SAUL AND SAMUEL AT GILGAL
1Sa 13:1-23.
THE first thing that claims our attention in connection with this
chapter is the question of dates involved in the first verse. In the
Authorized Version we read, "Saul reigned one year; and when he had
reigned two years over Israel, Saul chose him three thousand men."
This rendering of the original is now quite given up. The form of
expression is the same as that which so often tells us the age of a
king at the beginning of his reign and the length of his reign. The
Revised Version is in close, but not in strict, accord with the
Hebrew. It runs, ''Saul was thirty years old when he began to reign,
and he reigned two years over Israel." A marginal note of the
Revised Version says, ''The Hebrew text has, ‘Saul was a year old,’
The whole verse is omitted in the unrevised Septuagint, but in a
later recension the number thirty is inserted." There can be no
doubt that something has been dropped out of the Hebrew text.
Literally translated, it would run, ''Saul was a year old when he
began to reign, and he reigned two years over Israel." A figure
seems to have dropped out after ''Saul was" and another after "he
reigned." A blot of some kind may have effaced these figures in the
original manuscript, and the copyist not knowing what they were, may
have left them blank. The Septuagint conjecture of ''thirty" as
Saul's age is not very felicitous, for at the beginning of Saul's
reign his son Jonathan was old enough to distinguish himself in the
war. Judging from probabilities, we should say that the original may
have run thus: "Saul was forty years old when he began to reign, and
he reigned thirty and two years over Israel." This would make the
length of Saul's reign to correspond with the duration of Saul's
dynasty as given in Act 13:21. There it is said that God gave to the
people Saul "by the space of forty years." If to the thirty-two
years which we suppose to have been the actual length of Saul's
reign we add seven and a half, during which his son Ishbosheth
reigned, we get in round numbers as the duration of his dynasty
forty years. This would make Saul about seventy-two at the time of
his death.
The narrative in this chapter appears to be in immediate connection
with that of the last. The bulk of the army had gone from Jabesh-Gilead
to Gilgal, and there, under Samuel, they had renewed the kingdom.
There they had listened to Samuel's appeal, and there the
thunderstorm had taken place that helped so well to rivet the
prophet's lessons. Therefore the bulk of the army was disbanded, but
two thousand men were kept with Saul at Michmash and near Bethel,
and one thousand with Jonathan at Gibeah. These were necessary to be
some restraint on the Philistines, who were strong in the
neighbourhood and eager to inflict every possible annoyance on the
Israelites. Saul, however, does not seem to have felt himself in a
position to take any active steps against them.
But though Saul was inactive, Jonathan did not slumber. Though very
young, probably under twenty, he had already been considered worthy
of an important command, and now, by successfully attacking a
garrison of the Philistines in Geba, he showed that he was worthy of
the confidence that had been placed in him. It is interesting to
mark in Jonathan that dash and daring which was afterwards so
conspicuous in David, and the display of which on the part of David
drew Jonathan's heart to him so warmly. The news of the exploit of
Jonathan soon circulated among the Philistines, and would naturally
kindle the desire to retaliate. Saul would see at once that, as the
result of this, the Philistines would come upon them in greater
force than ever; and it was to meet this expected attack that he
called for a muster of his people. Gilgal was the place of
rendezvous, deep down in the Jordan valley; for the higher part of
the country was so dominated by the enemy that no muster could take
place there.
So it seemed as if the brilliant achievement of Jonathan was going
to prove a curse rather than a blessing. In all kinds of warfare, we
must be prepared for such turns in the order of events. When one
side shows a great increase of activity, the other does the same.
When one achieves an advantage, the other rouses itself to restore
the balance. It has often happened in times of religious darkness
that the bold attitude of some fearless reformer has roused the
enemy to activity and ferocity, and thus brought to his brethren
worse treatment than before. But such reverses are only temporary,
and the cause of truth gains on the whole by the successful
skirmishes of its pioneers. Many persons, when they see the activity
and boldness which the forces of evil manifest in our day, are led
to conclude that our times are sadly degenerate; they forget that
the activity of evil is the proof and the result of the vitality and
activity of good. No doubt there were faint-hearted persons in the
host of Israel who would bring hard accusations against Jonathan for
disturbing the equilibrium between Israel and the Philistines. They
would shake their heads and utter solemn truisms on the rashness of
youth, and would ask if it was not a shame to entrust a stripling
with such power and responsibility. But Jonathan's stroke was the
beginning of a movement which might have ended in the final
expulsion of the Philistines from the territories of Israel if Saul
had not acted foolishly at Gilgal. In this case, it was not the
young man, but the old, that was rash and reckless. Jonathan had
acted with courage and vigour, probably also with faith; it was Saul
that brought disturbance and disaster to the host.
The dreaded invasion of the Philistines was not long of taking
place. The force which they brought together is stated so high, that
in the number of the chariots some commentators have suspected an
error of the copyist, 30,000 for 3,000, an error easily accounted
for, as the extra cipher would be represented by a slight mark over
the Hebrew letter. But, be this as it may, the invading host was of
prodigiously large dimensions. It was so large as to spread a
thorough panic through the whole community of Israel, for the people
''hid themselves in caves, and in thickets, and in rocks, and in
high places, and in pits." Not content with such protection, some of
them, crossed the Jordan, and took refuge in Gilead and in Dan, not
far from Jabesh-Gilead, where another enemy had been so signally
defeated. Saul had remained in Gilgal, where he was followed by a
host of people, not in any degree impressed by what God had done for
them at Jabesh-Gilead, not trying to rally their courage by the
thought that God was still their King and Defender, but full of that
abject fear which utterly unnerves both mind and body, and prepares
the way for complete disaster. How utterly prostrated and helpless
the people were is apparent from that very graphic picture of their
condition which we find towards the end of the chapter: "There was
no smith found throughout all the land of Israel; for the
Philistines said, Lest the Hebrews make to themselves swords or
spears; but all the Israelites went down to the Philistines to
sharpen every man his share, and his coulter, and his axe, and his
mattock." It requires little effort of imagination to see that the
condition of the Israelites was, humanly speaking, utterly
desperate. An enormous array of warriors like the Philistines,
equipped with all the weapons of war, and confident in their prowess
and their power, pouring upon a land where the defenders had not
even swords nor spears, but only clubs and stones and such-like rude
resources for the purposes of conflict, presented a scene the issue
of which could not have been doubtful on all human calculations.
But surely the case was not a whit more desperate than that of their
forefathers had been, with the sea before them, the mountains on
either side, and the Egyptian army, in all its completeness of
equipment, hastening to fall upon their rear. Yet out of that
terrible situation their Divine King had delivered them, and a few
hours after, they were all jubilant and triumphant, singing to the
Lord who had triumphed gloriously, and had cast the horse and his
rider into the sea. And no one can fail to see that the very gravity
of the situation at the present time ought to have given birth to a
repetition of that spirit of faith and prayer which had animated
Moses, as it afterwards animated Deborah, and Gideon, and many more,
and through which deliverance had come. On every ground the duty
incumbent on Saul at this time was to show the most complete
deference to the will of God and the most unreserved desire to enjoy
His countenance and guidance. First, the magnitude of the danger,
the utter disproportion between the strength of the defending people
and that of the invading host, was fitted to throw him on God.
Second, the fact, so solemnly and earnestly urged by Samuel, that,
notwithstanding the sin committed by the people in demanding a king,
God was willing to defend and rule His people as of old, if only
they had due regard to Him and His covenant, should have made Saul
doubly careful to act at this crisis in every particular in the most
rigid compliance with God's will. Thirdly, the circumstance, which
he himself had so well emphasized, that the recent victory at Jabesh-Gilead
was a victory obtained from God, should have led him direct to God,
to implore a similar interposition of His power in this new and
still more overwhelming danger. If only Saul had been a true man, a
man of faith and prayer, he would have risen to the height of the
occasion at this terrible crisis, and a deliverance as glorious as
that which Gideon obtained over the Midianites would have signalized
his efforts. It was a most testing moment in his history. The whole
fortunes of his kingdom seemed to depend on his choice. There was
God, ready to come to his help if His help had been properly asked.
There were the Philistines, ready to swallow them up if no
sufficient force could be mustered against them. But weighed in the
balances, Saul was found wanting. He did not honour God; he did not
act as knowing that all depended on Him. And this want of his would
have involved the terrible humiliation and even ruin of the nation
if Jonathan had not been of a different temper from his father, if
Jonathan had not achieved the deliverance which would not have come
by Saul.
Let us now examine carefully how Saul acted on the occasion, all the
more carefully because, at first sight, many have the impression
that he was justified in what he did, and consequently that the
punishment announced by Samuel was far too severe.
It appears that Samuel had instructed Saul to wait seven days for
him at Gilgal, in order that steps might be properly taken for
securing the guidance and help of God. There is some obscurity in
the narrative here, arising from the fact that it was on the first
occasion of their meeting that we read how Samuel directed Saul to
wait seven days for him at Gilgal, till he should come to offer
burnt-offerings and to show him what he was to do (1Sa 10:8). We can
hardly suppose, however, that this first direction, given by Samuel,
was not implemented at an earlier time. It looks as if Samuel had
repeated the instruction to Saul with reference to the circumstances
of the Philistine invasion. But, be this as it may, it is perfectly
clear from the narrative that Saul was under instructions to wait
seven days at Gilgal, at the end, if not before the end, of which
time Samuel promised to come to him. This was a distinct instruction
from Samuel, God's known and recognized prophet, acting in God's
name and with a view to the obtaining of God's countenance and
guidance in the awful crisis of the nation. The seven days had come
to an end, and Samuel had not appeared. Saul determined that he
would wait no longer. "Saul said, Bring hither a burnt-offering to
me, and peace-offerings. And he offered the burnt-offering."
Now, it has been supposed by some that Saul's offence lay in his
taking on him the functions of priest, and doing that which it was
not lawful for any but priests to do. But it does not appear that
this was his offence. A king is often said to do things which in
reality are done by his ministers and others. All that is
necessarily involved in the narrative is, that the king caused the
priests to offer the burnt-offering. For even Samuel had no
authority personally to offer sacrifices, and had he been present,
the priests would have officiated all the same.
The real offence of Saul was that he disregarded the absence of
God's prophet and representative, of the man who had all along been
the mediator between God and the king and between God and the
people. And this was no secondary matter. If Saul had had a real
conviction that all depended at this moment on his getting God's
help, he would not have disregarded an instruction received from
God's servant, and he would not have acted as if Samuel's presence
was of no moment. The significant thing in Saul's state of mind, as
disclosed by his act, was that he was not really bent on complying
with the will of God. God was not a reality to Saul. The thought of
God just loomed vaguely before his mind as a power to be considered,
but not as the power on whom everything depended. What he thought
about God was, that a burnt-offering must be offered up to
propitiate Him, to prevent Him from obstructing the enterprise, but
he did not think of Him as the Being who alone could give it
success. It was substantially the carnal mind's view of God. It
says, no doubt there is a God, and He has an influence on things
here below; and to keep Him from thwarting us, we must perform
certain services which seem to please Him. But what a pitiful view
it is of God! As if the High and Lofty One that inhabiteth eternity
could be induced to bestow or to withhold His favour simply by the
slaughter of an animal, or by some similar rite!
But this was Saul's idea. "The sacrifice must be offered; the rite
must be gone through. This piece of outward homage must be paid to
the power above, but the way of doing it is of little moment. It is
a sacred form, no more. I am sorry not to have Samuel present, but
the fault is not mine. He was to be here, and he has not come. And
now these frightened people are stealing away from me, and if I wait
longer, I may be left without followers. Priests, bring the animal
and offer the sacrifice, and let us away to the war!"
How different would have been the acting of a man that honoured God
and felt that in His favour was life! How solemnized he would have
been, how concerned for his own past neglect of God, and the neglect
of his people! The presence of God's prophet would have been counted
at once a necessity and a privilege. How deeply, in his sense of
sin, would he have entered into the meaning of the burnt-offering!
How earnestly he would have pleaded for God's favour, countenance,
and blessing! If Jacob could not let the angel go at Peniel unless
he blessed him, neither would Saul have parted from God at Gilgal
without some assurance of help. "If Thy presence go not with me," he
would have said, "carry us not up hence." Alas, we find nothing of
all this! The servant of God is not waited for; the form is gone
through, and Saul is off to his work. And this is the doing of the
man who has been called to be king of Israel, and who has been
solemnly warned that God alone is Israel's defense, and that to
offend God is to court ruin!
When Samuel came, Saul was ready with a plausible excuse. On the
ground of expediency, he vindicated his procedure. He could not deny
that he had broken his promise (it was a virtual promise) to wait
for Samuel, but there were reasons exceedingly strong to justify him
in doing so. Samuel had not come. The people were scattered from
him. The Philistines were concentrating at Michmash, and might have
come down and fallen upon him at Gilgal. All very true, but not one
of them by itself, nor all of them together, a real vindication of
what he had done. Samuel, he might be sure, would not be an hour
longer than he could help. There were far more people left to him
than Gideon's band, and the God that gave the victory to the three
hundred would not have let him suffer for want of men. The
Philistines might have been discomfited by God's tempest on the way
to Gilgal, as they were discomfited before, on the way to Mizpeh. O
Saul, distrust of God has been at the bottom of your mind! The faith
that animated the heroes of former days has had no control of you.
You have walked by sight, not by faith. Had you been faithful now,
and honoured God, and waited till His servant sent you off with his
benediction, prosperity would have attended you, and your family
would have been permanently settled in the throne. But now your
kingdom shall not continue. Personally, you may continue to be king
for many years to come; but the penalty which God affixes to this
act of unbelief, formality, and presumption is, that no line of
kings shall spring from your loins. The Lord hath sought Him a man
after His own heart, and the Lord hath commanded him to be captain
over His people.
What a solemn and impressive condemnation have we here, my friends,
of that far too common practice - deserting principle to serve
expediency. I don't like to tell a lie, someone may say, but if I
had not done so, I should have lost my situation. I dislike common
work on the Sabbath day, but if I did not do it, I could not live. I
don't think it right to go to Sunday parties or to play games on
Sunday, but I was invited by this or that great person to do it, and
I could not refuse him. I ought not to adulterate my goods, and I
ought not to give false statements of their value, but everyone in
my business does it, and I cannot be singular. What do these
vindications amount to, but just a confession that from motives of
expediency God's commandment may be set aside? These excuses just
come to this: It was better for me to offend God and gain a slight
benefit, than it would have been to lose the benefit and please God.
It is a great deal to lose a small profit in business, or a small
pleasure in social life, or a small honour from a fellow-man; but it
is little or nothing to displease God, it is little or nothing to
treasure up wrath against the day of wrath. Alas for the practical
unbelief that lies at the bottom of all this! It is the doing of the
fool who hath said in his heart. There is no God. Look at this
history of Saul. See what befell him for preferring expediency to
principle. Know that the same condemnation awaits all who walk in
his footsteps - all who are not solemnized by that awful, that un-
answerable, question, "What shall it profit a man if he gain the
whole world and lose his own soul?"
Great offence has often been taken at the character here ascribed to
the man who was to fill the throne after Saul - "The Lord hath
sought Him a man after His own heart." Was David, the adulterer, the
traitor, the murderer, a man after God's own heart? But surely it is
not meant to be affirmed that David was such a man in every aspect,
in every particular. The point on which the emphasis should rest
must surely be that David was such a man in that feature in which
Saul was so wanting. And undoubtedly this was eminently true of him.
That which stood out most fully in the public character of David was
the honour which he paid to God, the constancy with which he
consulted His will, the prevailing desire he had to rule the kingdom
in His fear and for His glory. If God was but a form to Saul, He was
an intense reality to David. If Saul could not get it into his mind
that he ought to rule for God, David could not have got it out of
his mind if he had tried. That David's character was deformed in
many ways cannot be denied; he had not only infirmities, but tumours,
blotches, defilements, most distressing to behold; but in this one
thing he left an example to all of us, and especially to rulers,
which it would be well for all of us to ponder deeply: that the
whole business of government is to be carried on in the spirit of
regard to the will of God; that the welfare of the people is ever to
be consulted in preference to the interests of the prince; that for
nations, as for individuals, God's favour is life, and His frown
ruin.
|