Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 15:10
Then came the word of the LORD unto Samuel, saying,
10, 11. Then came the word of theLord unto Samuel, saying, It repenteth me that I have set upSaulRepentance is attributed in Scripture to Him when bad mengive Him cause to alter His course and method of procedure, and totreat them as if He did “repent” of kindness shown. To theheart of a man like Samuel, who was above all envious considerations,and really attached to the king, so painful an announcement moved allhis pity and led him to pass a sleepless night of earnestintercession.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Then came the word of the Lord unto Samuel,…. The word of prophecy, as the Targum; this came to him in a dream or vision, or by an articulate voice:
saying; as follows.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The word of the Lord came to Samuel: “ It repenteth me that I have made Saul king, for he hath turned away from me, and not set up (carried out) my word.” (On the repentance of God, see the remarks on Gen 6:6.) That this does not express any changeableness in the divine nature, but simply the sorrow of the divine love at the rebellion of sinners, is evident enough from 1Sa 15:29. , to turn round from following God, in order to go his own ways. This was Saul’s real sin. He would no longer be the follower and servant of the Lord, but would be absolute ruler in Israel. Pride arising from the consciousness of his own strength, led him astray to break the command of God. What more God said to Samuel is not communicated here, because it could easily be gathered and supplied from what Samuel himself proceeded to do (see more particularly 1Sa 15:16.). In order to avoid repetitions, only the principal feature in the divine revelation is mentioned here, and the details are given fully afterwards in the account of the fulfilment of the instructions. Samuel was deeply agitated by this word of the Lord. “ It burned (in) him,” sc., wrath ( , compare Gen 31:36 with Gen 30:2), not on account of the repentance to which God had given utterance at having raised up Saul as king, nor merely at Saul’s disobedience, but at the frustration of the purpose of God in calling him to be king in consequence of his disobedience, from which he might justly dread the worst results in relation to the glory of Jehovah and his own prophetic labours.
(Note: “Many grave thoughts seem to have presented themselves at once to Samuel and disturbed his mind, when he reflected upon the dishonour which might be heaped upon the name of God, and the occasion which the rejection and deposition of Saul would furnish to wicked men for blaspheming God. For Saul had been anointed by the ministry of Samuel, and he had been chosen by God himself from all the people, and called by Him to the throne. If, therefore, he was nevertheless deposed, it seemed likely that so much would be detracted from the authority of Samuel and the confidence of the people in his teaching, and, moreover, that the worship of God would be overturned, and the greatest disturbance ensue; in fact, that universal confusion would burst upon the nation. These were probably the grounds upon which Samuel’s great indignation rested.” – Calvin.)
The opinion that is also used to signify deep distress cannot be established from 2Sa 4:8. “ And he cried to Jehovah the whole night,” sc., praying for Saul to be forgiven. But it was in vain. This is evident from what follows, where Samuel maintains the cause of his God with strength and decision, after having wrestled with God in prayer.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Samuel Reproves Saul; Saul Rejected of God. | B. C. 1065. |
10 Then came the word of the LORD unto Samuel, saying, 11 It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the LORD all night. 12 And when Samuel rose early to meet Saul in the morning, it was told Samuel, saying, Saul came to Carmel, and, behold, he set him up a place, and is gone about, and passed on, and gone down to Gilgal. 13 And Samuel came to Saul: and Saul said unto him, Blessed be thou of the LORD: I have performed the commandment of the LORD. 14 And Samuel said, What meaneth then this bleating of the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear? 15 And Saul said, They have brought them from the Amalekites: for the people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God; and the rest we have utterly destroyed. 16 Then Samuel said unto Saul, Stay, and I will tell thee what the LORD hath said to me this night. And he said unto him, Say on. 17 And Samuel said, When thou wast little in thine own sight, wast thou not made the head of the tribes of Israel, and the LORD anointed thee king over Israel? 18 And the LORD sent thee on a journey, and said, Go and utterly destroy the sinners the Amalekites, and fight against them until they be consumed. 19 Wherefore then didst thou not obey the voice of the LORD, but didst fly upon the spoil, and didst evil in the sight of the LORD? 20 And Saul said unto Samuel, Yea, I have obeyed the voice of the LORD, and have gone the way which the LORD sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites. 21 But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the chief of the things which should have been utterly destroyed, to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God in Gilgal. 22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. 23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
Saul is here called to account by Samuel concerning the execution of his commission against the Amalekites; and remarkable instances we are here furnished with of the strictness of the justice of God and the treachery and deceitfulness of the heart of man. We are here told,
I. What passed between God and Samuel, in secret, upon this occasion, 1Sa 15:10; 1Sa 15:11. 1. God determines Saul’s rejection, and acquaints Samuel with it: It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king. Repentance in God is not, as it is in us, a change of his mind, but a change of his method or dispensation. He does not alter his will, but wills an alteration. The change was in Saul: He has turned back from following me; this construction God put upon the partiality of his obedience, and the prevalency of his covetousness. And hereby he did himself make God his enemy. God repented that he had given Saul the kingdom and the honour and power that belonged to it: but he never repented that he had given any man wisdom and grace, and his fear and love; these gifts and callings of God are without repentance. 2. Samuel laments and deprecates it. It grieved Samuel that Saul had forfeited God’s favour, and that God had resolved to cast him off; and he cried unto the Lord all night, spent a whole night in interceding for him, that this decree might not go forth against him. When others were in their beds sleeping, he was upon his knees praying and wrestling with God. He did not thus deprecate his own exclusion from the government; nor was he secretly pleased, as many a one would have been, that Saul, who succeeded him, was so soon laid aside, but on the contrary prayed earnestly for his establishment, so far was he from desiring that woeful day. The rejection of sinners is the grief of good people; God delights not in their death, nor should we.
II. What passed between Samuel and Saul in public. Samuel, being sent of God to him with these heavy tidings, went, as Ezekiel, in bitterness of soul, to meet him, perhaps according to an appointment when Saul went forth on this expedition, for Saul had come to Gilgal (v. 12), the place where he was made king (ch. xi. 15), and were now he would have been confirmed if he had approved himself well in the trial of his obedience. But Samuel was informed that Saul had set up a triumphal arch, or some monument of his victory, at Carmel, a city in the mountains of Judah, seeking his own honour more than the honour of God, for he set up this place (or hand, as the word is) for himself (he had more need to have been repenting of his sin and making his peace with God than boasting of his victory), and also that he had marched in great state to Gilgal, for this seems to be intimated in the manner of expression: He has gone about, and passed on, and gone down, with a great deal of pomp and parade. There Samuel gave him the meeting, and,
1. Saul makes his boast to Samuel of his obedience, because that was the thing by which he was now to signalize himself (v. 13): “Blessed be thou of the Lord, for thou sendest me upon a good errand, in which I have had great success, and I have performed the commandment of the Lord.” It is very likely, if his conscience had now flown in his face at this time and charged him with disobedience, he would not have been so forward to proclaim his disobedience; for by this he hoped to prevent Samuel’s reproving him. Thus sinners think, by justifying themselves, to escape being judged of the Lord; whereas the only way to do that is by judging ourselves. Those that boast most of their religion may be suspected of partiality and hypocrisy in it.
2. Samuel convicts him by a plain demonstration of his disobedience. “Hast thou performed the commandment of the Lord? What means then the bleating of the sheep?” v. 14. Saul would needs have it thought than God Almighty was wonderfully beholden to him for the good service he had done; but Samuel shows him that God was so far from being a debtor to him that he had just cause of action against him, and produces for evidence the bleating of the sheep, and the lowing of the oxen, which perhaps Saul appointed to bring up the rear of his triumph, but Samuel appears to them as witnesses against him. He needed not go far to disprove his professions. The noise the cattle made (like the rust of silver, Jam. v. 3) would be a witness against him. Note, It is no new thing for the plausible professions and protestations of hypocrites to be contradicted and disproved by the most plain and undeniable evidence. Many boast of their obedience to the command of God; but what mean then their indulgence of the flesh, their love of the world, their passion and uncharitableness, and their neglect of holy duties, which witness against them?
3. Saul insists upon his own justification against this charge, v. 15. The fact he cannot deny; the sheep and oxen were brought from the Amalekites. But, (1.) It was not his fault, for the people spared them; as if they durst have done it without the express orders of Saul, when they knew it was against the express orders of Samuel. Note, Those that are willing to justify themselves are commonly very forward to condemn others, and to lay the blame upon any rather than take it to themselves. Sin is a brat that nobody cares to have laid at his doors. It is the sorry subterfuge of an impenitent heart, that will not confess its guilt, to lay the blame on those that were tempters, or partners, or only followers in it. (2.) It was with a good intention: “It was to sacrifice to the Lord thy God. He is thy God, and thou wilt not be against any thing that is done, as this is, for his honour.” This was a false plea, for both Saul and the people designed their own profit in sparing the cattle. But, if it had been true, it would still have been frivolous, for God hates robbery for burnt-offering. God appointed these cattle to be sacrificed to him in the field, and therefore will give those no thanks that bring them to be sacrificed at his altar; for he will be served in his own way, and according to the rule he himself has prescribed. Nor will a good intention justify a bad action.
4. Samuel overrules, or rather overlooks, his plea, and proceeds, in God’s name, to give judgment against him. He premises his authority. What he was about to say was what the Lord had said to him (v. 16), otherwise he would have been far from passing so severe a censure upon him. Those who complain that their ministers are too harsh with them should remember that, while they keep to the word of God, they are but messengers, and must say as they are bidden, and therefore be willing, as Saul himself here was, that they should say on. Samuel delivers his message faithfully. (1.) He reminds Saul of the honour of God had done him in making him king (v. 17), when he was little in his own sight. God regarded the lowness of his state and rewarded the lowliness of his spirit. Note, Those that are advanced to honour and wealth ought often to remember their mean beginnings, that they may never think highly of themselves, but always study to do great things for the God that had advanced them. (2.) He lays before him the plainness of the orders he was to execute (v. 18): The Lord sent thee on a journey; so easy was the service, and so certain the success, that it was rather to be called a journey than a war. The work was honourable, to destroy the sworn enemies of God and Israel; and had he denied himself, and set aside the consideration of his own profit so far as to have destroyed all that belonged to Amalek, he would have been no loser by it at last, nor have gone this warfare on his own charges. God would no doubt have made it up to him, so that he should have no need of spoil. And therefore, (3.) He shows him how inexcusable he was in aiming to make a profit of this expedition, and to enrich himself by it (v. 19): “Wherefore then didst thou fly upon the spoil, and convert that to thy own use which was to have been destroyed for God’s honour?” See what evil the love of money is the root of; but see what is the sinfulness of sin, and that in it which above any thing else makes it evil in the sight of the Lord. It is disobedience: Thou didst not obey the voice of the Lord.
5. Saul repeats his vindication of himself, as that which, in defiance of conviction, he resolved to abide by, 1Sa 15:20; 1Sa 15:21. He denies the charge (v. 20): “Yea, I have obeyed, I have done all I should do;” for he had done all which he thought he needed to do, so much wiser was he in his own eyes than God himself. God bade him kill all, and yet he puts in among the instances of his obedience that he brought Agag alive, which he thought was as good as if he had killed him. Thus carnal deceitful hearts think to excuse themselves from God’s commandments with their own equivalents. He insists upon it that he has utterly destroyed the Amalekites themselves, which was the main thing intended; but, as to the spoil, he owns it should have been utterly destroyed; so that he knew his Lord’s will, and was under no mistake about the command. But he thought that would be wilful waste; the cattle of the Midianites was taken for a prey in Moses’s time (Num. xxxi. 32, c.), and why not the cattle of the Amalekites now? Better it should be prey to the Israelites than to the fowls of the air and the wild beasts and therefore he connived at the people’s carrying it away. But it was their doing and not his; and, besides, it was for sacrifice to the Lord here at Gilgal, whither they were now bringing them. See what a hard thing it is to convince the children of disobedience of their sin and to strip them of their fig-leaves.
6. Samuel gives a full answer to his apology, since he did insist upon it, 1Sa 15:22; 1Sa 15:23. He appeals to his own conscience: Has the Lord as great delight in sacrifices as in obedience? Though Saul was not a man of any great acquaintance with religion, yet he could not but know this, (1.) That nothing is so pleasing to God as obedience, no, not sacrifice and offering, and the fat of rams. See here what we should seek and aim at in all the exercises of religion, even acceptance with God, that he may delight in what we do. If God be well pleased with us and our services, we are happy, we have gained our point, but otherwise to what purpose is it? Isa. i. 11. Now here we are plainly told that humble, sincere, and conscientious obedience to the will of God, is more pleasing and acceptable to him than all burnt-offerings and sacrifices. A careful conformity to moral precepts recommends us to God more than all ceremonial observances, Mic 6:6-8; Hos 6:6. Obedience is enjoyed by the eternal law of nature, but sacrifice only by a positive law. Obedience was the law of innocency, but sacrifice supposes sin come into the world, and is but a feeble attempt to take that away which obedience would have prevented. God is more glorified and self more denied by obedience than by sacrifice. It is much easier to bring a bullock or lamb to be burnt upon the altar than to bring every high thought into obedience to God and the will subject to his will. Obedience is the glory of angels (Ps. ciii. 20), and it will be ours. (2.) That nothing is so provoking to God as disobedience, setting up our wills in competition with his. This is here called rebellion and stubbornness, and is said to be as bad as witchcraft and idolatry, v. 23. It is as bad to set up other gods as to live in disobedience to the true God. Those that are governed by their own corrupt inclinations, in opposition to the command of God, do, in effect, consult the teraphim (as the word here is for idolatry) or the diviners. It was disobedience that made us all sinners (Rom. v. 19), and this is the malignity of sin, that it is the transgression of the law, and consequently it is enmity to God, Rom. viii. 7. Saul was a king, but if he disobey the command of God, his royal dignity and power will not excuse him from the guilt of rebellion and stubbornness. It is not the rebellion of the people against their prince, but of a prince against God, that this text speaks of.
7. He reads his doom: in short, “Because thou has rejected the word of the Lord, hast despised it (so the Chaldee), hast made nothing of it (so the LXX.), hast cast off the government of it, therefore he has rejected thee, despised and made nothing of thee, but cast thee off from being king. He that made thee king has determined to unmake thee again.” Those are unfit and unworthy to rule over men who are not willing that God should rule over them.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Saul’s Third Major Error, vs. 10-23
The transgression committed by Saul, on this occasion, brought the sentence of finality on his kingdom. He had acted presumptuously in making his own offering (chapter 13) and made himself unpopular by his foolish ban (chapter 14). Now he becomes guilty of utter disregard for the will of God (chapter 15). God’s condemnation of Saul’s kingdom begins with His informing Samuel the prophet that He was done with Saul. Samuel was grievously upset at the news. It seems he had a great love for the king, and he spent the rest of the night crying to the Lord, evidently seeking mercy for the willful king.
God did not relent, and the next morning Samuel was sent to search out the camping place of Saul’s army to give him the bad news. Saul was moving toward Gilgal in the Jordan valley, where he had before met with Samuel. His camp at Carmel, in the far south of Judah, had been deserted for the removal to Gilgal When Samuel eventually caught up with Saul the king came out with a warm greeting for him, an utterance of blessing, and a brazen claim that he had performed the commandment of the Lord.
Samuel inquired of the meaning of the bleating of the sheep, and the lowing of the cattle, if Saul had indeed complied with the Lord’s commands. It was evident that God’s command had been violated. Saul immediately began to hedge and make excuses. He begins to speak of “they” and “the people,” implying that it was done because of the people’s insistence. He further tried to make it seem that it was out of zeal for the Lord the animals were spared. These fine, fat animals had been kept for sacrifices to “the Lord thy God,” which also seemed to imply that Samuel should appreciate that the people desired to honor his God.
Samuel now proceeded to tell Saul what the Lord had revealed to him the previous night. He began by recalling the child-like humility which Saul displayed when first he was anointed, when God had made him head of all the tribes of Israel. Now the Lord had given Saul a clear, unequivocal command to go and utterly destroy the Amalekites and all they possessed. And he had failed. In fact, it appeared that he had willfully disobeyed the Lord’s command. He was charged with evil in the sight of the Lord.
But Saul protested that he had obeyed the command of the Lord and had destroyed the Amalekites as He said. Agag the king, the sole survivor, was brought back to emphasize their destruction. He agreed that all the animals should have been destroyed, but the people had insisted on bringing them here to Gilgal to sacrifice to the Lord. Saul seemed to feel that he should be allowed to interpret the Lord’s command as he wished.
Samuel answered the king by saying that God delights more in faithful obedience to His commands than He does in the sacrifice of many fat animals. Obedience is from the heart, while sacrifice of animals is an outward formality. Rebellion against the Lord Samuel paralleled with witchcraft, for both constitute a substitution of something else for God’s word. Stubbornness is as bad as idolatry, because both set up something in the place of the Lord. For Saul’s rejection of the Lord’s word the Lord was rejecting his kingship.
After his intrusion into the priest’s office Saul was told that his kingdom would not continue. This time, however, his kingship itself will cease. It would seem that, from this time forward, the Lord no longer recognized Saul’s leadership of Israel.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES
1Sa. 15:10. It repenteth me. The anthropopathic expression for the change of the Divine procedure into the opposite of what the holy and righteous will of God had determined under the condition of holy and righteous conduct by men when on mans side there has been a change to the opposite of this condition without repentance. (Erdmann.) See also comments on this verse. It grieved Samuel and he cried unto the Lord, etc. Literally It burned (in) him, i.e., his wrath was kindled. Many grave thoughts seem to have presented themselves at once to Samuel and disturbed his mind, when he reflected upon the dishonour which might be heaped upon the name of God, and the occasion which the deposition and rejection of Saul would furnish to wicked men for blaspheming God. For Saul had been anointed by the ministry of Samuel, and he had been chosen by God Himself from all the people, and called by Him to the throne. If, therefore, he was nevertheless deposed, it seemed likely that so much would be detracted from the authority of Samuel and the confidence of the people in his teaching, and moreover that the worship of God would be overturned, and the greatest disturbance ensue; in fact, that universal confusion would break in upon the nation. These were probably the grounds upon which Samuels great indignation rested. (Calvin.) The object of Sauls prayer was doubtless not release from the fulfilment of the Divine command, but the exemption of Saul from the sentence of rejection and the forgiveness of his disobedience. (Erdmann).
1Sa. 15:12. When Samuel rose. It does not appear clearly where Samuel was, but probably at his own home. (Biblical Commentary.) Carmel. A city south-east of Hebron, on the mountains of Judah (Jos. 15:55), now called Kurmul. A place. Rather, a monument or trophy. The Hebrew word yad means a hand, but we have a certain clue to the meaning, monument or trophy, not only in the verb here used, set up, but in 2Sa. 18:18, where we are told that the marble pillar which Absalom set up was called Yad Absalom. (Biblical Commentary.)
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.1Sa. 15:10-12
SAMUELS PRAYER
I. There is a strong conviction in the mind of the best men that prayer has an influence upon the Divine mind. This arises, first, from their knowledge of the Divine character and the Divine command. They know that God has commanded His creatures to draw near to Him and pour out their hearts before Him, and they know also that He is infinitely just and good. They therefore conclude that He would not require them to perform any unmeaning actthat if He commands them to pray He is open to influence from their prayers. Secondly, their own past experience and the record of the experience of other praying souls confirms this conviction. If a man has waited upon God in the past and has received into his life the blessings which he has asked of God, it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to convince him that there was not a conviction between his prayer and the blessing. And the records of the Church of God in all ages are full of the testimonies of Gods servants that they have cried unto the Lord and He has heard them and given them their hearts desire. Samuel was evidently governed by a conviction that prayer was a power with God. His own name was to him a constant testimony of the power of prayerhis whole life had been a life of prayer, and he had in times past received blessings, both for himself and others, in answer to his petitions. In looking back, also, upon the history of Israel in the past, he could recall many times when judgments had been turned aside and blessings had descended in answer to the prayer of the people as a whole or to the request of one man on behalf of the entire nation. He would especially remember how, more than once, the prayer of Moses for rebellious and disobedient Israel had prevailed with God, and his whole soul was penetrated by a conviction that prayer had an influence upon the mind of the Eternal. When, therefore, God made known to him the new offence of which Saul had been guilty, and His purpose concerning him, Samuel did not think it useless to supplicate God long and earnestly to avert the sentence which He had passed on the offender or in some degree to mitigate its severity. The best men in all ages have done the same in similar circumstances under the influence of the same strong conviction of the power of prayer.
II. There are characters for whom the prayers of the best men cannot prevail. The man who begs a physician to restore his friend to health must remember that all does not rest with the physician. If his prescriptions were infallible, there must be co-operation on the part of the patient if they are to be of any avail. If he declines to fall in with the healers method of cure, he makes his friends prayer powerless by his own wilfulness. God Himself implies that Samuel and Moses were most powerful intercessors with Him on behalf of His ancient people (Jer. 15:1), yet there were times when even their pleadings failed, not because the Divine arm was shortened or the Divine ear deaf to their intercessions, but because the wilfulness of those for whom they prayed rendered it impossible to answer their supplications. God has often broken through the laws of His material universe in answer to the requests of His servants, but the laws of His moral kingdom are unalterable and cannot be broken through. If Saul in his unrepentant condition had been permitted to go unpunished, a moral law would have been broken. Samuels prayers had done much for him in the past, and if there had been any disposition on his part to turn to God and again submit to His will, they might have even now prevailed for him, but his own persistent obstinacy and self-will made even the petitions of this mighty intercessor with God powerless in his case.
III. When the servants of God become convinced that their prayers cannot be answered, they ought to become fully enlisted on the side of Gods purpose although it is not on the side of their desire. Samuel earnestly desired that the purpose of God concerning Saul should not be carried out, and he prayed fervently that his desire might be granted; but when he found that it could not be, although his grief was long and deep (see 1Sa. 15:35 and 1Sa. 16:1), he gave himself unreservedly into the hand of God, and prepared himself to carry to Saul the Divine message which he delivered with the authority and faithfulness which befitted his prophetic office. The fervent intercessor is changed into the inflexible judge when he becomes convinced that it is not consistent with the Divine will to grant him his hearts desire. It should be so with Gods servants at all times and under all circumstances. They are not forbiddenthey are indeed encouragedto make known their requests unto God with fervour; they may plead with Him with all their heart for the person or the plan that lies near their heart, but when they become convinced that their prayer can not be answered, they ought to cheerfully accept the position, and be willing to lend themselves, heart and soul, to the purpose and plan of God, although it is directly opposed to their previous desires.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
1Sa. 15:11. Wilfulness, the sin of Saul. Sauls temptation and fall consisted in a certain perverseness of mind, founded on some obscure feelings of self-importance, very commonly observable in human nature, and sometimes called pridea perverseness which shows itself in a reluctance absolutely to relinquish its own independence of action, in cases where dependence is a duty, and which interferes a little, and alters a little, as if with a view of satisfying its own fancied dignity, though it is afraid altogether to oppose itself to the voice of God. Should this seem at first sight to be a trifling fault, it is more worth while to trace its operation in the history of Saul. If a tree is known by its fruit, it is a great sin. In contemplating the miserable termination of a history which promised well in the beginning, it should be observed how clearly the failure of the Divine purpose is attributable to man. No one could be selected in talents and conduct more suitable for maintaining political power at home than the reserved, mysterious monarch whom God gave to His people; none more suitable for striking terror into the surrounding nations than a commander gifted with his coolness and promptness in action. But he fell from his election because of unbeliefbecause he would take another part, and not the very part which was actually assigned him in the decrees of the Most High.J. H. Newman.
Samuel cried unto the Lord all night. Was this warrantable? It was a mistaken, but surely not a criminal, urgency; for might he not with reason be supposed to receive the dreadful announcement as a frowning barrier over which faith had to wrestle? He might not arrest the evil of Sauls fate; the erring monarch must himself be a penitent suppliant ere that can be remedied. He might not keep the crown in the family of Saul; the season of probation was over for that. But he might mitigate the consequences of the sin to Saul and his people. The soul of the king might be brought to repentance and be saved, though with the loss of his dynasty. Who can tell how much Saul was indebted to that prayer of Samuel for the mercies and escapes and successes of his subsequent career.Steel.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Samuel Delivers the Lords Message of Condemnation. 1Sa. 15:10-23
10 Then came the word of the Lord unto Samuel, saying.
11 It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the Lord all night.
12 And when Samuel rose early to meet Saul in the morning, it was told Samuel, saying, Saul came to Carmel, and, behold, he set him up a place, and is gone about, and passed on, and gone down to Gilgal.
13 And Samuel came to Saul: and Saul said unto him, Blessed be thou of the Lord: I have performed the commandment of the Lord.
14 And Samuel said, What meaneth then this bleating of the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear?
15 And Saul said, They have brought them from the Amalekites: for the people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice unto the Lord thy God; and the rest we have utterly destroyed.
16 Then Samuel said unto Saul, Stay, and I will tell thee what the Lord hath said to me this night. And he said unto him, Say on.
17 And Samuel said, When thou wast little in thine own sight, wast thou not made the head of the tribes of Israel, and the Lord anointed thee king over Israel?
18 And the Lord sent thee on a journey, and said, Go and utterly destroy the sinners the Amalekites, and fight against them until they be consumed.
19 Wherefore then didst thou not obey the voice of the Lord, but didst fly upon the spoil, and didst evil in the sight of the Lord.
20 And Saul said unto Samuel, Yea, I have obeyed the voice of the Lord, and have gone the way which the Lord sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.
21 But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the chief of the things which should have been utterly destroyed, to sacrifice unto the Lord thy God in Gilgal.
22 And Samuel said, Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.
23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and subbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou has rejected the word of the Lord, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
9.
Why was Samuel grieved at Sauls action? 1Sa. 15:11
Samuel loved Saul. Those who try to make Sauls being rejected a jealous act of Samuel miss the gist of the entire story. Samuel regretted the action which Saul had taken. What Saul had done was nothing small; he had completely changed from the humble fellow he was when he was chosen king. He had elevated himself and the people had elevated him until he had lost his modesty. When he disobeyed, he was unfaithful to God. In one sense, he had almost carried out Gods orders; but yet he had failed to carry out the order directly and was certainly culpable. The narrative shows how he tried to shift the blame from himself to the people, and his whole unmanly character comes out.
10.
Where was Carmel? 1Sa. 15:12
The most famous Carmel is Mt. Carmel, the mountain which juts out into the Mediterranean Sea on the west cost of Israel along the northern border of the tribe of Manasseh. Samuel was not usually in this area, and it is doubtful that this reference here is to this northern Carmel. The name itself signifies a fruitful field. Another Carmel is a name given to a town in the hill country of Judah (Jos. 15:55). This was the home of Nabal (1Sa. 25:2). One of Davids wives is known as Abigail, the Carmelitess (1Ch. 3:1). It was doubtless here that Saul set up a marker for his partial victory over Amalek.
11.
How could Saul say he had performed Gods commandment? 1Sa. 15:13
Saul had evidently lost his understanding of truthfulness as well as humility. He had partially fulfilled the commandment of the Lord, but he had openly and blatantly disobeyed Gods commandment to destroy utterly the Amalekites. This loss of his ability to discern between truth and falsehood is indicative of the sad condition into which Saul had fallen.
12.
What was Sauls excuse for his disobedience? 1Sa. 15:15
As Saul had excused himself for offering a sacrifice by saying that he was afraid the people were going to leave him, so he once again blamed the people for his disobedience of Gods commandment to destroy the Amalekites. He said the people had spared the best of the sheep and the oxen to sacrifice to the Lord. He took partial credit for having destroyed the rest, but he took no blame for saving the best.
13.
Why did he call the Lord Samuels God? 1Sa. 15:21
Saul had a great deal of impudence to argue with Samuel with regard to his disobedience. Samuel reminded him of how God had blessed him when he was little in his own sight. He reviewed the circumstances which had led to the giving of the commandment to destroy the Amalekites. Samuel openly confronted Saul with his disobedience, but Saul persisted in excusing himself, When he made reference to the Lord, he called him Samuels God. Saul may have come to the place where he could not accept God as his own personal God. He was completely reprobate.
14.
What is the meaning of Samuels question? 1Sa. 15:22
Samuel clarified the issue. He drew a distinction between burnt offering and sacrifices and the obeying of the voice of God. Saul was excusing himself for sparing the best of the flocks and herds by saying that he was going to give them to God as a sacrifice. Saul was attempting to reason that it was all going to be given to God in the end and that it really made no difference whether he had obeyed Gods voice or not. Samuel made it clear that it is far better to obey than to sacrifice. It is better to hearken to God than to offer Him the fat of rams.
15.
What added penalty was pronounced on Saul? 1Sa. 15:23
Samuel taught Saul that rebellion against God is the sin of witchcraft. Saul put out the witches from the borders of the people of Israel, but he himself rebelled against God (1Sa. 28:9). Sauls stubborn heart was an iniquitous heart. Although he had not openly worshipped another God, he had made himself God and was as sinful as if he were an idolator. As a result, God rejected Saul personally from being king. This was a much more severe sentence than was passed on him when he offered his presumptuous sacrifice. At that time God simply said that the kingdom would be taken away from Sauls house and given to another. On this occasion, Saul himself was personally rejected as being fit to rule. On other occasions of rejection, God tempered His judgments by announcing that what He had predicted to come to pass would not come to pass in the lifetime of the one who had sinned. This might have been the penalty for Saul. If he had not sinned again, Saul might not have lived to see the end of his dynasty. He himself might have been allowed to die in a good old age, but now he himself is to be punished.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(10) Then came the word . . . Very likely in a dream.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
SAMUEL’S LAST WORDS TO SAUL, 1Sa 15:10-35.
10. Then came the word of the Lord unto Samuel Either by a dream or a vision of the night. See Num 12:6.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
YHWH’s Response To Their Actions ( 1Sa 15:10-11 ).
YHWH’s response was to reject Saul from being king on the grounds of sacrilege and high treason, that is, because by his actions he had rejected his Overlord’s commands, and had committed sacrilege against what belonged wholly to YHWH.
1Sa 15:10
‘ Then came the word of YHWH to Samuel, saying,’
The word of YHWH came to Samuel. He alone represented the true voice of YHWH. He was still very much YHWH’s representative, with his authority still acknowledged by Saul.
1Sa 15:11
“ It repents me that I have set up Saul to be king, for he is turned back from following me, and has not performed my commandments.” And Samuel was angry, and he cried to YHWH all night.’
YHWH declared to Samuel that He regretted setting up Saul as king because he had turned from following Him and had not obeyed His commandments. ‘Repent’ is an anthropomorphism indicating what it looked like from a human point of view. It simply indicated that as a result of Saul’s disobedience YHWH would now see him and act towards him differently. For the one thing above all others that He required in His ‘anointed one’ (verse 1) was obedience.
To Samuel what he learned was devastating, for he recognised what it demonstrated, that Saul could no longer be trusted to do what YHWH required, even in the most serious of matters. His kingship had gone to his head. The result was that he was furious with Saul, and spent the night mourning because Israel’s king, whom he had appointed, had been a total failure. And perhaps at the same time he was praying for God to show him what he should now do to prevent catastrophe for Israel.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Samuel’s Reproof
v. 10. Then came the word of the Lord unto Samuel, saying, v. 11. It repenteth Me that I have set up Saul to be king, v. 12. And when Samuel rose early to meet Saul in the morning, v. 13. And Samuel came to Saul; and Saul said unto him, Blessed be thou of the Lord, v. 14. And Samuel, v. 15. And Saul said, They have brought them from the Amalekites, v. 16. Then Samuel said unto Saul, Stay, v. 17. And Samuel said, When thou wast little in thine own sight, v. 18. And the Lord sent thee on a journey and said, Go and utterly destroy the sinners, the Amalekites, v. 19. Wherefore, then, v. 20. And Saul said unto Samuel, v. 21. But the people, v. 22. And Samuel saith, Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as in obeying the voice of the Lord? v. 23. For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
(10) Then came the word of the LORD unto Samuel, saying, (11) It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the LORD all night.
Let not the Reader imagine, that from these expressions, there is any change in the mind of God, as if that God was liable to alter. The repentance here spoken of, is in accommodation to our language, speaking after the manner of men, and not in reference to him, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. He is in one mind (saith Job) and who can turn him? Job 23:13 . But what a precious thought is it, concerning salvation, that the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. Rom 11:29 . What a beautiful view is given, in the close of this verse of Samuel. Dear, man! the dismission of himself and his sons from the government; called forth no such concern. But we behold him in tears a whole night, crying to the Lord for Saul. But Reader! turn your views from Samuel, and behold him, of whom Samuel is but a faint resemblance, who spent whole nights in prayers to God: and in that unequalled agony he sustained in the garden, poured out his very soul, until the sweat of his face was, as it were, great drops of blood falling down to the ground. Neither is this all. Samuel’s intercession falls infinitely short of our Jesus. Though both prayed for their enemies, and the enemies of our God; yet though Samuel succeeded not, Jesus always prevails. Yes! dearest Lord! thou must ever prosper; neither can one, for whom thou prayest, perish, or come short of thy salvation.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1Sa 15:10 Then came the word of the LORD unto Samuel, saying,
Ver. 10. Then came the word of the Lord. ] That which one saith of our Henry VIII may well be applied to Saul, Habuit ille quidem egregias dotes; sed suos simul patiebatur manes: there were in him great virtues, and no less vices, jumbled together, as it were. And as the chronicler writeth of our Edward II. Never was prince received with greater love and opinion of all than he; or ever any that sooner lost it. So here.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1 Samuel
SAUL REJECTED
1Sa 15:10 – 1Sa 15:23
Again the narrative takes us to Gilgal,-a fateful place for Saul, There they ‘made Saul king before the Lord’; there he had taken the first step on his dark way of gloomy, proud self-will, down which he was destined to plunge so far and fatally. There he had, in consequence, received the message of the transference of the kingdom from his house, though not from himself. Now, flushed with his victory over Amalek, he has come there with his troops, laden with spoil. They had made a swift march from the south where Amalek dwelt, passing by Nabal’s Carmel, where they had put up some sort of monument of their exploit in a temper of vain-glory, very unlike the spirit which reared the stone of help at Eben-ezer; and apparently they purpose sacrifices and a feast. But Samuel comes into camp with no look of congratulation. Probably the vigorous old man had walked that day from his home, some fifteen miles off, and on the way seems to have picked up tidings of Saul’s victory and position, which ought to have reached him from the king himself, and would have done so if Saul’s conscience had been clear. The omission to tell him was studied neglect, which revealed much.
Samuel had ‘cried unto the Lord all night,’ if perchance the terrible sentence might be reversed; and his cries had not been in vain, for they had brought him into complete submission, and had nerved him to do his work calmly, without a quiver or a pang of personal feeling, as becomes God’s prophet.
I. We must go back a step beyond this passage to understand it. Note, first, the command which was disobeyed. The campaign against Amalek was undertaken by express divine direction through Samuel’s lips. It was the delayed fulfilment of a sentence passed in the times of the Conquest, but not executed then. The terrible old usages of that period are brought into play again, and the whole nation with its possessions is ‘devoted’. The word explains the dreadful usage. There are two kinds of devotion to God: that of willing, and that of unwilling, men; the one brings life, the other, death. The massacre of the foul nations of Canaan was thereby made a direct divine judgment, and removed wholly from the region of ferocious warfare. No doubt, the whole plane of morals in the earlier revelation is lower than that of the New Testament. If Jesus has not taught a higher law than was given to ‘them of old time,’ one large part of His gift to men disappears. The wholesale destruction of ‘babe and suckling’ with the guilty makes us shudder; and we are meant to feel the difference between the atmosphere of that time and ours. But we are not meant to question the reality of the divine command, nor His right to give it. He slays, and makes alive. His judgments strike the innocent with the guilty. In many a case, and often, the sin is one generation’s, and the bitter fruit another’s. The destruction of Canaanites and Amalekites does not change its nature because God used men to do it; and the question is not whether the Israelites were fiercely barbarous in their warfare, but whether God has the right of life and death. We grant all the dreadfulness, and joyfully admit the distance between such acts and Jesus Christ; but we recognise them as not incongruous with the whole revealed character of the God who is justice as well as love, as parallel in substance, though different in instrument, with many of His dealings with men,-as the execution of righteous sentence on rank corruption, and as sweetening the world by its removal. Most of the difficulty and repugnance has been caused by forgetting that Israel was but the sword, while the hand was God’s.
II. Note the disobedience. Partial obedience is complete disobedience. Saul and his men obeyed as far as suited them; that is to say, they did not obey God at all, but their own inclinations, both in sparing the good and in destroying the worthless. What was not worth carrying off they destroyed,-not because of the command, but to save trouble. This one fault seems but a small thing to entail the loss of a kingdom. But is it so? It was obviously not an isolated act on Saul’s part, but indicated his growing impatience of the divine control, exercised on him through Samuel. He was in a difficult position. He owed his kingdom to the prophet; and the very condition on which he held it was that of submission to Samuel’s authority. No wonder that his elevation quickened the growth of his masterfulness and gloomy, impetuous self-will,-traits in his character which showed themselves very early in his reign! No wonder either that such a king, held in leading-strings by a prophet, should chafe! The more insignificant the act in itself, the more significant it may be as a flag of revolt. Disobedience which will not do a little thing is great disobedience. Nor was this the first time that Saul had ‘kicked,’ like another Saul, ‘against the pricks,’ Gilgal had seen a previous instance of his impetuous self-assertion, masked by apparent deference; and the inference is fair that the interval between the two pieces of rebellion had been of a piece with them. Trivial acts, especially when repeated, show deep-seated evil. There may be only a coil of the snake visible, but that betrays the presence of the slimy folds, though they are covered from sight among the leaves. The tiny shoot of a plant, peeping above the ground, does not augur that the roots are short; they may run for yards. Nor can any act be called small, of which the motive is disregard of God’s plain command: ‘He that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.’ Saul had never much religion. He had never heard of Samuel till that day when he came to consult him about the asses. It was a wonder to his acquaintances to find him ‘among the prophets’; and all his acts of worship have about them a smack of self, and an exclusive regard to the mere externals of sacrifice, which imply a shallow notion of religion and a spirit unsubdued by its deeper influences.
Such a man habitually acts in disregard of God’s will; and that is great sin, though it be manifested in small acts. It is to be remembered, too, that the excepting of the best of the spoil from the general destruction, changed the whole character of the transaction, and brought it down from the level of a solemn act of divine justice, of which Saul and his army were the executors by divine mandate, to that of a mere cattle-lifting foray, in which they were but thieves for their own gain. The mingling of personal advantage with any sort of service of God, ruins the whole, and turns it into mere selfishness. Samuel, in 1Sa 15:19 , puts the two sides of this ‘evil in the sight of the Lord’ as being disobedience and swooping down on the booty, like some bird of prey.
III. Note Saul’s excuses. Throughout the whole interview he plays a sorry part, and is evidently cowed by the hated authority and personality of the old man; while Samuel, on his side, is curt, stern, and takes the upper hand, as becomes God’s messenger. The relative positions of the two men are the normal ones of their offices, and explain both Saul’s revolt and the chronic impatience of kings at the interference of prophets. Here we have Saul coming to meet Samuel with affected heartiness and welcome, and with the bold lie, ‘I have performed the commandment of the Lord.’ That is more than true obedience is quick to say. If Saul had done it, he would have been slower to boast of it. ‘Those vessels yield the most sound that have the least liquor.’ He ‘doth protest too much’; and the protestation comes from an uneasy conscience. Or did he, like a great many other men who have no deep sense of the sanctity of every jot and tittle of a divine law, please himself with the notion that it was enough to keep it approximately, in the ‘spirit’ of the precept, without slavish obedience to the ‘letter’? In a later part of the interview 1Sa 15:20 he insists that he has obeyed, and tries to prove it by dwelling on the points in which he did so, and gliding lightly over the others.
‘Samuel had reason to believe the sheep and oxen above Saul’; and there is a tone of almost contempt for the shuffling liar in his quiet question: ‘What meaneth then this bleating of the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear?’ There was no answering that; so Saul shifts his ground without a blush or a moment’s hesitation. ‘The people spared.’ It is a new character for him to appear in,-that of a weak ruler who cannot keep his unruly men in order! Had he tried to restrain them? If he had, and had failed, he was not fit to be a king. If he had not, he was a coward to shift the blame on to them. How ready men are to vilify themselves in some other direction, in order to escape the consciousness of sin, which God is seeking to force home on them! No doubt the people were very willing to have a finger in the affair; but so was he. And if the cattle was their share, Agag, who could be held to ransom, was his; and the arrangement suited all round. As to the purpose of sacrificing at Gilgal, perhaps that was true; but if it were, no doubt the same process of selection, which had destroyed the worthless and kept the best, would have been repeated; and the net result would have been a sacrifice of the least valuable, and ‘the survival of the fittest’ in many a pasture and stall.
But note Saul’s attitude towards Jehovah, betrayed by him in that one word: ‘the Lord thy God,’ No wonder that he had been content with a partial and perfunctory obedience, if he had no closer sense of connection with God than that! There is almost a sneer in it, too, as if he had said, ‘What needs all this fuss about saving the cattle? You should be pleased; for this Jehovah, with whom you profess to have special communication, will be honoured with sacrifice, and you will share in the feast.’ If the words do not mean abjuring Jehovah, they go very near it, and, at all events, betray the shallowness of Saul’s religion. Samuel, in his answer, reminds him of his early modesty and self-distrust, and of the source of his elevation. He then sweeps away the flimsy cobwebs of excuses, by the curt repetition of the plain, dreadful terms of Saul’s commission, and then flashes out the piercing question, like a sword, ‘Wherefore then didst thou not?’ The reminder of past benefits, and the reiteration of the plain injunctions which have been broken, are the way to cut through the poor palliations which men wrap around their sins.
It speaks of a very obstinate and gloomy determination that, in answer, Saul should reiterate his protestation of having done as he was bid. He doggedly says over again all that he had said before, unmoved by the prophet’s solemn words. He is steeling his heart against reproof; and there is only one end to that. Sin unacknowledged, after God has disclosed it, is doubly sin. The heart that answers the touch of God’s rebukes by sullenly closing more tightly on its evil, is preparing itself for the blow of the hammer which will crush it. ‘He that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.’ Let us beware of meeting God’s prophet with shuffling lies about our obedience, and of opposing to the words which are loving though they pierce, the armour of impenetrable self-righteousness and conceit.
IV. Note the punishment. To the vain talk about honouring God by sacrifice, Samuel opposes the great principle which was the special message committed to every prophet in Israel, and which was repeated all through its history, side by side with the divinely appointed sacrificial system. In the intensity of his spiritual emotion, Samuel speaks in lyric strains, in the measured parallelism which was the Hebrew dress of poetry, and gives forth in words ‘which will live for ever’ the great truth that God delights in obedience more than in sacrifice. Whilst, on the one hand, he lifts the surrender of the will, and the consequent submission of the life, high above all mere ritual, on the other hand, by the same process, he sinks the rebellion of the will and the stubbornness of the nature, unsubdued either by kindness or threats, as Saul was showing his to be, to the level of actual idolatry.
‘Rebellion is divination,
And stubbornness is idols and teraphim.’