ears of the Lord? 1Sa. 8:21

Samuel evidently went before the Lord again and again about the problem. This would be a rehearsal of these things in the ears of the Lord. Samuels heart was heavy, and he found release in prayer. He was anxious about his people, and he wanted to be sure that he was doing the will of God in this matter. This demand of the people and the subsequent anointing of a king mark a turning point in the history of the people of Israel.

10.

Why did Samuel send the people back home? 1Sa. 8:22

The elders of the people of Israel had come from various tribes. Some of them had come from across the Jordan in Gilead. Some had come from the far north near the Sea of Galilee. Others had no doubt come from Beer-sheba, the southern city half way down the length of the Dead Sea. Samuel was awaiting the will of the Lord in this matter, and he wanted time for this will to be made known to him. He would call the people again when a king was picked out for them. The people evidently had respect for Samuel, and were willing to wait until the time was right. We find none of them rebelling openly against this dismissal, but they must have returned with thoughtful steps. What they were doing had brought sadness to the prophet. It had brought a statement from the Lord that forced them on in spite of the warning which Samuel had given them. Some of them may have entertained doubts about their actions as they waited in their home tribes to see what would happen. Much discussion must have transpired. All Israel was agog. The monarchy was about to be born.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(19) The people refused.The warning words of the prophet-judge were evidently carefully considered and debated in a formal assembly, but the majority at least abided by the terms of their request.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

19. The people refused to obey They had counted the cost, and were willing to submit to regal exactions for the sake of having a government like the nations around them. “On this Samuel sorrowfully dismissed them to their homes, that he might have time to take the necessary measures for effecting this great change.” Kitto.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments