1 Samuel (Written)

1 Samuel 15:27-35
Anathematize the Sinners – Amalek, Part III

In 1 Samuel, the Hebrew word nakham, to sigh, is found four times. All four of those uses are in Chapter 15. The first was in verse 11 where I argued against the standard translation of most versions, which use the verbs relent, repent, regret, etc.

Those give a bit of the sense, but the meaning is fuller than that. In fact, other uses of the word convey a completely different meaning, such as comfort, appease, consolation, etc. Those are so disparate that it is hard to see any connection.

However, if every instance of the 108 uses of nakham in Scripture is translated as sigh, the underlying meaning will be more understandable in each case.

As noted in the comments on 1 Samuel 15:11, the Lord doesn’t actually regret His decisions. They are made in accordance with His foreknowledge and predetermined plan. However, the verses in the passage today give us seemingly contradictory thoughts –

v.29 – And also Refulgency Israel, not He will cheat, and not He will be sighed. For not man, He, to be sighed.

v.35 – And Yehovah, He was sighed for He caused to reign, Saul, upon Israel.

What do we do when such thoughts appear contradictory? Why would the Bible say one thing about the Lord and then just a few verses later say exactly the opposite? It would be foolish to think that the Bible would have a contradiction within just six verses. So, how would you handle what is presented?

Text Verse: “And He sent, the God, Messenger to Jerusalem to cause to ruin her, and according to causing to ruin, He looked, Yehovah, and he was sighed [nakham] upon the evil. And He said to the Messenger, the ‘causing to ruin,’ ‘Abundant! Now, you must cause to slacken your hand. And Messenger Yehovah standing with threshing floor Ornan the Jebusite.” 1 Chronicles 21:15

So how can it be that the Lord will “not be sighed” and yet the Lord is sighed? The answer lies in our relationship with Him. When Samuel said the Lord will not be sighed, he was stating a truth which in ancient Greek was known as theopropeō, meaning in a manner befitting God. We would say theomorphically.

When we read that God sighed, that is known as anthrōpopathōs, after the manner of human passion. The word we commonly use today is “anthropomorphic.” The Bible assigns to God human attributes. God does not change. He is. However, we change in relation to Him.

When we see a change in the events occurring in the redemptive narrative, such as Saul losing the kingship, it is because God knew Saul would change in relation to Him. In order to explain the change in events so that we can readily understand what has happened, the change is ascribed to God.

If you keep this in mind as you read Scripture, you will have a better sense of what God’s word is conveying to you. There are no contradictions. Rather, the word contains verbal accommodations to help us process what is going on.

Great things such as anthropomorphism are to be found in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. Now You Must Enweigh Me (verses 27-35)

The final verses of the previous passage said –

“And he said, Saul unto Samuel, ‘I sinned. For I traversed mouth Yehovah and your words. For I feared the people, and I heard in their voice. ²⁵ And now, you must lift, I pray, my sin. And you must return with me. And I prostrated myself to Yehovah.’

²⁶ And he said, Samuel unto Saul, ‘Not I will return with you. For you spurned word Yehovah, and He spurned you, Yehovah, from being king upon Israel.’” 1 Samuel 15:24-26

Having completed his words to Saul…

²⁷ And as Samuel turned around to go away, Saul seized the edge of his robe, and it tore.

Rather: vayisov sh_emuel lalekheth vayakhazeq bikhnaph m_eilo vayiqara – “And he turned, Samuel, to walk, and he caused to seize in extremity his robe, and it was rent.” Inserting the name Saul does an injustice to the account. It is a quick and convenient addition, but it misses the point.

Who is the nearest antecedent? Samuel. He finished speaking to Saul, turned, and as he was turning, Samuel seized the extremity of Saul’s robe. The causative verb indicates that the action is not accidental but purposeful. He is giving Saul an object lesson to remember.

This would likely have been the tzitzith mandated in Numbers 15:38. In Deuteronomy 22, speaking of these tassels, Moses uses the term gedilim. Both indicate what is carefully described in Numbers 15 –

“Again the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, ³⁸ ‘Speak to the children of Israel: Tell them to make tassels on the corners of their garments throughout their generations, and to put a blue thread in the tassels of the corners. ³⁹ And you shall have the tassel, that you may look upon it and remember all the commandments of the Lord and do them, and that you may not follow the harlotry to which your own heart and your own eyes are inclined, ⁴⁰ and that you may remember and do all My commandments, and be holy for your God. ⁴¹ I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: I am the Lord your God.’” Numbers 15:37-41

Samuel is conveying that Saul’s actions failed to honor the Lord. Instead, he did what his own heart and eyes were inclined to do. Tearing Saul’s robe is a symbolic act that would leave him no doubt that Samuel, and by extension, the Lord, was through with him.

Something similar occurs in 1 Kings 11 –

“Now it happened at that time, when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, that the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite met him on the way; and he had clothed himself with a new garment, and the two were alone in the field. ³⁰ Then Ahijah took hold of the new garment that was on him, and tore it into twelve pieces. ³¹ And he said to Jeroboam, ‘Take for yourself ten pieces, for thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: ‘Behold, I will tear the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon and will give ten tribes to you…” 1 Kings 11:29-31

It is the prophet in both cases who performs the symbolic action that points to a truth already decided in God’s plans. But just in case Saul has become too dull to understand…

²⁸ So Samuel said to him, “The Lord has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today,

vayomer elav sh_emuel qara Y_ehovah eth maml_ekhuth Yisrael mealekha ha’yom – “And he said unto him, Samuel, ‘He rent, Yehovah, kingdom Israel from upon you the day.’” The action of Samuel tearing Saul’s rob adds poignancy and potency to the words. It is an intentional, not accidental, act. The Lord has decided and this is what will come to pass. And more…

^{28 (con’t)} and has given it to a neighbor of yours, who is better than you.

u-n_ethanah l_ereakha ha’tov mimekha – “And he gave her to your associate – the good from you.” Like a city, a kingdom is a feminine entity. Saying “it” is fine, but using the feminine conveys the sense more appropriately. It is the people who form a kingdom under a king. Saul has lost his right to rule God’s people.

Therefore, someone else will be selected to whom the kingdom will be given. As noted in a previous sermon, this was not by chance or something unexpected that had to be reworked into God’s plans now that Saul had failed.

Instead, it was already known that the rule would go to Judah. Because in Genesis 49, it was to Judah that the promise of Shiloh’s coming was made. Along with that explicit note, innumerable typological hints of this have been provided.

God knew in advance that Saul’s kingdom would not continue. However, it was a necessary step in the process of His redemptive plans. The decision for his rule to end and another to assume the kingdom has now been openly displayed to Saul in the tearing of his robe. As a confirmation of this, Samuel continues…

²⁹ And also the Strength of Israel

v_egam netsakh Yisrael – “And also Refulgency Israel.” A new noun, ascribed as a name of the Lord, is used, netsakh, a goal. Strong’s describes it as “The bright object at a distance travelled towards.” This is the only time it is directly applied to the Lord in this manner. However, the word is used elsewhere to describe what belongs to Him –

“Yours, O Lord, is the greatness,
The power and the glory,
The victory and the majesty [netsakh];
For all that is in heaven and in earth is Yours;
Yours is the kingdom, O Lord,
And You are exalted as head over all.” 1 Chronicles 29:11

The word “strength” doesn’t convey this idea at all. Some translations say “glory,” but there is a word for that. Other translations include Refuge, Preeminence, Triumpher, Eternal One, Glorious One, Excellency, Hope, Majestic God, etc.

The word netsakh is often translated as “forever,” but to say “goal” more correctly satisfies the intent. A goal can include the sense of forever, but that is the state in which the goal may exist, such as when pursuing God. In the case of the deity of God in Christ, Paul says –

“…who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see, to whom be honor and everlasting power. Amen.” 1 Timothy 6:16

Therefore, to maintain the idea of the goal, which is described by the unapproachable light, I selected the word refulgency, the quality of being bright and sending out rays. Next, Samuel says that He…

^{29 (con’t)} will not lie nor relent.

lo y_eshaqer v_elo yinakhem – “not He will cheat, and not He will be sighed.” The word shaqar includes lying, but it contains a fuller sense. It can indicate dealing falsely in action as well as word. The Lord will do neither. His words will always be truthful, and His actions will be in line with His words.

Also, He will never sigh, meaning breathe strongly over a matter, be it from frustration, sorrow, consternation, etc. Such an expression can be applied to Him so we understand such a situation, but it does not actually apply to Him…

^{29 (con’t)} For He is not a man, that He should relent.”

ki lo adam hu l_ehinakhem – “For not man, He, to be sighed.” Various words are translated as man in the Hebrew canon. In this case, Samuel uses the word adam, coming from adom, to be red. The use of adam speaks of humanity having been created by God. Unlike man, God is uncreated.

Therefore, His being is perfect and unchanging. In contrast, humanity is temporal and has potential to change. Where man waffles in his convictions, God remains steadfast. Therefore, His will in a matter will not change, even if He allows man to change in relation to Him, thereby seemingly to indicate a change in Him.

Saul finally gets it and concedes the point. Despite that, he continues to only think of himself…

³⁰ Then he said, “I have sinned;

vayomer khatathi – “And he said, ‘I sinned.’” It is a single Hebrew word. Thus, we can take the expression as an admission in state only, but not in remorse. In other words, “Yeah, yeah, so I sinned…” Saul is simply not getting the scope of his transgression or the weight of the matter that has been presented to him. Therefore, he continues seeking self-aggrandizement…

^{30 (con’t)} yet honor me now, please, before the elders of my people and before Israel,

atah kab_edeni na neged ziqne ami v_eneged Yisrael – “Now you must enweigh me, I pray, afront elders my people, and afront Israel.” Losing the kingdom doesn’t necessarily mean losing the kingship. His kingdom will not continue after him, but he remains the anointed king during his life.

As such, to maintain that state, he seeks to be honored by Samuel in the presence of the people. Otherwise, they may sense the rift between them and bring his kingship to an end. How much more if they saw that the tzitzith of Saul’s garment had been torn off.

Saul’s use of an imperative verb appears to be based on fear of the outcome if Samuel doesn’t come with him. The use of imperative continues, saying…

^{30 (con’t)} and return with me, that I may worship the Lord your God.”

v_eshuv imi v_ehishtakhavethi l_eY_ehovah elohekha – “And you must return with me, and I prostrated myself to Yehovah your God.” Saul has done a changeup switcheroo in his terminology from verse 25 –

v.25 – “And now, you must lift, I pray, my sin. And you must return with me. And I prostrated myself to Yehovah.”
v.30 – “And you must return with me, and I prostrated myself to Yehovah your God.”

He no longer asks for his sin to be lifted, and instead of saying Yehovah, he says, “Yehovah your God.” He understands that the Lord’s decision is final, but he can still appeal to the humanity in Samuel. His appeal is understood and acknowledged…

³¹ So Samuel turned back after Saul, and Saul worshiped the Lord.

vayashav sh_emuel akhare shaul vayishtakhu shaul l_eY_ehovah – “And he returned, Samuel after Saul. And he prostrated himself, Saul, to Yehovah.” Despite Saul’s petition being selfish, it is one that Samuel could hardly neglect. He had anointed Saul. To reject Saul at this time would indicate a rejection of the anointing that still rested on him.

That may seem trivial, but what would his anointing of the next king matter in the eyes of the people if Samuel could walk away from his anointed king at this time? The validity of the Lord’s anointed king would be called into question.

Thus, the people could brazenly appoint their own king and assume their chosen potentate was as worthy as whoever Samuel had anointed. They had already rejected the Lord as a king to rule them. The next step of rejecting the Lord’s anointed would be simple after that.

Despite this, there was also a failure of Saul to attend to in order for the kherem that was demanded by the Lord to be fulfilled. The people failed in regard to the animals, but Samuel will not tolerate it in regard to Amalek personally…

³² Then Samuel said, “Bring Agag king of the Amalekites here to me.”

vayomer sh_emuel hagishu elay eth agag melekh amaleq – “And he said, Samuel, ‘You must cause to near unto me Agag, king Amalek.’” It’s hard to know what was on Agag’s mind when the summons was made. He was spared by Saul, and now he is told that the Lord’s prophet wanted to see him.

It is unlikely he was worried about death. One would think that was a matter for Saul. Therefore, the request may have even emboldened Agag to think he had some value to Samuel since he was kept alive. Therefore…

^{32 (con’t)} So Agag came to him cautiously.

Rather: vayelekh elav agag maadanoth – “And he walked unto him, Agag, delightedly.” The word maadanoth, a delight or delicacy, is rare in the Bible, this being the second of only four uses. It is derived from adan, to be soft or pleasant. The only use of that word is in Nehemiah 9:25, where it is used reflexively to indicate delighting oneself.

This, rather than cautiously, is the intent. The word is used adverbially to indicate that Agag is delightedly going to see the prophet. This meaning is seen in Proverbs –

“You must chastise your son,
And he will cause to rest you,
And he will give delights to your soul.” Proverbs 29:17 (CG)

Agag’s soul is delighted, and so he walks to Samuel delightedly. The reason for this is…

^{32 (con’t)} And Agag said, “Surely the bitterness of death is past.”

vayomer agag akhen sar mar ha’maveth – “And he said, Agag, ‘Surely, it veered, bitter – the death.’” The NKJV gives a good sense, but the Hebrew is stronger, “the death.” Thus it personifies death. It is as if Agag was walking along the road heading to death (because of the battle), but then the bitterness of death took a turn off that path, leading to delight in its place.

However, in his arrogant stride, he failed to realize he never left the original path he was on…

³³ But Samuel said, “As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women.”

Rather: vayomer sh_emuel kaasher shik_elah nashim kharbekha ken tishkal minashim imekha – “And he said, Samuel, ‘According to which it miscarried women, your sword, thus it will miscarry, from women, your mother.’” The certain meaning, lost in all translations, is as I have rendered it. Only a few ancient Jewish commentaries got the intent.

The verb form is known as a qal. Its aspect is imperfect. There are two possible paradigms in this aspect –

It will miscarry…
She will be miscarried…

Notice the difference –

According to which it miscarried women, your sword, thus it will miscarry, from women, your mother.
According to which it miscarried women, your sword, thus she will be miscarried, from women, your mother.

The word sword is feminine. So the subject of the second clause could refer either to the sword or to the mother. There are two reasons why it is sword. The first is that it is the main subject and also the appropriate antecedent. The word from is being used as a comparative between the miscarrying of women and the mother.

Agag’s mother is being caused to metaphorically miscarry because of Agag’s pending death. The second option allows this, but then it loses the parallelism to the first clause.

The second reason is because of what is about to happen to Agag…

^{33 (con’t)} And Samuel hacked Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.

vayshaseph sh_emuel eth agag lipne Y_ehovah bagilgal – “And he hewed, Samuel, Agag to faces Yehovah in the Gilgal.” A unique word, one that would have been loved by Gomer Pyle, is found here: shasaph. It signifies to hew to pieces. The implication is that Saul used Agag’s own sword to hew him.

Because of the use of this word, it seems that Samuel not only struck and killed him, but sacrificially parted him in some undescribed manner. And thus ended the life of Agag…

³⁴ Then Samuel went to Ramah, and Saul went up to his house at Gibeah of Saul.

vayelekh sh_emuel ha’ramatah v_eshaul alah el beitho givath shaul – “And he walked, Samuel, the Ramah-ward. And Saul, he ascended unto his house – Gibeah Saul.” Once the meeting was complete, the two parted ways, each heading homeward. Ramah signifies Lofty Place. Gibeah means Hill.

³⁵ And Samuel went no more to see Saul until the day of his death.

v_elo yasaph sh_emuel liroth eth shaul ad yom motho – “And not he added, Samuel, to see Saul until day his death.” There was a complete parting of the two. In 1 Samuel 19, Saul will go to where Samuel is in Naioth. However, there is no indication they met, and there was no conversing between them.

Saul went there to kill David. However, the Spirit of God came upon him in the presence of Samuel, causing him to strip and lie before Samuel, prophesying. No actual meeting between the two took place.

^{35 (con’t)} Nevertheless Samuel mourned for Saul,

ki hithabel sh_emuel el shaul – “For he bewailed himself, Samuel, unto Saul.” Samuel had developed a close bond with Saul. The affection he felt for him is reflected in these few words. Despite this, because of the Lord’s decision and because of his obedience to the will of the Lord, the separation between the two was permanently maintained by Samuel.

*^{35 (fin)} and the Lord regretted that He had made Saul king over Israel.

v_eY_ehovah nikham ki himlikh eth shaul al Yisrael – “And Yehovah, He was sighed for He caused to reign, Saul, upon Israel.” As noted in the introduction, these words are anthropomorphically ascribed to the Lord for us to understand and empathize with the events that have taken place.

The Lord tolerated the selection of Saul as an object lesson to Israel that the tallest and seemingly most prime of the people was not the only consideration in selecting a king. Rather, a deep love for the Lord and a desire, even if failingly, to follow His ways is what is of prime consideration to Him.

You saved me, and yet I sin
It’s troubling that it is this way
I keep failing… think I’m done in
The Lord will drop me for sure… maybe today

 Sometimes I even do wrong intentionally
It’s like the Imp of the Perverse deep down inside
There he is, poking and prodding at me
For sure, I’m a goner, the Lord can’t abide

*

Yes, you have a streak that is wrong
Just like My people, Israel
But I have kept them all along
And because of Jesus, you are safe from hell

II. The Lord’s Patience and Eternal Salvation

Chapter 15 is given to reveal the difference between merely seeking the Lord and obeying Him. As noted in verse 1, “There is no hint of time, as the word ‘also’ [NKJV] implies.” It is a narrative that is selected from the lives of Samuel and Saul as they interact with one another before the Lord.

Saul, Asked, pictures those seeking the truth, even to the point of being saved. Saul’s typological salvation has already been seen previously.

But is that enough to be pleasing to the Lord from that point on? Or does the Lord suffer us in our salvation when we are disobedient? Seeing the nation of Israel for its 3500-year history should answer the question. But it still needs to be addressed for those who are in Christ.

In verse 1, Samuel, Asked from God, picturing the seed of Grace (Jesus and those in Him), says to Saul that the Lord sent him to anoint him as king over His people. Having reminded him of that, the imperative words that he must hear Yehovah’s voice, meaning being obedient to them, are required.

Verse 2 lets Saul know that the Lord considered the ways of Amalek (those who are disconnected from the body and strive to disconnect people from the body) when they attacked Israel as they ascended from Egypt. Egypt signifies Double Trouble. That is indicative of life bound by sin and without God. Man is born in sin, and he cannot redeem himself. Thus, he is in double trouble.

Saul’s job is to eliminate this foe, Amalek, totally anathematizing them and all they had. Samuel’s listed items left no room for anything but total anathematization. A comparable note from Paul is given concerning those – any and all – who deviate from the gospel –

“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, ⁷ which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. ⁸ But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. ⁹ As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:6-9

Verse 4 noted the men were numbered in the Telaim, the spotted lambs. The word is ultimately derived from tala, to cover with pieces, as in patching. In Genesis, it was used to picture the acceptance of the doctrine of the grace of Christ outlined in Paul’s epistles.

The number of those selected was two hundred thousand and ten thousand from Judah. These reflect those who have entered the New Covenant from Israel and Judah, as noted in Jeremiah 31:31. The numbers, however, are the main issue. Two is the number of division or difference (Israel and Judah), twenty is expectancy, two hundred is insufficiency.

Bullinger notes that ten, a multiple of both numbers given, signifies completeness of order where nothing is wanting, the number and order are perfect, and the whole cycle is complete. Being “footed” signifies their guidance and moral walk (Topical Lexicon).

Summed up, their guidance and moral walk, though adhering initially to the doctrines of grace in Christ, were insufficient throughout this entire cycle of redemption. That is what is explained in the chapter concerning their actions.

When they came to Amalek City (verse 5), it said that “he caused to grapple, riv, in the valley, nakhal, valley.” The word valley is derived from the verb nakhal, which means to inherit. This means that they contended with the word of the Lord in their inheritance, their state of salvation. This begins the explanation of what occurred.

Verse 6 noted the Kenite, Acquire. It speaks of those who have Acquired (Kenite) salvation through Christ’s fulfillment of the Law of Moses. They are united to Him by affinity through His imputed righteousness. These are to be spared.

The destruction is to be on the Amalekites. They are The People Who Wring Off. They are those who are disconnected from the body and strive to disconnect the body. The Lord wants them excised from among the people.

The clause that says they were struck by Saul from Havilah to Shur which is facing Egypt escapes me. My best guess is that it speaks of completely destroying the Amalekites, meaning those they picture, in their doctrine with evidence presented to them from throughout Scripture (Havilah to Shur). That, however, is total speculation, even if it matches the typological purpose of the battle.

I conclude this from the likely meaning of Havilah and Shur, and the known meaning of Egypt: Circle, Wall, and Double Trouble. There is Scripture, there is the end of the argument, and that faces the place where man is in sin, without God.

Despite Israel’s success in battle, they sadly took Agag, Rooftop, alive. Abarim notes, “since a society was a ‘house,’ its ‘rooftop’ referred to that society’s governing council.”

As such, Agag pictures the apex of those who come against God’s people, attempting to sever them from the body. In other words, he symbolizes the prime false doctrine of what Amalek, those who wring off the head, signifies.

He was taken alive while the rest were anathematized with the mouth of the sword. In other words, the law, which they supposedly held to, was found to condemn them because it is what points to Christ. It is not an end in itself.

Along with Agag, the people also kept the best of the animals, but the author used different words to describe them than those initially used.

It is a note of disobedience in adhering to the word. It is what people do all the time when they misuse Scripture for their own purposes, pulling verses out of context in order to form a pretext. It said that Saul was unwilling to anathematize them.

It is exactly what Paul rebuked Peter for in Galatians. Paul said that those who present a false gospel were to be anathema. An example of this disobedience is given concerning what Peter did in Galatians 2:11-21.

Because of this, the Lord said in verse 11, “I was sighed, for I caused to reign, Saul, to king.” It is not those who are merely saved that are pleasing to God, but those who are obedient in their salvation.

God covenanted with all who are saved, and they will remain saved. However, He finds no pleasure in those who fail to live in faithful obedience. That is the continued warning and admonition to the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3.

For this reason, it said, “And it burned to Samuel, and he shrieked unto Yehovah all the night.” How many of you have been so upset about the state of believers’ lives that you shout out to the Lord about it? Hopefully, all of us would have such an attitude.

Verse 12 noted that Saul went Carmel-ward and erected a monument to himself. Carmel, Vineyard of God, is explained by Paul, saying, “you are God’s field” (1 Corinthians 3:9). It doesn’t say he went to Carmel, just toward it.

The meaning appears to be that those who are like Saul want to erect a name for themselves among God’s people, but they are unwilling to go all the way in obedience.

After Saul built his monument, he revolved, traversed, and went to the Gilgal, the Liberty. This means that he went there to honor himself as king, despite being disobedient to the word. It is something people like this are famous for.

In verse 13, Saul proclaimed to Samuel that he had done what the Lord commanded. Samuel, however, noted to Saul the voice of the flock, tson, to migrate, and cattle, baqar, to seek. The doctrines of Amalek, migrating through the word and searching it out in an inappropriate way, were not eliminated.

Rather, they were assimilated as if they were acceptable offerings to the Lord. In verse 16, Samuel told Saul that he was to slacken up and let him speak. Saul answered with a plural response, we, for him to speak. The people wanted to hear what the issue was. However, Samuel redirected his words solely towards Saul.

The Lord’s words through Samuel reminded Saul that even when he was little in his own eyes, he was appointed the head of Israel’s tribes. In other words, those seeking the truth, meaning those of faith, are set in the preeminent position in Israel.

They were given the word and expected to obey it, destroying all that Amalek stands for. Instead, they failed. Think of Peter in Galatians 2. This is the theme being presented. There is one gospel, one truth, and the focus is to be on that. There can be no accommodation of another gospel. All false doctrines must be eliminated.

Samuel continued speaking to Saul, asking why he didn’t obey the word of the Lord. Instead, he swooped down on the booty of the enemy. If this doesn’t sound like much of the church in the world, it would be hard to say what did.

False doctrines are mixed in, accommodations are made, and leaders, even if saved, swoop down on these things in order to ingratiate themselves. Despite this, Saul protested, “Which I heard in voice Yehovah!”

He couldn’t even state a complete thought to defend himself. It is like multitudes of people who have no idea what the word of the Lord says, or they misrepresent the word of the Lord, attempting to defend themselves based on… the word of the Lord!

Saul even boasted of his disobedience while trying to defend himself, saying that he brought Agag when he anathematized Amalek. If Agag is an Amalekite, then he didn’t anathematize Amalek.

It is like the Catholic Church. They subdue their enemies and then incorporate the main doctrine of those same enemies into their doctrines. Think of it as, “I conquered the Lord’s enemies by assimilating what made them enemies into our doctrine!” The thinking is erratic, confused, and unholy.

The greatest example of this is found in those who came to Christ, who triumphed over the law, but who then place that same enemy, meaning the law, as the pinnacle of their doctrine. This is exactly what Saul is doing by sparing Agag and the best of the animals.

In verse 22, Samuel rebuked him for his supposed great acts –

1. Behold! ^*Hearing – from ⁺sacrifice, good!
2. To ^@‘causing to hearken’ – from ^#fat rams!

 

1. For ⁺sin divination – ^*bitterness.
2. And ^#nothingness and teraphim – ^@causing to peck.

Saul’s actions are completely unacceptable. As noted at that time, “Israel failed to hear the word of faith. They were cut off and exiled. Those in the church who fail to heed the word of faith will likewise be cut off (if not saved) or lose all rewards (if they were saved and then turned to false doctrines).”

Verse 23 conveyed the words that Saul was spurned from being king. Because of that (verse 24), Saul admitted his transgression, blaming his attitude on the people, exactly like Peter when he feared “those who were of the circumcision.”

In verse 26, Samuel refused to budge and noted a second time that Saul had been spurned from being king. Verse 27 said that Samuel turned to walk, and when he did, he seized the extremity of Saul’s robe, rending it.

Those who are the seed of grace will not be led by the weak and peevish who cannot properly uphold the doctrines of the Lord. Rather, as verse 28 points out, those who will lead the people are those who are better than that.

What is being seen here is a contrast between Saul and the one who will replace him. These are types, not concrete ones, but examples. This is why verse 1 was given without regard to time. There has to be a time when David will take the lead role in the redemptive narrative.

When he does, he will be used as an example of the kind of believer the Lord favors. This chapter anticipates the coming switch from Saul to David. This is why verse 29 noted that the Lord will not cheat or be sighed. It is because he is not a man that such could happen.

The Lord determined from the beginning that Saul would be the first king, and that he would then be followed by David. In using the lives of these two men, He is showing us what pleases Him, even when both categories may be saved.

Saul, after hearing the words of finality concerning his kingship, still asked selfishly for Samuel to honor him. Samuel did so. However, he also directed that Agag be brought to him.

The idea here is still honoring those who are saved, but it ensures that their wrong beliefs are eradicated. This is a recurring theme in Paul’s letters.

Next, Agag came to Samuel in a delighted fashion. Think of a saved, right-thinking believer going to a church that has incorporated false doctrine, like law observance, and destroying that doctrine. This is the intent. It is what Paul did in Antioch when Peter was there playing the hypocrite, and it is what we are called to do.

At that time, Samuel said to Agag, “According to which it miscarried women your sword, thus it will miscarry from women, your mother.” In other words, Samuel is using the law (kherev, sword, which is identical to Horeb, the mountain of the law), to destroy the very doctrine of the offender, symbolized by Agag.

It is what we do every week at the Superior Word. We analyze the law, from Moses through Malachi, to defeat the false doctrines of those who refuse to come to Christ alone for salvation. The typology, if nothing else, confirms the translation in contrast to all others, which makes the miscarried woman the subject instead of the sword.

It is the sword itself, the law, which is used to destroy the enemies of God’s people who are supposedly trusting in the law. The picture has been seen many times, and it will continue to be seen repeatedly.

Therefore, it said, “And he hewed, Samuel, Agag to faces Yehovah in the Gilgal.” Agag, Rooftop, the prime false doctrine of what Amalek signifies, is hewn before the Lord in “the Liberty.” The doctrine of law observance cannot live in the presence of the gospel of grace.

In verse 34, it noted that Samuel went Ramah-ward. He is heading to the Lofty Place where those who hold to grace alone, even after salvation, will be exalted. They are anticipating what they possess, but what they have not yet actually attained.

Saul went to his house in Gibeah of Saul. Gibeah is etymologically connected to Gabbatha. This is a note of Saul’s salvation, despite his disobedience.

To understand that, take time to read 1 Corinthians 3:9-15 and 2 Corinthians 5:9-11. Verse 35 completed the chapter by saying that Saul and Samuel were separated henceforth, but that Samuel mourned for Saul. Along with that, the Lord sighed that He caused to reign, Saul, upon Israel.

It is a note that those who are saved and hold to proper doctrine are not to fellowship with those who hold to improper doctrine. It is a stern but sad admonition. We may mourn over their decision to cling to false doctrine and try to correct them, but there can be no harmony between the two.

Further, the Lord has saved and will continue to save them, but they are a disappointment to Him as they reject the grace they once so gladly received.

The chapter is clear and obvious in what it proclaims. It has continuously been the main focus of 1 Samuel. What is it that pleases God? It is not adherence to the law that Jesus fulfilled. That is a disgrace and a disappointment to the Lord for those who have at one time believed the gospel.

For those who never believed, the implication is obvious. There is no room in God’s economy for them. They will be anathematized and destroyed. Just think of the hacking Agag got! What a sad, mournful thought. Jesus is right there in Scripture, waiting for people to simply trust Him, and then to continue to trust Him apart from their own merits.

Let us learn that lesson and hold fast to it. Is it worth tolerating that which God will not tolerate and fellowshipping with those whose lives and actions are abhorrent to Him? Do we desire to give up on all of heaven’s riches to accommodate that which God finds deplorable?

Look at how Paul addressed Peter, calling him back to sound and reasonable doctrine after his gross violation of the grace he had been bestowed. Think on these things, apply the lesson to your lives, and honor God through holding fast to the doctrine of grace found when He gave Christ for our restoration. Amen.

Closing Verse: “And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. ⁴ You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. ⁵ For we through the Spirit eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.” Galatians 5:3-

Next Week: 1 Samuel 16:1-13 The choice is wise, not just a whim – that’s how it’s done… (Arise! Anoint Him! Part I) (33^rd 1 Samuel Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He is the One who abases the haughty and exalts the humble. He regards the lowly, and the proud, He knows from afar. So yield yourself to Him, trust Him, and believe His word. In this, He will do great things for you and through you.

1 Samuel 15:27-35 (CG)

²⁷ And he turned, Samuel, to walk, and he caused to seize in extremity his robe, and it was rent. ²⁸ And he said unto him, Samuel, “He rent, Yehovah, kingdom Israel from upon you the day. And he gave her to your associate – the good from you. ²⁹ And also Refulgency Israel, not He will cheat, and not He will be sighed. For not man, He, to be sighed.”

³⁰ And he said, “I sinned. Now you must enweigh me, I pray, afront elders my people, and afront Israel. And you must return with me, and I prostrated myself to Yehovah your God.” ³¹ And he returned, Samuel after Saul. And he prostrated himself, Saul, to Yehovah.

³² And he said, Samuel, “You must cause to near unto me Agag, king Amalek.” And he walked unto him, Agag, delightedly.

And he said, Agag, “Surely, it veered, bitter – the death.”

³³ And he said, Samuel, “According to which it miscarried women, your sword, thus it will miscarry, from women, your mother.” And he hewed, Samuel, Agag to faces Yehovah in the Gilgal.

³⁴ And he walked, Samuel, the Ramah-ward. And Saul, he ascended unto his house – Gibeah Saul. ³⁵ And not he added, Samuel, to see Saul until day his death. For he bewailed himself, Samuel, unto Saul. And Yehovah, He was sighed for He caused to reign, Saul, upon Israel.

 

1 Samuel 15:27-35 (NKJV)

²⁷ And as Samuel turned around to go away, Saul seized the edge of his robe, and it tore. ²⁸ So Samuel said to him, “The Lord has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today, and has given it to a neighbor of yours, who is better than you. ²⁹ And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor relent. For He is not a man, that He should relent.”

³⁰ Then he said, “I have sinned; yet honor me now, please, before the elders of my people and before Israel, and return with me, that I may worship the Lord your God.” ³¹ So Samuel turned back after Saul, and Saul worshiped the Lord.

³² Then Samuel said, “Bring Agag king of the Amalekites here to me.” So Agag came to him cautiously.

And Agag said, “Surely the bitterness of death is past.”

³³ But Samuel said, “As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women.” And Samuel hacked Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.

³⁴ Then Samuel went to Ramah, and Saul went up to his house at Gibeah of Saul. ³⁵ And Samuel went no more to see Saul until the day of his death. Nevertheless Samuel mourned for Saul, and the Lord regretted that He had made Saul king over Israel.

 

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson.

1 Samuel 15:13-26
Anathematize the Sinners – Amalek, Part II

(Typed 20 October 2025) Most of us know the old idiom, “You got caught with your hand in the cookie jar.” It became popular around WWII when it became common for people to keep their money in a cookie jar.

If someone took some of the money without the owner’s approval, he might get caught. Hence, the “getting caught” part. Today, the idiom extends to children who literally get caught with their hands in the jar, or to people who get caught taking anything they have no right to.

With the advent of cheap home security, office, warehouse, etc., cameras, there is a lot more getting caught going on in the world today. Despite getting caught, some people, even with chocolate chip goo all over their faces, will still deny what they did.

And even with the evidence presented directly to them, such as a video, some will continue to work around the situation, denying what they did was as it seems. In 1 Samuel 15, Saul will get caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He will deny any wrongdoing. And when presented with the evidence of his misdeeds, he will attempt to justify his actions.

Imagine having your face all smeared in cookie goo and then having it recorded in God’s word for everyone to read. Would we act differently if we thought our own misdeeds were going to be exposed to the whole world?

Text Verse: “Against You, You only, have I sinned,
And done this evil in Your sight—
That You may be found just when You speak,
And blameless when You judge.” Psalm 51:4

When David became king, he got caught with his hand in the proverbial cookie jar as well. When confronted with what he did, he didn’t try to hide it. Rather, he immediately said, “I have sinned against the Lord.” Along with that, he took the time to confess his wrongdoing to the Lord in a psalm.

His error and how he handled it is on prominent display in the same book that Saul’s is. The world has access to both stories because what they did is recorded. But what a difference in how the two men handled their sin, and how they are perceived by God’s people to this day.

Not only did David not hide what he did, but there is no hint of him justifying his wrongdoing, either to Nathan the prophet or to the Lord in the psalm. If we are honest with ourselves and others, we will admit that each of us is prone to wrongdoing. The effects of sin run deeply in even the greatest saint.

How we respond to our wrongdoings is important. This is a lesson that is on prominent display in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. You Swooped Unto the Booty (verses 13-19)

¹³ Then Samuel went to Saul,

vayavo sh_emuel el shaul – “And he went, Samuel, unto Saul.” Samuel was probably in his hometown of Ramah. When he arose in the morning, he was told that Saul had first gone to Carmel and then to Gilgal. As Gilgal is close to the Jordan, it would be about fifteen miles from Ramah to Gilgal. This would be about a five-hour walk.

Samuel means Asked from God. Saul means Asked. However, Saul is identical in spelling to Sheol, the pit. It is a point to remember. As he approaches, meeting Saul…

^{13 (con’t)} and Saul said to him, “Blessed are you of the Lord! I have performed the commandment of the Lord.”

vayomer lo shaul barukh atah l_eY_ehovah haqimothi eth d_evar Y_ehovah – “and he said to him, Saul, ‘Blessed you to Yehovah. I caused to arise word Yehovah.’” The proclamation itself shouts out that his words are a lie. It is a guilty person who greets another and immediately proclaims his innocence.

Saul doesn’t ask why Samuel has come, although it could be assumed that Samuel would come according to the instruction given in 1 Samuel 10:8. Saul had gathered at Gilgal according to the words of that verse. However, the last time they gathered the people in this manner, it said –

“And it was according to his finish to cause to ascend the burnt offering, and behold, Samuel, coming, and he went, Saul, to meet him to bless him.

¹¹ And he said, Samuel, ‘What you done?’ And he said, Saul, ‘For I saw for dispersed, the people, from upon me, and you, not you came to appointment the days, and Philistines being gathered Michmash.’ ¹² And I said, ‘Now they will descend, Philistines, upon me the Gilgal, and faces Yehovah not I rubbed, and I contained myself, and I caused to ascend the burnt offering.’

¹³ And he said, Samuel, unto Saul, ‘You were silly. Not you guarded command Yehovah your God which He enjoined you. For now – He caused to establish, Yehovah, your kingdom upon Israel until vanishment. ¹⁴ And now – your kingdom, not it will rise. He searched, Yehovah, to Him man according to His heart, and He enjoined him, Yehovah, to commander upon His people, for not you guarded which He enjoined you, Yehovah.’” 1 Samuel 13:10-14

Saul had not carefully guarded the Lord’s command. Samuel immediately called him out for it. This time, Saul preempted Samuel, calling out a blessing, as if that would stop any negative comments in their tracks.

Without being prompted, Saul then claimed that he had “cause to arise word Yehovah.” In other words, establish the word as if it stood firm. Unfortunately, little voices were calling out, highlighting Saul’s deceit…

¹⁴ But Samuel said, “What then is this bleating of the sheep in my ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear?”

vayomer sh_emuel u-meh qol ha’tson ha’zeh b_eaz_enay v_eqol ha’baqar asher anokhi shomea – “And he said, Samuel, ‘And what voice the flock, the this, in my ears, and voice the cattle which I hearing?’” Samuel’s words highlight Saul’s disobedience. The word of the Lord was to anathematize all living things. Nothing was to be excepted.

The animals of Amalek, bleating and lowing, proclaimed the ironic truth. They could not have highlighted the truth of Saul’s misdeeds more poignantly than the donkey of Balaam when it rebuked him for beating her.

The two types of animals mentioned here are the tson, flock, a word coming from a root meaning to migrate, and the baqar, cattle, which comes from the verb baqar, to seek or search out. Despite their barnyard rebukes to his transgressions, Saul gets his shovel and digs himself a bit deeper in the manure pile…

¹⁵ And Saul said, “They have brought them from the Amalekites; for the people spared the best of the sheep and the oxen,

vayomer shaul meamaleqi hevium asher khamal ha’am al metav ha’tson v_eha’baqar – “And he said, Saul, ‘From Amalekite they caused to bring them which he commiserated, the people, upon best the flock and the cattle.’” It is the same word Samuel spoke to Saul, khamal, to commiserate –

“And not you will commiserate upon him. And you will cause to die from man until woman, from suckling and until being suckled, from ox and until sheep, from camel and until donkey.” 1 Samuel 15:3

The rest of the words explained what “commiserate upon him” meant. Exactly what Saul was told not to do, he did. However, instead of acknowledging that as the leader, he was responsible for the actions of his people, he punted the blame to them, saying “he commiserated, the people.”

These are not the words of a strong leader but of a peevish simp, unwilling to lead and direct those under him in accord with the word of the Lord.

As for the name Amalek, it is derived from the word am, people, and malaq, to nip or wring off the head of a bird with or without severing it from the body. They are The People Who Wring Off. They are those who are disconnected from the body and who strive to disconnect the body.

Saul blamed his own people for what happened between them and Amalek. And worse, he next attempts to take their evil actions, of which he implicitly approved by allowing them to be done, and says it was intended for a holy purpose…

^{15 (con’t)} to sacrifice to the Lord your God;

l_emaan z_evoakh l_eY_ehovah elohekha – “to end purpose sacrifice to Yehovah your God.” The ludicrous nature of Saul’s words is evident in what happened to peace (thank) offerings. When they were presented to the Lord, it says, “The flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offering for thanksgiving shall be eaten the same day it is offered” (Leviticus 7:15).

In other words, there are parts of the animal that were reserved for holy purposes. The rest of the animal was returned to the offeror for him to eat. The people had taken the best of the flock and herd to have a giant party, roasting and dining on the plundered animals of Amalek, exactly what the Lord had forbidden. Saul pretends this is ok, though, saying…

^{15 (con’t)} and the rest we have utterly destroyed.”

v_eeth hayother hekheramnu – “and the remaining, we caused to anathematize.” In other words, “We kept all the good stuff to sacrifice to Yehovah (well, and to party with), and everything else (the not so good stuff), we dedicated to the Lord by anathematizing it.”

The entire thought is revolting and unholy. The false-hearted actions of Ananias and Sapphira could not excel Saul’s deceitfulness and disdain for the word of the Lord. But like Peter, who called them out for what they did, Samuel has words for Saul…

¹⁶ Then Samuel said to Saul, “Be quiet! And I will tell you what the Lord said to me last night.”

vayomer sh_emuel el shaul khereph v_eagidah l_ekha eth asher diber Y_ehovah elay ha’lay_elah – “And he said, Samuel unto Saul, ‘You must cause to slacken, and let me cause to declare to you what He spoke, Yehovah, unto me the night.’” The word khereph, to slacken, gives the sense of idleness, desisting, fainting, etc.

Saul is excitedly defending the indefensible. Samuel tells him to let it go, slacken his stand and pay heed to his words, words which are, in turn, the word of the Lord…

^{16 (con’t)} And he said to him, “Speak on.”

The written and the oral Hebrew are not the same: vayomeru lo daber – “And they said [k.] to him, ‘You must speak.’” The written is plural, “And they said.” The oral is singular, “And he said.” Of this discord, Keil, et. al., say, the written “is evidently a copyist’s error.” It takes more to assume that than it takes to assume the text is correct.

A first read through such an error would be caught by the copyist. Rather, the oral fails to understand the context. Saul is standing there with his troops, not alone. In verse 15, Saul said, “And the remaining, we caused to anathematize.”

Samuel addresses Saul, the one speaking for the whole. However, they all want to know what is being conveyed. It is a common reaction when a group is presented with a matter relevant to all. Even though Samuel is addressing Saul, the issue pertains to those with him…

¹⁷ So Samuel said, “When you were little in your own eyes, were you not head of the tribes of Israel?

The words are highly emphatic: vayomer sh_emuel halo im qaton atah b_eenekha rosh shivte Yisrael atah – “And he said, Samuel, ‘Not if, diminutive, you, in your eyes – head scepters Israel, you?’” The emphasis tells us that, despite more than just Saul asking him to speak on, Samuel redirects the conversation back to Saul alone.

We don’t know the tone of Samuel’s voice, but he is repeating the word of the Lord. For all we know, the Lord could be excoriating him with sarcasm –

“Well, well, well! Wasn’t it… surely it was! You were so small in your own eyes. You didn’t see yourself as worthy to lead Israel’s leaders – yes you!”

It is a reminder of the day of his calling –

“And he answered, Saul, and he said, ‘Not son right, I? From least scepters Israel? And my family the little from all families, scepters Benjamin? And why you spoke according to word, the this?’” 1 Samuel 9:21

The thought, based on the Lord’s words, would then be, “And you were right! You proved yourself this day to be as unworthy as you thought you were! You are a “son right” and what you have done is completely wrong!”

^{17 (con’t)} And did not the Lord anoint you king over Israel?

This is not a question but a firm proclamation: vayimshakhakha Y_ehovah l_emelekh al Yisrael – “And He anointed you, Yehovah, to king upon Israel!” Despite Saul’s feeling of unworthiness, the Lord gave him the chance to excel and become more than he thought of himself. The opportunity and the offering were his.

What he did with it was also his to decide. And what Saul did proved that he was not a suitable king to rule the Lord’s people. To validate that, the evidence is laid before him…

¹⁸ Now the Lord sent you on a mission, and said, ‘Go, and utterly destroy the sinners, the Amalekites,

vayishlakhakha Y_ehovah b_edarekh vayomer lekh v_ehakharamtah eth ha’khataim eth amaleq – “And He sent you, Yehovah, in road, and He said, ‘You must walk, and you caused to anathematize the sinners – Amalek.” The word kherem, anathematize, can mean only one thing. Saul failed to follow through with the Lord’s intent. He was to engage Amalek and destroy them.

The specific reason for this is that they are “the sinners.” Saying it this way is rather rare. It is a way of saying their sin is preeminent in the eyes of the Lord –

“And men Sodom wicked, and sinners to Yehovah, vehemently.” Genesis 13:13 (CG)

The terminology used was intended to highlight the necessity for following through with the command…

^{18 (con’t)} and fight against them until they are consumed.’

venilkhamta vo ad kalotham otham – “And you were fought in them until they finish them.” Saul wasn’t just to fight Amalek and destroy their ability to wage war again. Nor was he to merely fight them and chase them out of Israel. Rather, he was to destroy them until there was not an Amalekite left breathing. But this didn’t take place…

¹⁹ Why then did you not obey the voice of the Lord?

v_elamah lo shamata b_eqol Y_ehovah – “And to why not you heard in voice Yehovah?” The NKJV is correct. To hear means more than to simply listen. It means to hearken by acting upon what was heard. Saul failed to do this. And more, the lack of acting was an intentional act of disobedience…

^{19 (con’t)} Why did you swoop down on the spoil, and do evil in the sight of the Lord?”

vatat el hashalal vataas ha’ra b_eene Y_ehovah – “And you swooped unto the booty, and you did the evil in eyes Yehovah.” A new and rare word is seen, iyt, to swoop down on as a raptor might do to a mouse. It will only be seen here and in 1 Samuel 25:14.

Saul is being equated to a bird of prey, an unclean bird, that swoops down on its spoil. Such a bird fixes its eyes on the goal before it to the exclusion of all else. This is how Saul conducted himself, taking his eyes off the Lord, closing his ears to the word of the Lord, and fixating on nothing but the prey he intended to tear apart and devour.

Despite that, Saul shovels out more of what he is standing in, proving himself even more foolish…

What is it about that five-letter word?
What is so difficult that we can’t get it right?
Do we not trust the word we have heard?
Anything but GRACE… and so we put up a fight

We fight against God, not trusting His offer
We ignore what is so clearly stated in His word
Our own deeds are what we try to proffer
Ignoring the message of GRACE that we heard

Somehow, we have to insert ourselves into it
That place where we do not belong
We fight against the cross, failing to commit
By GRACE through faith alone… No!
Works shall be our song

I. He Spurned You (verses 20-26)

²⁰ And Saul said to Samuel, “But I have obeyed the voice of the Lord,

The response is unusual. Saul uses a relative pronoun to begin his defense: vayomer shaul el sh_emuel asher shamati b_eqol Y_ehovah – “And he said, Saul unto Samuel, ‘Which I heard in voice Yehovah!’” It seems that his words form an ellipsis, such as, “I have done that ‘which I heard in voice Yehovah!’”

Without knowing the intonation, facial expression, and so forth, it is hard to tell if he is being coy, confused, shocked, smarmy, angry, or something else. As such, we can’t dogmatically read into the narrative anything about what is being conveyed. Whatever his intent, he continues with his protestation…

^{20 (con’t)} and gone on the mission on which the Lord sent me, and brought back Agag king of Amalek; I have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.

v_eelekh baderekh asher sh_elakhani Y_ehovah vaavi eth agag melekh amaleq v_eeth amaleq hekheramti – “And I walked in the road which He sent me, Yehovah. And I caused to bring Agag, king Amalek, and Amalek I caused to anathematize.” An obvious point that either eludes Saul or that he is purposefully ignoring, is that Agag, king of Amalek is also an Amalekite.

If he were to anathematize Amalek, as he himself admits, then he could not have done so by leaving Agag alive.

Agag is from either agag, a verb meaning to violently blaze, or it is connected to gag, a rooftop. Various suggestions are Flaming, High, Very Sublime, Rooftop, or Apex.

Saul next continues with his illogical or obdurate words. Based on verse 24, I would go with the latter…

²¹ But the people took of the plunder, sheep and oxen, the best of the things which should have been utterly destroyed, to sacrifice to the Lord your God in Gilgal.”

vayiqakh ha’am mehashalel tson u-baqar reshith ha’kherem lizboakh l_eY_ehovah elohekha bagilgal – “And he took, the people, from the booty: flock and cattle, first, the devoted to sacrifice to Yehovah your God in the Gilgal.” Saul goes from the first person to the third, pinning the responsibility for what happened on the people. Notice how the pronouns cunningly change –

“Which I heard in voice Yehovah. And I walked in the road which He sent me, Yehovah. And I caused to bring Agag, king Amalek, and Amalek I caused to anathematize. ²¹ And he took, the people, from the booty: flock and cattle, first, the devoted to sacrifice to Yehovah your God in the Gilgal.”

The problem is that Agag should have been killed, so blaming the people for keeping the flocks makes little difference. And that, despite the fact that he is their king. Blaming them for taking from the booty doesn’t absolve him of wrongdoing.

Further, saying “the Lord your God,” to Samuel seems to imply that Saul is supposedly trying to rectify his past wrong, “I have done this so that you can offer the sacrifices to the Lord which I incorrectly did in the past. You are the Lord’s representative, and these sacrifices are for you to offer to Him accordingly.”

If this is his intent, it is a pathetic one by feigning obedience to the command he once violated (1 Samuel 13), as if it justifies his actions in this engagement against Amalek. But two rongs don’t make a rite. The animals were kherem, anathematized. As such, they belonged to the Lord through kherem. They could not be offered because they did not belong to the people.

The Gilgal signifies The Rolling, but the intended meaning is derived from the account of Joshua 5:9, where the Lord “rolled away the reproach of Egypt.” Thus, it means The Liberty.

So far, Saul’s words demonstrate weakness mixed with futile deflection. Samuel understands this and redirects the conversation back to the main point…

²² So Samuel said:
“Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices,
As in obeying the voice of the Lord?

vayomer sh_emuel ha’khephets l_eY_ehovah b_eoloth uz_evakhim kishmoa b_eqol Y_ehovah – “And he said, Samuel, ‘The pleasure, to Yehovah, in burnt offerings and sacrifices according to hearing in voice Yehovah?’” It is a rhetorical question. Whether or not Saul is sincere in his words, he has failed to consider what most pleases the Lord. The nature of the question is to alert him to what is misdirected in his actions.

The answer to the question should be evaluated by each of us. What is it that pleases the Lord and which, when accomplished, places a person in right standing with Him?

The question’s importance is based on the same deficiency in thinking that Paul spends an inordinate amount of time in his epistles attempting to correct.

Burnt offerings and sacrifices were mandates of the law. Does the Lord find more pleasure in people who do deeds of the law, or in those who hear and obey his voice? The thought will be considered after hearing Samuel’s response to his own question…

^{22 (con’t)} Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice,
And to heed than the fat of rams.

hineh sh_emoa mizevakh tov l_ehaqshiv mekhelev elim – “Behold! Hearing – from sacrifice, good! To ‘causing to hearken’ – from fat rams!” The word from is being used as a comparative, indicating a superlative followed by a diminutive.

Hearing (meaning obeying) is more important than sacrifice and, actively “causing to hearken,” meaning hearing and acting, is above the fat of rams, meaning the sacrificial part of the ram offered to the Lord as indicated in the law –

“Then he shall offer from the sacrifice of the peace offering an offering made by fire to the Lord. The fat that covers the entrails and all the fat that is on the entrails, ⁴ the two kidneys and the fat that is on them by the flanks, and the fatty lobe attached to the liver above the kidneys, he shall remove; ⁵ and Aaron’s sons shall burn it on the altar upon the burnt sacrifice, which is on the wood that is on the fire, as an offering made by fire, a sweet aroma to the Lord.” Leviticus 3:3-5

Saul could argue all day long that he acted in accord with the law, but the divine response would come back every time that his sacrifices and offerings were contemptible because they weren’t made in accordance with obeying through hearing and acting.

The word in both clauses is shama, to hear, but indicating obedience. This was seen, for example, in Numbers 14, the account which caused Israel to remain in the wilderness for forty years, and which typologically anticipated their second (the Roman) exile –

“Then the Lord said: ‘I have pardoned, according to your word; ²¹ but truly, as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord— ²² because all these men who have seen My glory and the signs which I did in Egypt and in the wilderness, and have put Me to the test now these ten times, and have not heeded [shama] My voice, ²³ they certainly shall not see the land of which I swore to their fathers, nor shall any of those who rejected Me see it.’” Numbers 14:20-23

That failure to obey (the act of hearing) is from the exact same account that the author of Hebrews uses to correct the thinking of the Hebrew people today –

“For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses? ¹⁷ Now with whom was He angry forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose corpses fell in the wilderness? ¹⁸ And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? ¹⁹ So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.” Hebrews 3:16-19

The author of Hebrews does exactly what the Lord did in Numbers. He equates hearing with obedience and not hearing with unbelief. It is the sin that Saul has committed, and it is the sin that those in the church commit every time they reinsert the law into their New Covenant theology.

Israel failed to hear the word of faith. They were cut off and exiled. Today, those in the church who fail to heed the word of faith will likewise be cut off (if not saved) or lose all rewards (if they are saved but turn to false doctrines). This is the lesson being taught in this passage about Saul and his faithless reaction to the word of the Lord. This is because…

²³ For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft,
And stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.

ki khatath qesem meri v_eaven u-t_eraphim haphtsar – “For sin divination – bitterness. And nothingness and teraphim – causing to peck.” Samuel’s use of ki, for, signifies parallelism, but his words are actually inverse parallelism –

“Behold! Hearing – from sacrifice, good! To ‘causing to hearken’ – from fat rams!”

1. Behold! ^*Hearing – from ⁺sacrifice, good!
2. To ^@‘causing to hearken’ – from ^#fat rams!

 

1. For ⁺sin divination – ^*bitterness.
2. And ^#nothingness and teraphim – ^@causing to peck.

The word meri, means bitterness. Figuratively, it signifies rebellion, but translating as bitterness is more precise. It is as if one takes the word of the Lord and, instead of assimilating it and acting on it, he finds it bitter. As such, it is something to be spit out. Because of this, the sacrifice is equated to the sin of divination.

In the second clause, causing to hearken is contrasted to causing to peck (urging until annoyance), while the fat of rams is equated to nothingness and teraphim. The words are brilliantly structured to get the point across that what Saul has done is completely unacceptable. Therefore…

^{23 (con’t)} Because you have rejected the word of the Lord,
He also has rejected you from being king.”

yaan maasta eth d_evar Y_ehovah vayimas_ekha mimelekh – “Because you spurned word Yehovah, and He spurned you from king.” The word yaan signifies to heed, but it is used adverbially to indicate a reason or cause for something.

Spurning Yehovah’s words is the reason why He spurns Saul in his kingship. As such, the word maas, spurn, is set in contrast to shama, hear –

*Behold! Hearing – from sacrifice! And to ‘causing to hearken’ – from fat rams! [shama]

*Because you spurned word Yehovah, and He spurned you from king. [maas]

Everything about the word of the Lord through Samuel is precisely stated, getting to the very heart of what the Lord expects from His people and what the result of rejecting that expectation means.

²⁴ Then Saul said to Samuel, “I have sinned, for I have transgressed the commandment of the Lord and your words,

vayomer shaul el sh_emuel khatathi ki avarti eth pi Y_ehovah v_eeth d_evarekha – “And he said, Saul unto Samuel, ‘I sinned. For I traversed mouth Yehovah and your words.’” To traverse means to go to the other side. When one hears the word of the Lord, he acts upon it, remaining in accord with the will of the Lord. When he traverses the word, he positionally moves out of the will of the Lord.

Saul acknowledges this is what he has done. After finally coming to this point of resigned acceptance, he explains why he did what he did, thus acknowledging that he knew all along that it was wrong. The problem was that his lack of faith in the word of the Lord was less than his desire to please men…

^{24 (con’t)} because I feared the people and obeyed their voice.

ki yarethi eth ha’am vaeshma b_eqolam – “For I feared the people, and I heard in their voice.” Saul was afraid of those he was supposed to lead. Instead of having faith in the word of the Lord, he acted in order to please them over Him. This is exactly what Paul refers to when writing the Galatians –

“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, ⁷ which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. ⁸ But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. ⁹ As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.
¹⁰ For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ.” Galatians 1:6-10

To show that this is exactly what Paul refers to, he then speaks in Galatians 2 of Peter doing exactly what Saul did –

“Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; ¹² for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. ¹³ And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.” Galatians 2:11-13

Both men, Saul and Peter, traversed the word of the Lord and had to be called out for their lack of faith. As for Saul…

²⁵ Now therefore, please pardon my sin,

Rather: v_eatah sa na eth khatathi – “And now, you must lift, I pray, my sin.” Samuel cannot pardon [shalakh: to send] sin. Saul is asking him to lift it, meaning the consequences of it, from him. In other words, “I know that I have sinned and that you are miffed with me. You probably want nothing to do with me, but don’t have that attitude. Instead…”

^{25 (con’t)} and return with me, that I may worship the Lord.”

v_eshuv imi v_eeshatkhaveh Y_ehovah – “And you must return with me. And let me prostrate myself to Yehovah.” Saul is looking for Samuel to overlook his sin so that he can prostrate himself before the Lord. Samuel would thus be the intercessor on Saul’s behalf. But even this request has an ulterior motive, which will be revealed in verse 30. Samuel, however, is determined to ignore the plea…

²⁶ But Samuel said to Saul, “I will not return with you, for you have rejected the word of the Lord,

vayomer sh_emuel el shaul lo ashuv imakh ki maastah eth d_evar Y_ehovah – “And he said, Samuel unto Saul, ‘Not I will return with you. For you spurned word Yehovah.’” The words are similar to verse 23, but there is a subtle difference –

Because (yaan) you spurned word Yehovah
For (ki) you spurned word Yehovah

The first one speaks of consequences of an action: “Because you did this, He will do that.” The second one refers to principles for an action: “I will not go for this reason.”

Samuel will not agree to Saul’s request because Saul treated the word of the Lord with contempt. It would be inappropriate for him to accompany Saul. His presence would be an implicit sign to the people that what Saul did was acceptable. To continue the ethical reason for not going, he says…

*^{26 (fin)} and the Lord has rejected you from being king over Israel.”

vayimas_ekha Yehovah mihyoth melekh al Yisrael – “and He spurned you, Yehovah, from being king upon Israel.” Continuing his thought from the first clause, Samuel is not referring to consequences, but principles –

…and He spurned you from king
…and He spurned you, Yehovah, from being king upon Israel.

If you are aware of the account of David’s transgression, you might question why there are differences in the outcome of each of them. Albert Barnes rightly explains the matter –

“How was it that these repeated confessions were unavailing to obtain forgiveness, when David’s was? Because Saul only shrank from the punishment of his sin. David shrank in abhorrence from the sin itself Psalm 51:4.” Albert Barnes

Barnes is right. It explains why the Lord continued to love David, despite the horrifying things he did. God understands our weaknesses. It is how we respond to them when they overtake us that explains who we really are.

Peter denied the Lord three times, but he was restored. He then implicitly did it again in Antioch when Paul had to call him out for his actions as recorded in Galatians. But we know that the Lord understood the deep-seated remorse Peter surely felt for his conduct because he continued to minister as an apostle.

The word repent is used to describe what we are supposed to do when we do wrong. Unfortunately, the modern sense of the word has been so manipulated over the years that it does not have the same meaning it once did.

When someone says, “You need to repent of your sins” in order to be saved, people think they have to completely stop sinning before they are saved. This, unfortunately, is the intent of most people who say it, and it is certainly implied by those who hear it.

But such a thought makes our salvation up to us. This is not the gospel. Thus, it is why I never hand out a tract that has the word repent in it. It is not because the word in its original meaning is wrong. Rather, it is how the word is perceived in modern thought.

The Greek word metanoeó signifies to think differently or afterwards. In other words, to reconsider. It is not the act that is changing but the mind. David’s mind was harmed by the knowledge of what he did. He reconsidered what he had done, acknowledging his transgression.

Saul has not reconsidered his wrongdoing. Instead, he regretted the fact that he got caught and that there were consequences for what he did. As an example, a person might get caught stealing jewels. His reaction might be to get upset that he must now go to jail, interrupting his exciting life.

On the other hand, he might hear about the place he robbed going out of business and the family losing their home in the process. In this, his heart is broken and he mourns over what he did, deciding he will do his utmost to never harm someone like that again. There is a world of difference between the two reactions.

As I said, God knows our weaknesses. He empathizes with us when our heart is rightly directed toward him. Saul’s heart has failed to measure up to this standard, and the Lord, who reads the hearts and minds of man, knows it.

As we go through life failing the Lord and others, we should reconsider our actions and determine that we will do our utmost to live for Him. If we fail, the Lord reads our hearts, and He is keenly aware of our struggle.

Our salvation is not up to us to procure through what we do. Rather, Jesus took care of that at the cross. We procure salvation by faith in what He did. Be sure to get this right. It will save you a lifetime of neurosis as you live in His presence, cleansed by His precious blood once and forever.

Thank God for His tender mercies toward those whose hearts are receptive to what He has done for us. Thank God for Jesus. Amen.

Closing Verse: “For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.” Hebrews 4:15

Next Week: 1 Samuel 15:27-35 Better than 50 chicken dinners… with no check! Just you wait and see… (Anathematize the Sinners – Amalek, Part III) (32^nd 1 Samuel Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He is the One who abases the haughty and exalts the humble. He regards the lowly, and the proud, He knows from afar. So yield yourself to Him, trust Him, and believe His word. In this, He will do great things for you and through you.

1 Samuel 15:13-26 (CG)

¹³ And he went, Samuel, unto Saul, and he said to him, Saul, “Blessed you to Yehovah. I caused to arise word Yehovah.”

¹⁴ And he said, Samuel, “And what voice the flock, the this, in my ears, and voice the cattle which I hearing?”

¹⁵ And he said, Saul, “From Amalekite they caused to bring them which he commiserated, the people, upon best the flock and the cattle to end purpose – sacrifice to Yehovah your God. And the remaining, we caused to anathematize.”

¹⁶ And he said, Samuel unto Saul, “You must cause to slacken, and let me cause to declare to you what He spoke, Yehovah, unto me the night.”

And they said [k.] to him, “You must speak.”

¹⁷ And he said, Samuel, “Not if, diminutive, you, in your eyes –head scepters Israel, you? And He anointed you, Yehovah, to king upon Israel! ¹⁸ And He sent you, Yehovah, in road, and He said, ‘You must walk, and you caused to anathematize the sinners – Amalek. And you were fought in them until they finish them.’ ¹⁹ And why not you heard in voice Yehovah? And you swooped unto the booty, and you did the evil in eyes Yehovah.”

²⁰ And he said, Saul unto Samuel, “Which I heard in voice Yehovah! And I walked in the road which He sent me, Yehovah. And I caused to bring Agag, king Amalek, and Amalek I caused to anathematize. ²¹ And he took, the people, from the booty: flock and cattle, first, the devoted to sacrifice to Yehovah your God in the Gilgal.”

²² And he said, Samuel, “The pleasure, to Yehovah, in burnt offerings and sacrifices according to hearing in voice Yehovah? Behold! Hearing – from sacrifice, good! To ‘causing to hearken’ – from fat rams! ²³ For sin divination – bitterness. And nothingness and teraphim – causing to peck. Because you spurned word Yehovah, and He spurned you from king.”

²⁴ And he said, Saul unto Samuel, “I sinned. For I traversed mouth Yehovah and your words. For I feared the people, and I heard in their voice. ²⁵ And now, you must lift, I pray, my sin. And you must return with me. And let me prostrate myself to Yehovah.”

²⁶ And he said, Samuel unto Saul, “Not I will return with you. For you spurned word Yehovah, and He spurned you, Yehovah, from being king upon Israel.”

 

1 Samuel 15:13-26 (NKJV)

¹³ Then Samuel went to Saul, and Saul said to him, “Blessed are you of the Lord! I have performed the commandment of the Lord.”

¹⁴ But Samuel said, “What then is this bleating of the sheep in my 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 the oxen, to sacrifice to the Lord your God; and the rest we have utterly destroyed.”

¹⁶ Then Samuel said to Saul, “Be quiet! And I will tell you what the Lord said to me last night.”

And he said to him, “Speak on.”

¹⁷ So Samuel said, “When you were little in your own eyes, were you not head of the tribes of Israel? And did not the Lord anoint you king over Israel? ¹⁸ Now the Lord sent you on a mission, and said, ‘Go, and utterly destroy the sinners, the Amalekites, and fight against them until they are consumed.’ ¹⁹ Why then did you not obey the voice of the Lord? Why did you swoop down on the spoil, and do evil in the sight of the Lord?”

²⁰ And Saul said to Samuel, “But I have obeyed the voice of the Lord, and gone on the mission on which the Lord sent me, and brought back Agag king of Amalek; I have utterly destroyed the Amalekites. ²¹ But the people took of the plunder, sheep and oxen, the best of the things which should have been utterly destroyed, to sacrifice to the Lord your God in Gilgal.”

²² So Samuel said:

“Has 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 heed than the fat of rams.
²³ For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft,
And stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.
Because you have rejected the word of the Lord,
He also has rejected you from being king.”

²⁴ Then Saul said to Samuel, “I have sinned, for I have transgressed the commandment of the Lord and your words, because I feared the people and obeyed their voice. ²⁵ Now therefore, please pardon my sin, and return with me, that I may worship the Lord.”

²⁶ But Samuel said to Saul, “I will not return with you, for you have rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord has rejected you from being king over Israel.”

 

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson.

1 Samuel 15:1-12
Anathematize the Sinners – Amalek, Part I

(Typed 13 October 2025) In March 1783, things were not going well for the American forces under George Washington as they battled the mighty British army. Things had spiraled out of control, necessitating Washington to gather his troops for a personal meeting in Newburgh, New York.

His speech was carefully laid out in the manner expected of such a great military leader. He was firm and yet humble, appealing indirectly to Scripture by loosely citing it with words any church-attending person would mentally connect with the Bible.

The National Constitution Center provides the following summary of his address –

“George Washington’s Newburgh Address was one of the most important speeches in his military career. The soldiers who gathered in Newburgh, New York, were tired, bloody, homesick, and unpaid.  They were also on the brink of mutiny.  Prior to Washington’s speech, the soldiers had circulated petitions criticizing the Continental Congress and contemplating widespread insubordination. When Washington heard of these mutinous rumblings, he was horrified. A large-scale mutiny by American soldiers would shatter the public’s confidence in the military, vindicate Great Britain’s skepticism about the American experiment, and tarnish the young nation in the eyes of the world. Explaining his decision to address the soldiers in Newburgh to Alexander Hamilton, Washington wrote, ‘I was obliged . . . to rescue them from plunging themselves into a gulf of civil horror from which there might be no receding.’ On March 15, 1783, Washington delivered this address to the senior officers of the Continental Army. In his speech, Washington emphasized many themes that he returned to throughout his career, including the importance of public duty, honor, civilian control of the military, and civic republican virtue. At a key moment in the speech, Washington reached into his pocket and revealed for the first time that he had begun wearing glasses, saying: ‘Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for, I have grown not only gray, but almost blind in the service of my country.’ Many soldiers were moved to tears.”

Text Verse: “Oh, love the Lord, all you His saints!
For the Lord preserves the faithful,
And fully repays the proud person.” Psalm 31:23

As we go through the verses today, think about the difference between Washington’s words and the actions of Saul. Despite all of the pressures of a thus-far failing campaign, Washington stood firm in his resolve. After the war, he turned down any notion of leading the nation as a military or kingly figure, only accepting when a president was called for.

On the other hand, Saul was unwilling to do what he was commanded to do, shunning the precise orders he was given. After the battle, instead of humility and honoring others above himself, he immediately set out to memorialize himself.

The words of the psalmist in our text verse ring true. Washington was preserved, eventually becoming the first president of our nation. Saul, however, was repaid for his pride. Let us remember how the Lord deals with us when we interact with Him. We, too, are being evaluated.

It is a truth that is on prominent display in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. Anathematize Them (verses 1-5)

Samuel also said to Saul,

Rather: vayomer sh_emuel el shaul – “And he said, Samuel, unto Saul.” There is no hint of time, as the word “also” implies. It is a narrative selected from the lives of Samuel and Saul as they interact with one another before the Lord. But it is not just any narrative.

This is a defining moment in the history of Saul’s life and thus in the history of all Israel and for the rest of redemptive history for all of God’s people. This is because the consequences of this account bear directly on the coming of the Messiah.

Samuel means Asked from God. Saul means Asked.

^{1 (con’t)} “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over His people, over Israel.

The position of the pronoun is emphatic: oti shalakh Yehovah limshakhokha l_emelekh al amo al Yisrael – “‘Me, He sent, Yehovah, to anoint you, to king upon His people – upon Israel.” The emphasis sets the stage for the narrative. Saul did not earn the kingship through mighty exploits, nor was he born into it, thus inheriting the right to rule.

Rather, Yehovah initiated the process, accomplished it through his prophet and judge Samuel, who complied with the Lord’s directive to anoint Saul as king –

“And Yehovah, he denuded ear Samuel, day one to faces coming Saul, to say, ¹⁶ “According to the time, tomorrow, I will send unto you man from land Benjamin. And you anointed him to commander upon My people, Israel. And he caused to save My people from hand Philistines. For I saw My people. For it came, his shriek, unto Me.” 1 Samuel 9:15, 16

Because the process was initiated by Yehovah, and because Samuel was the means by which it took place, the implied meaning for Saul is to heed what will be said, fully complying with every word as an unalterable directive…

^{1 (con’t)} Now therefore, heed the voice of the words of the Lord.

The verb is imperative: v_eatah sh_ema l_eqol divre Y_ehovah – “And now, you must hear to voice words Yehovah.’” The imperative does not mean, “I have a job for you that must get done,” even if that is true. Rather, it says Saul must hearken to the words of the voice speaking.

As an example, the president may say to a general through his messenger, “You must have victory in this battle.” In such a command, despite it being from the president, the imperative is directed to the victory. The urgency may be “this is our last chance,” “if you don’t, we will be out of supplies,” or some other point that necessitates victory.

On the other hand, if the president says, “You must heed my exact commands as you engage this battle. You need to win, but you must also prioritize not destroying the ancient archaeological site at all costs,” the imperative is on his command.

Winning the battle may be a desired outcome, but it is not the primary focus. Rather, complete obedience lies with the president’s words and how they are to be complied with. This is what is being dealt with here. The “voice words Yehovah” is of paramount importance. Therefore…

² Thus says the Lord of hosts: ‘I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, 

koh amar Y_ehovah ts_evaoth paqadti eth asher asah amaleq l_eyisral – “Thus, He said, Yehovah Sabaoth, ‘I visited which He did, Amalek, to Israel.’” Samuel uses the term Yehovah Ts_evaoth, Yehovah of Hosts. It is given to remind Saul to know that even if he is the king and military leader of the people, he is ultimately under the rule and authority of the Lord, the true Leader of Israel’s hosts.

And this leadership extends to all times in their history. The verb paqad means to visit. However, that has a variety of significations. In this case, Yehovah is going back in time, visiting the events in Israel’s history as if reading pages of a book.

He gets to the account of Amalek and what he did to Israel, and He says, “I need to fulfill what I said at that time!” This is similar to what happened in the book of Esther –

“That night the king could not sleep. So one was commanded to bring the book of the records of the chronicles; and they were read before the king. ² And it was found written that Mordecai had told of Bigthana and Teresh, two of the king’s eunuchs, the doorkeepers who had sought to lay hands on King Ahasuerus. ³ Then the king said, ‘What honor or dignity has been bestowed on Mordecai for this?’” Esther 6:1-3

Amalek is derived from the word am, people, and malaq, to nip or wring off the head of a bird with or without severing it from the body. They are The People Who Wring Off. They are those disconnected from the body and who strive to disconnect the body.

The Lord visited the events of Amalek’s interactions with Israel and decided that the time to act is now. In explanation of that…

^{2 (con’t)} how he ambushed him on the way when he came up from Egypt.

asher sam lo baderekh baaloto mimitsrayim – “which he put to him in the way, in his ascent from Egypt.” The battle against Amalek is described in Exodus 17. In that account, it says that Amalek came and fought with Israel in Rephidim. That doesn’t fully explain the matter. Later, in Deuteronomy, Moses said –

“Remember what Amalek did to you on the way as you were coming out of Egypt, ¹⁸ how he met you on the way and attacked your rear ranks, all the stragglers at your rear, when you were tired and weary; and he did not fear God. ¹⁹ Therefore it shall be, when the Lord your God has given you rest from your enemies all around, in the land which the Lord your God is giving you to possess as an inheritance, that you will blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. You shall not forget.” Deuteronomy 25:17-19

This is the reason for the longstanding enmity between the nations. The Lord has chosen this moment in history to right the wrongs committed against Israel by Amalek.

Egypt means Double Trouble.

Saul is instructed to be the instrument by which Amalek is punished. As such…

³ Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have,

atah lekh v_ehikithah eth amaleq v_ehakhramtem eth kal asher lo – “Now, you must go, and you cause to strike Amalek, and you cause to anathematize them, all which to him.” The instruction is to engage in battle (cause to strike), understanding that every person and everything belonging to Amalek is to be consecrated to Yehovah.

The word kharam means to seclude. In other words, all associated with Amalek is to be separated for destruction as an offering to the Lord for the offense they brought against the Lord and against the people bearing His name. Thus, it is an act of anathematization.

The word is used seven times in the books of Samuel, all of which are in this chapter about Amalek. These words are the basis for the imperative of verse 1. It isn’t just that Israel is to engage Amalek in battle, but the voice of the Lord wants their anathematization to be the defining outcome of the battle. Therefore…

^{3 (con’t)} and do not spare them.

v_elo takhmol alav – “And not you will commiserate upon him.” The word khamal, to commiserate, has only been seen twice so far. The first time was when Pharaoh’s daughter found Moses in the basket on the Nile and pitied him. The second was in Deuteronomy 13 when referring to someone enticing others to worship other gods. Even if it was the closest family member, they were not to be pitied. Instead, they were to be killed.

Saying he was to anathematize Amalek should have been enough to get the point across. However, to ensure that His words are understood and obeyed, to the last letter, Saul is instructed to show no pity at all. Rather…

^{3 (con’t)} But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”

v_ehematah meish ad ishah meolel v_ead yoneq mishor v_ead seh migamal v_ead khamor – “And you will cause to die from man until woman, from suckling and until being suckled, from ox and until sheep, from camel and until donkey.” The list is all-inclusive. Nothing with breath, even the smallest baby, was to be excepted. Rather it was to be devoted to the Lord.

People claim they find fault with the Lord for this, as if He has no right to dispense with His creation as He sees fit. However, many people who think this way would not bat an eye at aborting a child in the womb. Such illogical thinking belies their supposed moral superiority.

This is the Lord’s world. All humanity is subject to His will. What He determines is totally up to Him without regard to our morally tainted perspective of the world around us.

In this clause, a new word is seen, olel, a suckling. It is derived from ul, to suckle, the root from which the high priest Eli’s name stems.

The animals mentioned are first the shor, ox, coming from shur, to turn, and thus to travel about. Next is the seh, sheep, coming from a word signifying to rush, and thus to devastate. Third is the gamal, camel, coming from gamal, to treat a person well or ill. Thus, to adequately deal with. Last is the khamor, a male donkey. That is from khamar, to be red or khamar, to boil up, but the sense is redness from the glowing of the pot which causes the boiling.

The list as given is an abbreviated way of describing every person and every animal without exception.

⁴ So Saul gathered the people together

The phrase is unusual: vayshama shaul eth ha’am – “And he heard, Saul, the people.” The meaning is that Saul had the people hear the call to prepare for battle. The strange form of expression, which the context demands is causative, even though the verb itself is not in a causative form, is only found one more time, in 1 Samuel 23:8. Of this gathering of the troops…

^{4 (con’t)} and numbered them in Telaim,

Not another translation follows the Hebrew: vayiphq_edem bat_elaim – “And he visited them in the spotted lambs.” There is an article before t_elaim, “in the t_elaim.” The word is used nowhere else, and it is unlikely that it is the same as Telem mentioned in Joshua 15:24. That location probably has a completely different meaning.

Rather than being a name preceded by the article, it is probably a designation. If it is a name, it still should be preceded by the article, “in the Telaim.” If so, then it begs for a translation.

The word t_elaim is the plural of t_ela, a spotted lamb, meaning a young lamb that is spotted as a form of protection. That is from tala, to cover with pieces like patches. It is a word found eight times. Six are in the account of Jacob having spotted animals, which are contrasted to Laban’s flocks.

Once it is seen in Joshua 9 concerning patched sandals, which made those who wore them look like they had traveled a long time, when in fact they were from just down the road. The last use is in Ezekiel 16, where the people took fine garments given to them by the Lord and mottled them on high places, playing the harlot with other gods.

The Douay-Rheims says Saul “numbered them as lambs.” Other than lacking the article, that is a reasonable possibility concerning the intent.

If the word is being used as a descriptor, the word t_elaim could signify “two spotted lambs,” the plural being used as a reduplication of t_ela from one to two. If so, that would then be explained with the next words…

^{4 (con’t)} two hundred thousand foot soldiers and ten thousand men of Judah.

matayim eleph ragli vaasereth alaphim eth ish Y_ehudah – “two hundred thousand footed, and ten thousands man Judah.” In other words, the “two spotted lambs” may be equated to the two categories. These various suggestions are speculation based on what is recorded.

As for the numbers, two is the number of division or difference. It leads to twenty, the number of expectancy. That leads to two hundred, expectancy multiplied, and thus insufficiency.

The multiple ten, along with the number ten thousand, which is multiples of ten, signify, according to Bullinger, completeness of order where nothing is wanting, the number and order are perfect, and the whole cycle is complete.

⁵ And Saul came to a city of Amalek,

vayavo shaul ad ir amaleq – “And he came, Saul, until city Amalek.” The words ir amaleq either mean Amalek City, a city known by the name of the people, or it is a city of Amalek. The former seems likely, as the people are otherwise seen to move around in groups of plunderers.

^{5 (con’t)} and lay in wait in the valley.

The words are probably anticipatory: vayarev banakhal – “And he caused to grapple in the valley.” The word riv signifies to contend, wrangle, grapple, strive, etc. If this is the meaning, the clause may look forward to the spot where the battle will commence.

Others think the word used here is a contracted form of a verb signifying to lie in wait. As that is convenient, most translations follow suit, thus eliminating the seemingly disconnected meaning of the clause.

It could be that the grappling is with the subject of the next verse, the Kenite. Although the recorded words are amicable, it may be that the Kenite took this as an affront before realizing that Saul intended them good, not harm.

What seems likely is that the grappling is akin to Israel noted in Exodus 17 or Moses and Aaron in Numbers 20, where they grappled, riv, with the Lord. In other words, the words are anticipatory concerning the actions of the people.

Whatever the meaning, the type of valley, nakhal, is a stream or winter torrent. It is derived from the verb nakhal, to inherit, as a stream inherits the riverbed as it flows. Prior to engaging Amalek, Saul spares the ancient people who had been continuously in the land since Israel had entered it hundreds of years earlier…

Anathematize the Amalekites! Get it done
They are out there, waiting to strike
When they do, it is never fun
They come after all, stealthy and catlike

When they attack, they will nip off the head
From the body, they disconnect those unaware
Bleeding them out until they are dead
Doing it without a care

This is your job: leave none alive
Anathematize them! Get it done
If you don’t, man alive…
They will keep on coming, and it won’t be fun

II. I Was Sighed (verses 6-12)

⁶ Then Saul said to the Kenites, “Go, depart, get down from among the Amalekites,

vayomer shaul el ha’qeni l_ekhu suru r_edu mitokh amaleqi – “And he said, Saul, unto the Kenite, ‘You must walk, and you must veer, and you must descend from midst Amalekite.’” The Kenites were a nomadic people who came out of the wilderness with Israel at the time of Moses. They were related to Moses by marriage.

The name Kenite is a patronym derived from Qayin or Kain. That name is derived from qanah, to acquire. However, it is also etymologically connected to qayin, spear. To further complicate things, Jones’ Dictionary takes the meaning from Numbers 24:21, tying it to the word qen, nest. Thus, various meanings can be considered: Acquire, People of the Spear, Nestling, etc.

^{6 (con’t)} lest I destroy you with them.

pen osiphkha imo – “lest I gather you with him.” The meaning is “to gather to the Lord.” The same form of the verb is used when the Lord says, “I will gather you unto your fathers” in 2 Kings 22:20. The Kenites would fully grasp the meaning.

The reason for sparing them also goes back to the time of the exodus. Instead of waging war against Israel, the Kenites took a different approach…

^{6 (con’t)} For you showed kindness to all the children of Israel when they came up out of Egypt.”

The words are emphatic, thus showing the distinction between the Amalekites and the Kenite: v_eatah asitah khesed im kal b_ene Yisrael baalotam mimitsrayim – “And you, you did kindness with all sons Israel in their ascent from Egypt.” This has to be inferred from the words of Judges 1:16 –

“Now the children of the Kenite, Moses’ father-in-law, went up from the City of Palms with the children of Judah into the Wilderness of Judah, which lies in the South near Arad; and they went and dwelt among the people.” Judges 1:16

Moses’ father-in-law was the one in Exodus 18, after the account of war with Amalek, to advise Moses on how to relieve the burden he bore by judging all the people. The two accounts are set in stark contrast as they are remembered here.

Later, in Numbers 10, Moses petitioned his father-in-law to be with them and be their eyes as they traveled to Canaan, promising to treat him with the same goodness the Lord would treat them.

Because of this longstanding, amicable relationship, Saul gives them a chance to depart before the attack begins…

^{6 (con’t)} So the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites.

vayasar qeni mitokh amaleq – “And he veered, Kenite, from midst Amalek.” Understanding the situation, the Kenite pulled up stakes and veered out of the path that would otherwise see them consumed along with Amalek. With that effected…

⁷ And Saul attacked the Amalekites, from Havilah all the way to Shur, which is east of Egypt.

vayakh shaul eth amaleq mekhavilah boakha shur asher al p_ene mitsrayim – “And he struck, Saul, Amalek, from Havilah – you go Shur, which upon faces Egypt.” Saul immediately prevailed over Amalek City, causing them to retreat. He pressed the attack as they retreated, cutting them down as he went.

The root of Havilah is debated. Strong’s says it is derived from khul, to twist or whirl, as in a circular pattern. He defines it as Circular. The same root could also produce Circle or Whirling.

Jones’ derives it from khavah, to gather into a symbiosis, and says Bringing Forth or Trembling. Abarim associates it with laha, to languish or faint, and defines it as Languishing Village or Exhausted Revelation.

Shur is from shur, wall. That is from the verb shur, to travel about. Thus, it signifies Wall, Bull, Fort, or Fortification. In this destructive engagement, Saul makes his first major error against the “voice words Yehovah…”

⁸ He also took Agag king of the Amalekites alive,

vayitpos eth agag melekh amaleq khai – “And he manipulated Agag, king Amalek, alive.” The word of the Lord was to anathematize every living thing. This included Agag. Rather, it appears he spared Agag as a sign of his greatness, boasting over his victory by displaying the king of their great enemy alive.

Agag is from either agag, a verb meaning to violently blaze, or it is connected to gag, a rooftop. Various suggestions are Flaming, High, Very Sublime, Rooftop, or Apex. As for the rest…

^8 (con’t) and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword.

v_eeth kal ha’am hekharim l_epi kharev – “And all the people, he caused to anathematize to mouth sword.” Although this is in obedience to the word of the Lord, it is stated after the fact that Agag was spared.

As for the words l_epi kharev, to mouth sword, remember that the word kharev is identical in spelling to Horeb, the mountain where the law was given – חרב. Thus, the sword is typologically used to represent the law. To anathematize to the “mouth sword” equates to destruction according to the command of the law, something Saul has failed because he didn’t heed the word of the Lord…

⁹ But Saul and the people spared Agag

vayakhmol shaul v_eha’am al agag – “And he commiserated, Saul, and the people, upon Agag.” Saul didn’t spare Agag to kill him later, as Joshua did with the king of Ai in Joshua 8, or the five kings of the Amorites in Joshua 10. Those kings were saved to later publicly hang as a lesson for the soldiers concerning the battles of the Lord.

Rather, the same word, khamal, just used in verse 3 and translated as commiserate, is used again here, “And not you will commiserate upon him…” Saul openly disobeyed the word of the Lord in doing what he did. And more, the transgression is increased with the next words. He commiserated upon Agag, and also…

^{9 (con’t)} and the best of the sheep, the oxen, the fatlings, the lambs, and all that was good,

v_eal metav ha’tson v_eha’baqar v_eha’mishnim v_eal ha’karim v_eal kal ha’tov – “and upon best the flock, and the cattle, and the doubles, and upon the lambs, and upon all the good.” The words here are not the same as those above –

shor / seh / gamal / khamor
tson / baqar / mishneh / kar

It is as if the author is intentionally poking at Saul. It isn’t that he actually thought what is probably being expressed. Rather, it is a humorous way of saying it –

“The Lord was clear, you were to kill everything!”
“No, I did just what He said. There are no shor, seh, gamal, or khamor here. Can’t you see that! Not one I tell you!”

Obviously, only a cunningly devious person would deny such a thing, but that seems to be the point. As for the animals, the tson, flock, comes from a root meaning to migrate. It is a collective word for a flock of sheep or goats. Thus, it would include the seh, sheep mentioned already. The baqar, cattle, comes from the verb baqar, to seek or search out. It would have included the ox noted above.

Scholars struggle over the next word, mishneh, double. It is from shanah, to fold or duplicate. Thus, it signifies a duplicate, copy, or a double. This is the only time it is used in this manner. Some say it refers to that which is second best or inferior. But that is contrary to the context.

Others say it refers to sheep old enough to cut, or shed, the two teeth. Thus, sheep in their prime. This isn’t what it says. It is referring to the sheep, not their teeth or what happens to their teeth. Taking the word with its plain meaning, it would signify a fatling, a double-sized animal raised for slaughter. This would be similar to the use of the word found in Isaiah 61 –

“Instead of your shame you shall have double [mishneh] honor,
And instead of confusion they shall rejoice in their portion.
Therefore in their land they shall possess double [mishneh];
Everlasting joy shall be theirs.” Isaiah 61:7

There is a reduplication of the thing. In the case of the animal, it would be in its size and value. Lastly, the kar, lamb, comes from a verb signifying to dance or twirl. Thus, it is an animal that is full-grown and fattened.

Each of these spared was a prime category.

^{9 (con’t)} and were unwilling to utterly destroy them.

v_elo avu hakharimam – “and not he acquiesced – caused to anathematize them.” Saul was completely unwilling to acquiesce or yield to the word of the Lord. Instead, he turned his back on Him and took another path.

The reason Saul will give later is not only insufficient, but it will also exacerbate his guilt concerning the matter. For now, to highlight the contemptible nature of his misdeeds, the words continue with…

^{9 (con’t)} But everything despised and worthless, that they utterly destroyed.

v_ekhal ha’m_elakha n_emivzah v_enames otah hekherimu – “And all the deputyship – disesteemed and being wasted, it they caused to anathematize.” The word melakhah, deputyship, gives the sense of a subordinate worker. In other words, these are the prime animals that have been kept from being anathematized, and then there are all the others that didn’t make the grade.

1 Samuel 8:16 said that when Israel got a king, he would take the best of the people’s servants and maidservants and make them to his deputyship. The contrast was between the king and those under him. Saul has kept Agag the king and killed everyone else.

He has also taken the “kingly” animals, destroying everything else. The actions of Saul are highlighted as a vile display of his unworthy conduct as the chosen king of Israel.

¹⁰ Now the word of the Lord came to Samuel, saying,

vayhi d_evar Yehovah el sh_emuel lemor – “And it was, word Yehovah, unto Samuel, to say…” Because of the verse division, which came millennia later, cutting the verse off before what is said gives an ominous sense about what is coming.

Even without it, however, the fact that the Lord is speaking to Samuel immediately after the words concerning Saul, we know a cloud hangs in the air. Bad news concerning Saul is forthcoming…

¹¹ “I greatly regret that I have set up Saul as king,

nikhamti ki himlakhti eth shaul l_emelekh – “I was sighed, for I caused to reign, Saul, to king.” Translations generally say repent, regret, am sorry, etc. The word nakham means “to sigh.” It can have various connotations based on the context.

In this case, one can imagine the Lord going pbpbpbpbpbpbhhh or maybe hohhhhhh the way we do when we are exasperated. The Lord doesn’t actually regret His decisions. They are made in accordance with His foreknowledge and predetermined plan. But this doesn’t mean that He enjoys the process.

One can imagine Him saying, “Hohhhhh, I will be so glad when this is over. It was a necessary step, but this is brutal to endure.” Obviously, that is a lot of anthropomorphism tucked into the analysis, but it is a closer sense than translating it as repent or regret.

This sighing was caused by Saul’s conduct…

^{11 (con’t)} for he has turned back from following Me, and has not performed My commandments.”

Rather: ki shav meakharay v_eeth d_evaray lo heqim – “For he returned from after Me, and My words not he caused to rise.’” The word qum means to rise. In other words, Saul failed to establish the word of the Lord. It is true he didn’t perform what was said, but that only goes part of the way. The instruction was to take the Lord’s word and cause it to come about. Because of this…

^{11 (con’t)} And it grieved Samuel, and he cried out to the Lord all night.

vayikhar lishmuel vayizaq el Y_ehoval kal halay_elah – “And it burned to Samuel, and he shrieked unto Yehovah all the night.” The word kharah signifies to burn, but it is always in connection with anger. This doesn’t say why Samuel was angry, meaning whether he was angry with the Lord or Saul, but he was in a state of anger.

It is similar to Jonah, where it said, “And it spoiled unto Jonah – bad whopping, and it burned to him” (Jonah 4:1). Interestingly, that was based on the sighing (nakham) of God concerning the destruction of Nineveh. In both cases, it appears that both prophets were angry with the entirety of what occurred.

Thus, there is the implicit anger at the Lord for initiating the process and for involving them in it, as well as the results of the unfolding process. In the case of Saul, his disobedience. In the case of Jonah, Nineveh’s change of mind.

¹² So when Samuel rose early in the morning to meet Saul,

vayashkem sh_emuel liqrath shaul baboqer – “And he caused to rise early, Samuel, to encounter Saul in the morning.” One can almost imagine Samuel stewing in his anger all night. Like anyone in that condition, he gets up early, steaming as he heads out the door to find Saul. However, when he looks for him…

^{12 (con’t)} it was told Samuel, saying, “Saul went to Carmel, and indeed, he set up a monument for himself;

vayugad lish_emuel lemor ba shaul ha’karemelah v_ehineh matsiv lo yad – “And it was caused to declare to Samuel, to say, ‘He went, Saul, the Carmel-ward, and behold, causing to station to him hand.” Samuel encountered someone who knew about Saul’s affairs and who told him Saul headed towards Carmel for the purpose of erecting a hand, a monument, to himself.

We know this is what it means because the same wording is used in 2 Samuel 18:18 when Absalom erected a pillar “upon his name,” calling it yad avshalom, “Hand Absalom.” Whatever Saul erected, it was to signify his personal position and strength, the hand being a symbol of authority and power.

Carmel is from kerem, vineyard. Thus, it means Plantation, Orchard, or Fruitful Field (Plentiful Place). Clarke calls it Vineyard of God because the name is supplemented with the ending, el, God. Saul erected his monument…

*^{12 (fin)} and he has gone on around, passed by, and gone down to Gilgal.”

vayisov vayaavor vayered ha’gilgal – “And he revolved, and he traversed, and he descended – the Gilgal.” With the monument set up, he then set his sights on where he was renewed as king –

“And he said, Samuel, unto the people, ‘You must walk, and we will walk the Gilgal, and let us renew there the kingdom.’ ¹⁵ And they walked, all the people, the Gilgal. And they caused to reign there, Saul, to faces Yehovah in the Gilgal. And they sacrificed there sacrifices repayments to Yehovah. And he brightened there, Saul, and all men Israel, until vehemently.” 1 Samuel 11:14, 15

It is clear that he is going to Gilgal with the intent of honoring himself as king, while including sacrifices to the Lord as had occurred before.

The Gilgal signifies The Rolling, but the intended meaning is derived from the account of Joshua 5:9, where the Lord “rolled away the reproach of Egypt.” Thus, it means The Liberty.

The verses so far are sad but not unexpected. Paul advises Timothy regarding the appointment of elders that a man is not to be a novice, “lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil” (1 Timothy 3:6).

Regardless of how long Saul had been a king at this point, being the first king of Israel, he was essentially a novice, learning each aspect of the job as he went. He failed to keep himself and his authority in check. This led to the situation in which he and Samuel found themselves.

It is an unfortunate thing, but the Lord knew it would occur. Saul’s selection as king fit the ongoing plan of redemption exactly as it should. There are numerous reasons why it had to be so.

One of them is seen time and again in Scripture, where the first of something is replaced by a second. This type of occurrence is given for several reasons as well. For example, there is the law, and then there is grace. The two contrast, and yet they confirm the whole of God’s workings in that regard.

Likewise, the second replacing the first, like Jacob replacing Esau, is given to show us pictures of Christ, such as Him replacing Adam as man’s new federal Head.

Another reason there is to be a new king is the prophetic word. In Genesis 49, it was not to Benjamin, but to Judah, that the promise of Shiloh’s coming was made. Other hints, typologically and prophetically, have been given already concerning this as well.

God’s selection of Saul was not in error. Nor was it something He repented of. Instead, it was something that had to be endured in order for things to properly match His redemptive plans. God did not repent over sending Jesus to the cross. Rather, it is something that was set forth before the founding of the world in His mind.

It was something that had to be endured for the final redemption of man to be secured. As we read Scripture and as we live our lives, we should have this mind in us, never questioning God’s knowledge, ability, goodness, or purposes.

In His word, we should accept what is recorded there as appropriate, even if our limited mores and biased intellectual view of things conclude otherwise. And in our lives, we should accept that if we are in Christ, what happens to us, no matter how difficult and vexing it seems, is serving a good purpose and will be realized in a good result.

If we can keep this attitude, we will be grounded, faithful Christians whose moral compass is properly aligned with God and His will for us. May it be so as we continue our walk of life in His presence.

Closing Verse: “He who is of a proud heart stirs up strife,
But he who trusts in the Lord will be prospered.” Proverbs 28:25

Next Week: 1 Samuel 15:13-26 Because they are not life’s winners, this you must do… (Anathematize the Sinners – Amalek, Part II) ((31^st 1 Samuel Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He is the One who abases the haughty and exalts the humble. He regards the lowly, and the proud, He knows from afar. So yield yourself to Him, trust Him, and believe His word. In this, He will do great things for you and through you.

1 Samuel 15:1-12 (CG)

¹ And he said, Samuel, unto Saul, “Me, He sent, Yehovah, to anoint you, to king upon His people – upon Israel. And now, you must hear to voice words Yehovah.” ² Thus, He said, Yehovah Sabaoth, “I visited which He did, Amalek, to Israel, which he put to him in the way, in his ascent from Egypt. ³ Now, you must go, and you cause to strike Amalek, and you cause to anathematize them, all which to him. And not you will commiserate upon him. And you will cause to die from man until woman, from suckling and until being suckled, from ox and until sheep, from camel and until donkey.”

⁴ And he heard, Saul, the people. And he visited them in the spotted lambs, two hundred thousand footed, and ten thousands man Judah. ⁵ And he came, Saul, until city Amalek. And he caused to grapple in the valley.

⁶ And he said, Saul, unto the Kenite, “You must walk, and you must veer, and you must descend from midst Amalekite, lest I gather you with him. And you, you did kindness with all sons Israel in their ascent from Egypt.” And he veered, Kenite, from midst Amalek. ⁷ And he struck, Saul, Amalek, from Havilah – you go Shur, which upon faces Egypt. ⁸ And he manipulated Agag, king Amalek, alive. And all the people, he caused to anathematize to mouth sword. ⁹ And he commiserated, Saul, and the people, upon Agag, and upon best the flock, and the cattle, and the doubles, and upon the lambs, and upon all the good, and not he acquiesced – caused to anathematize them. And all the deputyship – disesteemed and being wasted, it they caused to anathematize.

¹⁰ And it was, word Yehovah, unto Samuel, to say, ¹¹ “I was sighed, for I caused to reign, Saul, to king. For he returned from after Me, and My words not he caused to rise.” And it burned to Samuel, and he shrieked unto Yehovah all the night. ¹² And he caused to rise early, Samuel, to encounter Saul in the morning. And it was caused to declare to Samuel, to say, “He went, Saul, the Carmel-ward, and behold, causing to station to him hand.” And he revolved, and he traversed, and he descended – the Gilgal.

 

1 Samuel 15:1-12 (NKJV)

¹ Samuel also said to Saul, “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over His people, over Israel. Now therefore, heed the voice of the words of the Lord. ² Thus says the Lord of hosts: ‘I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he ambushed him on the way when he came up from Egypt. ³ Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’ ”

⁴ So Saul gathered the people together and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand foot soldiers and ten thousand men of Judah. ⁵ And Saul came to a city of Amalek, and lay in wait in the valley.

⁶ Then Saul said to the Kenites, “Go, depart, get down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them. For you showed kindness to all the children of Israel when they came up out of Egypt.” So the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites. ⁷ And Saul attacked the Amalekites, from Havilah all the way to Shur, which is east of Egypt. ⁸ He also took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword. ⁹ But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best of the sheep, the oxen, the fatlings, the lambs, and all that was good, and were unwilling to utterly destroy them. But everything despised and worthless, that they utterly destroyed.

¹⁰ Now the word of the Lord came to Samuel, saying, ¹¹ “I greatly regret that I have set up Saul as king, for he has turned back from following Me, and has not performed My commandments.” And it grieved Samuel, and he cried out to the Lord all night. ¹² So when Samuel rose early in the morning to meet Saul, it was told Samuel, saying, “Saul went to Carmel, and indeed, he set up a monument for himself; and he has gone on around, passed by, and gone down to Gilgal.”

 

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson.

1 Samuel 14:46-52
And Saul, He Caught the Kingdom, Part II

(Typed 6 October 2025) In these verses, Saul has to figure out why the Lord will not respond to the question he asked Him. He will have to go through a step-by-step process to find the cause. Fortunately, he only has to go through a few steps to discover his answer.

A few days before typing this sermon, I had a problem. It was compounded by another problem that I have had at the house for almost a year. However, nobody could figure out the resolution to that.

My internet is amazingly fast, with the exception of one site. Unfortunately, it is a site I use multiple times every day, the church website. A normal post will take 15 seconds to upload and process, maybe less. At the house, it takes two minutes or more. This happens on any device, mine or anyone else’s.

These devices, including my iPad that I use here at church, work normally. A Frontier specialist at the house couldn’t figure it out. He switched, in the middle of an upload, from my internet to his cell service, and it immediately changed to working normally.

After many more tests, he said that in 30 years, he had never encountered this. The specialists at Frontier have no idea. So now imagine the time it took to fix the next problem.

When I went to upload a sermon on Tuesday morning, the upload was blocked. This has happened before if malicious code is inserted. That requires going to the server and rebooting it. That didn’t fix it.

The reason it didn’t work was that the only thing being blocked was the sermon. Everything else could be uploaded. So, I uploaded half the sermon. No problem. Then I tried posting the other half. Blocked. So I posted the first half of the second half. No problem.

Then I posted the second half of it. Blocked. I kept doing this until I figured out it was my translation of 1 Samuel 9. I tried half of it. Blocked. I posted the second half, and it was OK. I then tried the first three verses. Blocked. The rest posted ok.

Then I tried to post it verse by verse. Verse 2 was blocked. I then posted each half. No problem. Oh my! So I sent the verse to Sergio. He figured there was a virus hidden in that verse. So I made a new post and typed it manually. Blocked. Not a virus.

We went to a site that evaluated such things and put the verse in. It came up with about eighty pages of code. He ran that through ChatGPT. It analyzed it and said –

“… Saul – select and good … From his shoulders. Many WAF rules (including Sucuri) look for the SQL pattern SELECT … FROM in a case-insensitive way and often ignore punctuation and line breaks. Your wording creates that exact sequence.”

The words Select and From are used to form a code that malicious viruses use to ruin other people’s stuff. It took me two hours to get this figured out.

Text Verse: “And to him, it was son, and his name Saul – select and good. And not man from sons Israel good from him. From his shoulders and upward higher from all the people.” 1 Samuel 9:2 (CG)

Someday, we won’t have to worry about hackers, coding, and slow internet. Until then, we have to live through these things. Saul wanted to figure out why the Lord wouldn’t respond to him. At times, we might think the Lord isn’t listening to us, but He is.

We don’t need to worry about that. If a response to a prayer seems overdue in coming, that’s just the way the Lord’s timing works sometimes. If God answered every prayer we made right when we made it, we, not He, would never get anything done.

The way things are is just how they should be. This is a truth that we can learn from His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. He Struck Amalek (verses 46-48)

In the previous verses, Saul’s rash vow that no man should eat until the evening brought Israel a considerable amount of loss in their battle against the Philistines. The army was weakened due to a lack of nourishment, fatigue set in, and the victory was not as pronounced as it could have been.

Along with that, Jonathan didn’t hear Saul’s adjuration and ate some honey. This brought Saul to the point of exclaiming that Jonathan should die for what he did. Were it not for the men of the army speaking up for Jonathan and redeeming him from death, Saul would have carried out his word.

Along with these events, without any word from the Lord to instruct him concerning continued battle, Saul had no choice but to remain at the camp, allowing the Philistines to continue their retreat without further engagement by Israel. Because of this…

⁴⁶ Then Saul returned from pursuing the Philistines,

vayaal shaul m_eakhare p_elishtim – “And he ascended, Saul, from after Philistines.” This means that not only did Saul cease the attack, but he would have turned and ascended to his previous location of Gibeah, noted in verse 2, forsaking any further battle at this time.

Saul means Asked. As a consequence of his actions…

^{46 (con’t)} and the Philistines went to their own place.

u-ph_elishtim hal_ekhu limqomam – “And Philistines, they walked to their place.” The Philistines did not suffer complete defeat. They were able to return to their five cities and would be able to rest, rearm, and eventually reengage in the battle.

Despite this, the victory for Israel was considered a resounding success. They had caused the complete retreat of the Philistines from Israelite territory. These words begin to close out the previous section. Next, the narrative turns to a parenthetical explanation of the state of Israel with Saul as its head. Then, the rest of the previous narrative will resume and complete the chapter…

⁴⁷ So Saul established his sovereignty over Israel,

Rather: v_eshaul lakhad ham_elukhah al Yisrael – (“And Saul, he caught the kingdom upon Israel.” The NKJV says “so,” implying that these words are a result of the previous thought. This is not the intent. Rather, that thought was complete. What is presented here through the end of the chapter is a summary of Saul’s kingship.

This can be deduced because a general listing of the various foes he faced will be detailed. Following this will be a listing of various family members. After that, there is a note that Saul battles against the Philistines all his days. As such, this verse begins this short summary of Saul’s kingship.

First is the word lakad. It signifies to catch or capture. It is generally used to indicate taking a city in battle. It is also used when someone is taken during the casting of the lots. In all of its uses, there is a sense of purposeful capturing that has taken place.

It was used in this latter way when Saul was taken in the lots, having been selected as the first king of Israel. It was also used in verses 41 & 42 when Saul and Jonathan were taken by lot, and then Jonathan was taken when the lot was cast between the two of them.

The sense, then, is the seizure of something. Saying that he established his sovereignty is correct to a point, but it was his selection by lot, which was followed by his military victories as leader of the army, that is being highlighted. The kingly power was caught, and the full authority that goes with it was solidified under him.

The use of this word is specifically designed to help us understand what is going on. Therefore, because he has caught the kingdom and solidified his power, the next thought is better understood…

^{47 (con’t)} and fought

Still speaking of Saul: vayilakhem – “And he was fought.” Notice that it doesn’t say that Israel was fought. Though that is understood, Saul now stands as representative of the forces of Israel. One can see this thought expressed elsewhere –

“When it was told David, he gathered all Israel, crossed over the Jordan, and came to Helam. And the Syrians set themselves in battle array against David and fought with him. ¹⁸ Then the Syrians fled before Israel; and David killed seven hundred charioteers and forty thousand horsemen of the Syrians, and struck Shobach the commander of their army, who died there.” 2 Samuel 10:17, 18

Saul, as the leader of Israel’s armies was fought…

^{47 (con’t)} against all his enemies on every side,

saviv b_ekhal oy_evav – “around in all his hatings.” Saying that Saul was fought in this matter intensifies the state of Israel at that time. They were surrounded by those with whom they were at enmity. The kingdom began in a state of troubled vexation leading to constant battles…

^{47 (con’t)} against Moab, against the people of Ammon, against Edom, against the kings of Zobah, and against the Philistines.

b_emoav u-vivne amon u-v_eedom u-v_emalkhe tsovah u-bap_elishtim – “in Moab, and in sons Ammon, and in Edom, and in kings Zobah, and in the Philistines.” The foes mentioned almost encompass Israel. Moab is to the east of the Dead Sea, and Ammon is north of that, to the northeast corner of the Dead Sea. Edom is south of Moab, to the south and southeast of the Dead Sea.

The kings of Zobah were to the north and northeast of Israel. They extended far past Damascus, between the Euphrates and the Orontes. The Philistines held territory in the west of Canaan along the Mediterranean Sea.

Moab means From Father. Ammon signifies A People. Edom means Red or Ruddy, being etymologically connected to Adam. Zobah (Tsovah) is introduced here. Though probably not a Hebrew name, several Hebrew words that would be on the mind of a reader would give the possible sense of Engagement (as in interacting), Collective, or Beauty. Strong’s, however, defines it as Station. Philistines signifies Weakeners. With all these foes around…

^{47 (con’t)} Wherever he turned, he harassed them.

u-v_ekhol asher yiphneh yarshia – “And in all which he will turn, he will cause to condemn.” The word rasha is used here. It signifies to do or declare wrong, thus, to condemn. For example –

“For any kind of trespass, whether it concerns an ox, a donkey, a sheep, or clothing, or for any kind of lost thing which another claims to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whomever the judges condemn [rasha] shall pay double to his neighbor.” Exodus 22:9

The use of this word in such an unusual context is striking and has caused a lot of debate as to the intent. Translations, not knowing what to do with it, are all over the place: inflicted punishment, vexed, distressed, disturbed, harassed, routed, struck down, was victorious, overcame, was successful, to the worse, conquering, caused havoc, troubled, discomfited, handled them as wicked, etc.

There is no need, however, to depart from the word’s intended meaning. What is being said is that “he was fought” by these nations, implying that they felt they had a right to his kingdom. However, in fighting back and prevailing, he condemned their actions. Next, Israel’s ancient foe is highlighted…

⁴⁸ And he gathered an army

vayaas khayil – “And he made valor.” The noun khayil is widely rendered. It is derived from khul, to whirl or twist. Thus, it literally signifies a whirling, as in, “and he made a whirling.” That, however, gives the sense of a force. Something twisted is under tension. Something whirling is a force as it spins.

The word valor would be an aspect of such a force where courage and gallantry are highlighted, such as in combat. This is then reflected in the next words…

^{48 (con’t)} and attacked the Amalekites,

vayak eth amaleq – “and he caused to strike Amalek.” Amalek is not mentioned in the previously listed nations because they generally comprised bands of marauding raiders, not being established in a particular location. The main battle against this foe is described in Chapter 15.

Amalek is derived from the word am, people, and malaq, to nip or wring off the head of a bird with or without severing it from the body. They are The People Who Wring Off. They are those who are disconnected from the body and strive to disconnect the body.

^{48 (con’t)} and delivered Israel from the hands of those who plundered them.

vayatsel eth Yisrael miyad shosehu – “and he caused to snatch Israel from hand plundering him.” The meaning is derived from when Amalek would raid Israel when they were weak or unsuspecting. Samuel refers to the first instance as the reason for engaging them –

“Samuel also said to Saul, ‘The Lord sent me to anoint you king over His people, over Israel. Now therefore, heed the voice of the words of the Lord. ² Thus says the Lord of hosts: ‘I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he ambushed him on the way when he came up from Egypt.’” 1 Samuel 15:1, 2

With the military aspect of Saul’s kingdom noted, the next thought presented is that of his royal family…

Fighting the enemy on every side
But it’s no sweat when you know the Lord
It’s like going for a Sunday ride
When you stay grounded in His word

Yes, the enemies can be trying at times
They can seem overwhelming, but not for long
As soon as Bible reading hour chimes
Then comes the encouragement to make you strong

Then you get back in the fight, sure to win
Because you remember you are aligned with Jesus
The enemy won’t prevail. No, he’s done in
Because of the great thing God has done for us

II. Son of Valor (verses 49-52)

⁴⁹ The sons of Saul were Jonathan, Jishui, and Malchishua.

vayihyu b_ene shaul Yonathan v_eyishvi u-malkishua – “And they were, sons Saul, Jonathan, and Ishvi, and Malchishua.” Jonathan means Yah Has Given. Ishvi either comes from “man” and a shortened form of Yehovah, and thus, Man of Yah, or it comes from shavah, to level, and thus Equal or Equalize. It is believed that he is the same person as Abinadab in 1 Samuel 31:2.

Malchishua is derived from melekh, king, along with one of several possible roots. And so, it means something like King of Salvation, King of Help, My King is Opulence, or King of Wealth.

One other son of Saul is mentioned elsewhere, Ishbosheth (aka Eshbaal). It is not known why he isn’t listed here.

^{49 (con’t)} And the names of his two daughters were these: the name of the firstborn Merab, and the name of the younger Michal.

v_eshem sh_ete v_enotav shem ha’b_ekhirah merav v_eshem ha’q_ethanah mikhal – “And name two his daughters: name the firstborn, Merab, and name the diminutive Michal.” Merab means Multiplication or Increase, coming from ravav, a verb signifying to multiply or increase.

Michal is identical to mikal, a rivulet. But it could also be a shortened form of Michael, derived from mi (who), k (according to), and el (God), and thus means Who Is Like God.

⁵⁰ The name of Saul’s wife was Ahinoam the daughter of Ahimaaz.

v_eshem esheth shaul akhinoam bath akhimaats – “And name, wife Saul, Ahinoam – daughter Ahimaaz.” Ahinoam is derived from akh, brother, and the verb naem, to be pleasant. Therefore, various possibilities are Brother of Pleasantness, My Brother is Delight, Kindred to Sweetness, or Delightful Ally. The last two look at “brother” in the figurative sense.

Ahimaaz is derived from akh, brother, and the Arabic maats, enraged. Thus, it is believed to mean Brother of Anger or My Brother is Wrath. Strong’s defines it as coming from atsah, to fasten. If so, it may mean something like My Brother is Fastened, Brother of Closure, or something similar.

^{50 (con’t)} And the name of the commander of his army was Abner the son of Ner, Saul’s uncle.

v_eshem sar ts_evao aviner ben ner dod shaul – “And name, commander his host, Abiner son Ner, uncle – Saul.” The name is normally spelled Abner. Here, it is uniquely spelled Abiner. The name comes from av, father, and ner, lamp. Thus, it would mean Father of Light, Father Is a Lamp, etc. However, the inclusion of the i would make it possessive, My Father Is Light (a Lamp). Ner means Lamp.

⁵¹ Kish was the father of Saul, and Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel.

This ends the parenthesis that began in verse 47: v_eqish avi shaul v_ener avi avner ben aviel – “And Kish, father Saul, and Ner, father Abner, son Abiel.)” Kish was previously defined as Ensnared. The difficulty with the relationships between these men was discussed in 1 Samuel 9. Refer to the comments there if you need to. Abiel means God Is My Father. Next, the words of verse 46 resume to close out the chapter…

⁵² Now there was fierce war with the Philistines all the days of Saul.

vat_ehi ha’milkhamah khazaqah al p_elishtim kol y_eme shaul – “And it was the battle strong upon Philistines all days Saul.” One can see how the thought of verse 46 flows directly into these words –

“And he ascended, Saul, from after Philistines. And Philistines, they walked to their place. … ⁵² And it was the battle strong upon Philistines all days Saul. And he saw, Saul, all man powerful, and all son valor, and he gathered him unto him.”

Saul was not able to completely subdue the Philistines due to his rash vow, leading to a lack of response by the Lord, even after the troops were refreshed. This meant he had to face the enemy time and again throughout his reign.

In order to meet the demands of warfare against the Philistines and the other foes mentioned above, this final thought is presented…

*^{52 (fin)} And when Saul saw any strong man or any valiant man, he took him for himself.

v_eraah shaul kal ish gibor v_ekhal ben khayil vayaasphehu elav – “And he saw, Saul, all man powerful, and all son valor, and he gathered unto him.” This statement seems a bit disconnected from a typical ending to the chapter. Some think it is an explanation of the previous sentence. That is true, but it is setting up the later narrative of David as well –

“Then one of the servants answered and said, ‘Look, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, who is skillful in playing, a mighty man of valor [khayil], a man of war, prudent in speech, and a handsome person; and the Lord is with him.’
¹⁹ Therefore Saul sent messengers to Jesse, and said, ‘Send me your son David, who is with the sheep.’” 1 Samuel 16:18, 19

Saul’s theocratic reign essentially ended in Chapter 13. The ending of his earthly reign and the need to anoint his successor begins in the next chapter. That will bring about the events that eventually lead to the death of Saul and his sons at the end of 1 Samuel. Thus, the words closing out this chapter anticipate David joining Saul’s army as a part of that process.

A list of names is found in His word
Without any reason given for it being there
But remember the lesson that you’ve heard
To find Jesus, just research the word with care

He is found in what God is telling us
He is the reason for the giving of the word
So be sure to think about how it all points to Jesus
Yes, remember this lesson that you’ve heard

The Lord wants us to see His Son in it
To search for Him, because He is there
It may take time and study – more than a bit
But you will be rewarded with Jesus everywhere

III. Christ in the Contents

There are two accounts to be evaluated. The first encompasses the contents of verses 31-46 and also includes verse 52. The second comprises verses 47-51.

The first began in verse 31 with the statement that Israel had driven back the Philistines from Michmash to Aijalon. It is saying that the Weakeners were driven from the Treasury to Place of Strength. Thus, it means that Israel held Aijalon (Place of Strength), and it is where the subsequent events take place.

Thus, the spiritual battle being described shows that the Weakeners will be beaten. They will no longer mishandle the Bible, and Israel will be in the place of strength when they are battling in faith. This is based on Jonathan’s leading the battle solely through faith in the Lord.

The next thing introduced in verse 32, which is never condemned elsewhere, is the unusual note that the people supposedly sinned to Yehovah by eating the blood. But what was their action based on? It was based on Jonathan’s act of faith, which eventually led to Saul’s rash oath that no one should eat.

Jonathan had eaten, and he was strengthened. The people followed Jonathan’s act of faith –

“Then Jesus said to them, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. ⁵⁴ Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. ⁵⁵ For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. ⁵⁶ He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. ⁵⁷ As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me. ⁵⁸ This is the bread which came down from heaven—not as your fathers ate the manna, and are dead. He who eats this bread will live forever.’” John 6:53-58

The specific animals point to Christ as the plunder of the Philistines. The sheep, tson, comes from a root signifying to migrate. Think of the migration of people in search of Christ, just as they are in search of food. Of the tson, the Topical Lexicon rightly states, “The history of flock sacrifices informs present gratitude for the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ.”

The cattle, baqar, comes from a root signifying to inquire or seek, which is what those who want to find Christ will do. These cattle are the plunder of the Weakeners, meaning those who rob others of Christ. Slaughtering them “earthward” looks to the internment of Christ in the tomb. This was followed by the people eating the blood –

“Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.’” Luke 22:20

Saul, however, defaults to the law in verse 33 after being told that the people were sinning against Yehovah. But the blood is the life. As such, the blood of Christ is eternal life. Saul, however, sees this as a covert act and calls for a stone to be rolled unto him. This would be used to properly slaughter the animals.

In verse 34, Saul changes the names of the animals, calling for the people to bring their ox, shor, and seh, sheep. The roots give the sense of turning and making desolate. In this case, they are to be taken in a negative sense of the people turning from their faith, making it desolate.

Instead of honoring the Lord through faith as Jonathan had, Saul has a confused sense of what is right. He is seeking the truth, but he is theologically confused and can never seem to put his foot down in the right place, meaning trusting by faith.

Verse 35 noted, “And he built, Saul, altar to Yehovah. It, he caused to begin to build, altar to Yehovah.” Just after the Ten Commandments were given, the law of the altar was detailed. Saul took the stone that he used for the sacrifices and began to build an altar with it.

What was the altar described in Exodus 20 intended to anticipate? Jesus. Saul has missed the point of salvation by faith and is determined to build an altar to Yehovah, thus building his own anticipation of the Messiah instead of what God offered through faith. Despite battling the Weakeners, Saul can never seem to defeat them because his actions lack the faith necessary to traverse that gap, something Jonathan readily did.

The next thing mentioned was in verse 36. Saul desired to go down by night after the Philistines, the Weakeners, plundering them until the morning. But that is contrary to the message of Jesus. He notes in John 9:4 that the “night is coming when no one can work.”

The people, desiring to do Saul’s will, told him that he should do what was good in his eyes. However, that alerted the priest that they should first “near, here, unto ‘the God.’” It would be unfathomable to build an altar to Yehovah and then not ask God if He was with them in the venture they planned to set out on.

Understanding the priest’s words is necessary to understanding what is going on. The article before God is always used to express being in a right relationship with God or to contrast those who are not. In this case, the answer for Saul comes back right away, but it comes through the lack of any answer!

He asks his questions of the Lord in verse 37. The first is whether he should descend after the Philistines. The second is whether the Lord will deliver them into his hand. As noted, if only the first question had been asked, the Lord could have said yes but have handed Israel into the hands of the Philistines.

Such could be expected after the men had eaten the blood. However, neither question was answered that day. Saul completely misunderstood what was going on and called over the corners of the people in verse 38. They are defined by the word pinnah, a corner or cornerstone. It is the place of stability, strength, and support.

They represent the stability of people, a stability only found in Christ, the Chief Cornerstone of Psalm 118. In verse 39, Saul tells the people that if the sin he assumes is the cause for the Lord not responding is found, even in Jonathan, Yah Has Given, he would die. Jonathan represents those who are given their gift (faith) from the Lord.

These men never responded. Instead, they awaited the falling of the lot. As such, in verse 40, Saul divided himself and Jonathan from them, side against side. Again, as in verse 36, they emphatically told Saul ha’tov b_eenekha aseh, “the good in your eyes, you must do.”

Therefore, in verse 41, Saul said to the Lord God of Israel, “You must give-ward spotless.” In response from the Lord, Saul and Jonathan were taken. Therefore, in verse 42, Saul called for the lot to fall between himself and Jonathan. When it was cast, it said, “And he was caught, Jonathan.”

Saul assumed that this meant there was guilt in Jonathan. But Saul had said, “You must give-ward spotless.” The result was Jonathan being caught. Saul assumed the lot favored him, meaning he must be innocent. But that is not the case. Only Saul assumes the guilt is in others.

However, he is the one who has failed to understand Jonathan’s act of faith. Everyone else seemed to understand it except Saul. Saul next pressed Jonathan, asking what he did. Jonathan, now assuming he had done wrong because of Saul’s adamancy, admitted he tasted honey with the end of his branch.

This foreshadows going to the word and tasting Paul’s writings, finding in them grace through faith. Because Saul found error in that, Jonathan acknowledges he should die. Saul agreed with an emphatic statement (verse 44) that this is surely what would come about.

Saul was more concerned with saving face than acknowledging Jonathan’s proven ability. However, this was not the case with the people. In verse 45, they recognized what Saul had been unable or unwilling to acknowledge, exclaiming, “The ‘Yah Has Given’ will die?” Rather, it is the faith given to him by the Lord that brought about the salvation in Israel!

The intent of the words is obvious. Unless one uses the gift of the Lord, grace through faith, salvation will never come about. The contrast to Saul returning to the law for a sacrificial altar is highlighted in their words.

It is reflective of the words of Hebrews 10:26, “For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.” Sacrifices after the coming of Christ are no longer acceptable. Only faith in what He has done is accredited to man for salvation.

The people’s words concerning Jonathan not being harmed acknowledge that it is he who is right with God, something the lot had already disclosed. Because of that, it said that the people redeemed Jonathan. In other words, the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith has been upheld.

Next, the narrative jumps to verse 52 as a closing thought, noting that the battle remained strong upon the Philistines all the days of Saul. The typological meaning is that during the days of asking for the truth, the spiritual battle will continue. Only when the truth is decided upon will it be complete.

During his rule, however, it noted that when Saul, Asked, saw powerful sons of valor, he gathered them unto him. The purpose of that statement will find its most important realization in Chapter 16 with the selection of David to serve him.

The reason why Saul did not fully defeat the Philistines, and the reason he will continue to fight them for the rest of his life, is that he cannot get himself to come down solely on the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith alone. He keeps inserting himself into the equation.

Understanding this, the second section, which comprises verses 47-51, was inserted as an explanation of the rule of Saul. The meaning can be seen in the names provided.

It essentially says, “And Asked caught the kingdom upon Israel. And he was fought around in all his hatings.” Those seeking the truth, represented by Saul, will lead Israel before the time of the millennial kingdom. This fight will be against several named enemies. The first is Moab, From Father, representing those who have rejected Christ –

“You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.” John 8:44

Next is Ammon, A People. They are the Jews who are “not My people,” meaning those who rejected Jesus, according to Hosea 1 and Romans 9.

That is followed by Edom, Red, representing those who have not transferred from the headship of Adam to that of Christ. They are still unregenerate and fallen.

Lastly, Zobah, was named. Of the various root words the name resembles, one gets the sense of it reflecting those who engage against the will of the Lord, taking their station against the Lord’s people. The words concerning Saul’s engagement with these foes were unusual but understandable: “And in all which he will turn, he will cause to condemn.”

In other words, these contrary spiritual groups come with their falsities, and each is shown to be false and condemned as such.

Verse 48 noted Saul making valor, meaning a strong force, and striking the ancient foe, Amalek. The Amalekites are not of the body, and they strive to disconnect the body, just as the Philistines and others do. The whole picture is that of law versus grace and those who strive from one side or the other.

With that short section complete, the naming of those in Saul’s family was provided. They form a marvelous picture of God in Christ. Saul’s sons are Yah Has Given, Man of Yah, and King of Salvation. It forms a picture of the incarnation and what Jesus would accomplish.

Saul’s daughters are Multiplication (Increase) and Who Is Like God. They describe the effect of Christ’s work in the people of the world. His people form a body that has multiplied and that bears the resemblance of Christ.

The wife of Saul is “Kindred to Sweetness, the daughter of Brother of Closure.” The verb translated as sweetness naem, was used in describing Solomon’s beloved, representing the church, in Song of Songs 7:6. It is those God cherishes and to whom He then provides eternal salvation. The names reflect the relationship of Christ to His people.

Next, Abiner was named. Understanding that the word dod, uncle, also means beloved, the words say, “And name commander his host, My Father Is Light, son Lamp, beloved – Asked.” The symbolism is explained in Revelation, where the Son is said to be the Lamp of God through which God radiates to His people.

One can see the Father/Son relationship that is expressed in light upon those who have asked for and received the truth in Christ.

The last words of verse 51 refer to those ensnared by the law and living without Christ (Kish), but who then lead to those who will seek the truth (Asked). They will find what they seek in Christ whose Father is God.

The family of Saul is given to provide these hints of Christ. They reveal His relationship within the Godhead and with the people of God. Like other such clusters of names, the word highlights these things while giving a real account concerning some of those we will interact with again as we continue through the coming chapters.

Like the words concerning Saul mentioned at the beginning of the sermon, Select and From, God is giving us coded information in His word. The way to retrieve it is like the process I went through to figure out what was wrong with our website.

We have to carefully, methodically, and meticulously search each word and its possible connection to what God is telling us elsewhere. Once that is determined, we can then take that coded information and lay it out to reveal what is being expressed.

The process is long and tiring at times, but it is worth the effort. Then we can see what is on the mind of God and adjust our lives to what is being expressed. Unfortunately, I know people who have been told about the problem with law and how it is opposed to grace, and yet they continue down the path of law observance.

It is as if their operating system is broken and they choose not to fix it. Regarding that translation, the easiest thing for me to do once I found out what was causing the uploading problem would have been to change the translation, tweaking it so that the problem would just go away. That is what ChatGPT suggested.

But that doesn’t solve the greater problem. The word is set, and it cannot be manipulated to suit our whims. Rather, we must find the “exemption code” and apply it to our walk with God. In the case of the church website, the translation remained unchanged, and I added my IP address to the exemption list.

By doing that, anything I publish for the website from my home IP address is overlooked, even if it is suspicious. In the case of our sin, we must have an exemption in place, or we will remain in our sin. The exemption comes by moving from law to grace. Without that, we will never be restored to God.

All people are born under law, be it the law Adam violated or the Law of Moses. None are exempt from law without receiving Christ’s perfect righteousness. Take to heart what is being expressed in these stories of 1 Samuel. The same theme keeps getting repeated again and again in various ways to instruct us on how to find the right path.

Let us look to Jesus in faith. In doing so, our steps will be in line with what God intends.

Closing Verse: “And we have stable the prophetic word which attending we do well, as a lamp shining in an obscure place until that day – it shall gleam through, and light bearing – it shall arise in your hearts.” 1 Peter 1:19 (CG)

Next Week: 1 Samuel 15:1-12 Funner than chicken dinners with no check, super fun… (Anathematize the Sinners – Amalek, Part I) (30^th 1 Samuel Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He is the One who abases the haughty and exalts the humble. He regards the lowly, and the proud, He knows from afar. So yield yourself to Him, trust Him, and believe His word. In this, He will do great things for you and through you.

1 Samuel 14:46-52 (CG)

⁴⁶ And he ascended, Saul, from after Philistines. And Philistines, they walked to their place.

⁴⁷ And Saul, he caught the kingdom upon Israel. And he was fought around in all his hatings: in Moab, and in sons Ammon, and in Edom, and in kings Zobah, and in the Philistines. And in all which he will turn, he will cause to condemn. ⁴⁸ And he made valor, and he caused to strike Amalek, and he caused to snatch Israel from hand plundering him.

⁴⁹ And they were, sons Saul, Jonathan, and Ishvi, and Malchishua. And name two his daughters: name the firstborn, Merab, and name the diminutive Michal. ⁵⁰ And name, wife Saul, Ahinoam – daughter Ahimaaz. And name, commander his host, Abiner son Ner, uncle – Saul. ⁵¹ And Kish, father Saul, and Ner, father Abner, son Abiel.

⁵² And it was the battle strong upon Philistines all days Saul. And he saw, Saul, all man powerful, son valor, and he gathered unto him.

 

1 Samuel 14:46-52 (NKJV)

⁴⁶ Then Saul returned from pursuing the Philistines, and the Philistines went to their own place.

⁴⁷ So Saul established his sovereignty over Israel, and fought against all his enemies on every side, against Moab, against the people of Ammon, against Edom, against the kings of Zobah, and against the Philistines. Wherever he turned, he harassed them. ⁴⁸ And he gathered an army and attacked the Amalekites, and delivered Israel from the hands of those who plundered them.

⁴⁹ The sons of Saul were Jonathan, Jishui, and Malchishua. And the names of his two daughters were these: the name of the firstborn Merab, and the name of the younger Michal. ⁵⁰ The name of Saul’s wife was Ahinoam the daughter of Ahimaaz. And the name of the commander of his army was Abner the son of Ner, Saul’s uncle. ⁵¹ Kish was the father of Saul, and Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel.

⁵² Now there was fierce war with the Philistines all the days of Saul. And when Saul saw any strong man or any valiant man, he took him for himself.

 

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson

1 Samuel 14:31-45
And Saul, He Caught the Kingdom, Part I

(Typed 29 September 2025) In these verses, the people transgress by eating meat with blood in it. This prohibition is something that predates the law, going back to the time of Noah after the flood. It was later mentioned in Acts 15 during the Council of Jerusalem.

Paul clarifies what is acceptable and unacceptable in the church age in his epistles. He mentions nothing about consuming blood. So why was it included in Acts 15? It was an accommodation to the Jewish believers who would not have understood the freedoms found in Christ. Blood pudding, anyone?

There had to be a transition time for people to understand what was going on in redemptive history. God moved from the time of law to the time of grace, and from the headship of His governance of Israel as the stewards of the law to Gentiles being the predominant force during the church age. The reason for the prohibition first given to Noah was stated by the Lord…

Text Verse: “But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.” Genesis 9:4

This prohibition was repeated in the law, several times. In Deuteronomy 12:23, it says, “Only you must seize to failure of eating the blood. For the blood, it the soul, and not you will eat the soul with the meat” (CG).

The blood is directly equated to the soul. This bears on a multitude of other verses in Scripture. It carries theological weight concerning the role of the Messiah. Eating blood was forbidden because of this. The anticipation of the Messiah is what the Bible is focusing on when this tenet is brought up, such as in these verses from 1 Samuel 14.

Pay attention to what is being conveyed. This wasn’t a legalistic mandate being held over Israel to see how poorly they would perform while living under the law. It is information being conveyed about what God is doing in Christ.

Such great things as this are to be found in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. You Dealt Covertly! (verses 31-35)

³¹ Now they had driven back the Philistines that day from Michmash to Aijalon.

vayaku bayom ha’hu bap_elishtim mimikhmas ayalonah – “And they will cause to strike in the day, the it, in the Philistines from Michmash Aijalon-ward.” The heroic faith and engagement of the enemy by Jonathan have been highlighted so far in Chapter 14. That led to a massive victory, driving the Philistines from where they were stationed in Michmash, 15-20 miles away to Aijalon.

As that is west of Michmash in the Shephelah, one can see that this wasn’t just a battle where the Philistines were beaten back slowly. Instead, they were in retreat, heading downward to their coastal enclave with Israel pursuing them and cutting them down.

Philistines means Weakeners. Michmash is derived from kamas, to store away, and figuratively, storing, as in the memory. Jones’ agrees and defines it as Treasure or Treasury.

Aijalon comes from ayyal, deer. Hence, it signifies Place of the Deer. However, that comes from the same as ayil, ram, which is derived from a word indicating strength. Thus, in Joshua, it means Place of Strength.

Because of the heat of the battle, the length of the pursuit, and the lack of food as they continued, it next says…

^{31 (con’t)} So the people were very faint.

vayaaph ha’am m_eod – “And he dimmed, the people, very.” Jonathan’s efforts led to Israel seizing the initiative was, unfortunately, hindered by Saul’s rash command not to eat during the day. Jonathan tasted a little honey, and his eyes were able to see, but the opposite effect took place among the people. One can see the contrast in the words of this clause –

Vs. 27 – And they saw, his eyes.
Vs. 31 – And he dimmed, the people, very.

Because of the expenditure of energy, the men were famished at the end of the day’s battle…

³² And the people rushed on the spoil,

vayaas ha’am el shalal – “And he made [k.], the people, unto booty.” The written and the oral Hebrew are different. The written says, vayaas ha’am el shalal – “And he made, the people unto booty.” The oral says, vayaat ha’am el ha’shalal – “And he swooped, the people, unto the booty.”

The reason for this is that the grammar as written is clunky. To correct it, they went to verse 15:19, where it notes the people swooped (iyt) unto the booty. There is no need for this, but this is what people do in their attempt to outsmart the Giver of the word.

One can see how things were in these ancient battles. Once the Philistines were beaten back, the Israelites would have immediately seized the goods in their camp.

Even if the Philistines were to regain the initiative against the battle lines, they would still have to contend with either fighting the camp to regain their supplies or accept the victory but retire without them. In Israel’s case, they secured the supplies and also retained the victory on the battle lines.

^{32 (con’t)} and took sheep, oxen, and calves, and slaughtered them on the ground;

vayiqkhu tson u-vaqar u-vene vaqar vayishkhatu ar_etsah – “And he took flock and cattle and sons cattle, and they slaughtered earthward.” As the men returned, they were spent and needed to strengthen themselves. Therefore, they went right to the spoils of the enemy. The spoil they came to is specifically noted as tson, flock, coming from a root signifying to migrate, and baqar, cattle, coming from a word indicating to seek or inquire.

Saying they slaughtered them earthward explains the next clause. The men didn’t bother to cut the animals in a way that would bleed them out. Instead, they butchered them in a fit of hunger, the animals fell to the ground, and the people began slicing and dicing. Though they had been disobedient, Saul’s ridiculous edict led them to this point…

^{32 (con’t)} and the people ate them with the blood.

vayokhal ha’am al ha’dam – “And he ate, the people, upon the blood.” The words “upon the blood,” mean that they are eating over the animals that haven’t been properly bled. As the blood is the life, they are essentially consuming its life. This was forbidden in the law in several places. For example –

“And whatever man of the house of Israel, or of the strangers who dwell among you, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood, and will cut him off from among his people. ¹¹ For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.” Leviticus 17:10, 11

Eating the blood is a definite transgression of the law. But it appears there is a second transgression based on the previous clause, which said, “And he took flock and cattle and sons cattle.” The way that is worded may imply that they also violated this precept –

“And bullock or sheep, it and its son, not you will slaughter in day one.” Leviticus 22:28 (CG)

Without regard to the law, the men came upon the booty and tore into it…

³³ Then they told Saul, saying, “Look, the people are sinning against the Lord by eating with the blood!”

vayagidu l_eshaul lemor hineh ha’am khotim l_eY_ehovah leekhol al ha’dam – “And they caused to declare to Saul, to say, ‘Behold! The people sinning to Yehovah to eat upon the blood.’” To understand some of what is being conveyed from a biblical perspective, a review of Deuteronomy 12 is necessary.

First, to say that they were sinning against Yehovah could simply mean they were violating the law, something which is true. But it doesn’t explain why the law was given. In Deuteronomy 12:16, it said, “Only you shall not eat the blood; you shall pour it on the earth like water.”

This was based on what was cited from Leviticus 17. Included also in that chapter, it says –

“Whatever man of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who dwell among you, who hunts and catches any animal or bird that may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood and cover it with dust; ¹⁴ for it is the life of all flesh. Its blood sustains its life. Therefore I said to the children of Israel, ‘You shall not eat the blood of any flesh, for the life of all flesh is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.’” Leviticus 17:13, 14

The reason is complicated and should be supplemented by reviewing the sermon from Leviticus 17. In short, the prohibition on eating blood was given because it is the vehicle of life. For this reason, the Lord reserved all blood to Himself.

To eat blood was to assimilate into oneself something that belonged to God alone. It was, therefore, idolatrous to use it in any other way than as designated by Him. If it was not used in the rites of the tabernacle, it was to be poured out and covered with earth.

In pouring out the blood like water and then covering it with dust, the typology points directly to Christ. From the dust, man was made. But he wasn’t yet alive. Only when the Lord breathed into the nostrils of man did he become a nephesh khayah, or “soul living.” In man or animal, when the life is poured out, the dust reclaims ownership over it.

This is true with only one exception. It is Jesus, the Lord God, who breathed life into man. And yet, He then descended from the man He breathed life into. When His blood was shed upon the ground from which His earthly body came, He gave up His soul. And yet the ground found no victory over Him.

His life returned, His soul reanimated, and by the power of the Lord God, He walked out of the tomb. Atonement for us was made when He poured out His soul. And yet now, He lives. Only in Him is true and eternal life. The typology must be maintained, even when not a part of the sacrificial rites at the altar.

As the Bible says that the blood is the soul, it gives insight into one of the doctrines of theology taught by Scripture: What is the soul, and where does it come from? There are several views on this, and this is the perfect time to learn them. Three basic views are:

The Preexistence View. Of this, there are two separate divisions. The first is the Platonic view, which says the soul was never created. The second is the Christian (created) view. This says the soul was created from eternity. Without explaining all the details of it or the reasons why, it is a heretical view.

The Creation View. This assumes God directly creates a new individual soul for everyone born into this world. The body is generated through the parents, but the soul is created by God. It says that the soul is created at the moment of conception.

One reason for holding to this view is that all genetic information is present at conception. However, one reason why this view is wrong is that God completed His work of creation on Day 6. Another obvious reason is that the blood, which carries all the genetic information, is called the soul right in this verse.

Last, is the Traducian View. This comes from the Latin word tradux, the branch of a vine. This view says that each human being is a branch of the parents. Both soul and body are naturally generated by father and mother.

There is abundant biblical evidence for this third view. Eve was made from Adam, not separately. There is the fact noted by Paul that both males and females come from a union of males and females. Eve is called the mother of all the living. The Bible says that Adam had children in his image, thus natural generation is implied.

The Greek word for flesh, sarx, can mean both a physical body and a whole person with a body. Acts 17 says that all humans are derived from one man (“one blood”). Hebrews says that Levi was in Abraham’s loins, implying a physical transmission. In the Bible, the body in a womb is considered a person.

Paul says that all men sinned through one man, demonstrating that sin is transmitted by natural process – something that would not occur with a created soul. David even says that man is conceived in sin. Jesus is said to come from the loins (or body) of David, demonstrating a genetic connection. Paul shows that humans are a soul-body unity. The soul is “naked” without the body (2 Corinthians 5:3).

These and many other reasons from Scripture and from thinking the matter through clearly demonstrate the importance of the precept.

Understanding the matter of these men drinking blood, and what that means in relation to the greater truths found in Scripture, we can better see why this is such a grievous sin…

^{33 (con’t)} So he said, “You have dealt treacherously; roll a large stone to me this day.”

vayomer b_egadtem golu elay ha’yom even g_edolah – “And he said, ‘You dealt covertly! You must roll unto me, the day, stone whopping.’” The word bagad signifies to cover. Their act is covert, or hidden, and Saul is exposing it. Having a whopping stone rolled over was so that the animals could be laid on it, allowing the blood to flow out rather than pooling in the body as the animal lay on the ground…

³⁴ Then Saul said, “Disperse yourselves among the people, and say to them, ‘Bring me here every man’s ox and every man’s sheep, slaughter them here, and eat;

vayomer shaul putsu va’am vaamartem lahem hagishu elay ish shoro v_eish s_eyehu u-sh_ekhatem bazeh vaakhaltem – “And he said, Saul, ‘You must scatter in the people, and you said to them, ‘You must cause to approach unto me man, his ox, and man, his sheep.’ And they slaughtered in this, and they ate.” Saul uses the terms shor, bullock, coming from a word signifying to turn, and seh, sheep, coming from a root believed to mean “to rush,” and thus to be or make desolate.

His instructions are to go throughout the camp and make his stone the sole spot for slaughtering the animals. He wanted to personally observe compliance with this law…

^{34 (con’t)} and do not sin against the Lord by eating with the blood.’” So every one of the people brought his ox with him that night, and slaughtered it there.

v_elo tekhetu l_eY_ehovah leekhol el ha’dam vayagishu khal ha’am ish shoro v_eyado ha’laylah vayishkhatu sham – “‘and not they will sin to Yehovah to eat unto the blood.’ And they caused to approach, all the people, man, his ox, in his hand the night. And they slaughtered there.” Now, only the shor, ox, is mentioned. Saul’s instructions were obeyed, and the people came to the stone designated for this purpose. With this done, it next says…

³⁵ Then Saul built an altar to the Lord. This was the first altar that he built to the Lord.

vayiven shaul mizbeakh l_eY_ehovah otho hekhel livnoth mizbeakh l_eY_ehovah – “And he built, Saul, altar to Yehovah. It, he caused to begin to build, altar to Yehovah.” There are a multitude of speculations concerning the meaning of these words –

Saul began to build, but did not finish.
Saul began to build altars to Yehovah, this being the first.
Saul began, among the kings of Israel, the building of altars.
Saul made the first public acknowledgment to the Lord for the victories and care He doted on them.
Etc.

None of these reflects the simple words of the Hebrew. The word otho is a direct object marker. It is normally left untranslated, but because the form is accompanied by the 3^rd person marker, it signifies “it.” That then is used to describe something. In this case, it is the repeated words “altar to Yehovah.”

And he built, Saul, altar to Yehovah.
It, he caused to begin to build, altar to Yehovah.

The meaning is, “Saul built an altar to Yehovah. He used this whopping stone as the foundational stone of this altar to Yehovah.

When in the battle with your foes
There is no need to vow or adjure
The conflict is one of which the Lord knows
And if you are His, He will guide you, for sure

To make a vow about something you should do
Will only complicate the path you’re on
Just get to the task without a lot of todo
No regrets will exist, after it’s done and gone

There is no need to get others involved, also
When your words could trap them too
Pray for the Lord to guide you, and then go
Keep it simple! This you should do

II. Dying, He Will Die (Verses 36-40)

³⁶ Now Saul said, “Let us go down after the Philistines by night, and plunder them until the morning light; and let us not leave a man of them.”

vayomer shaul ner_edah akhare ph_elishtim laylah v_enavozah vahem ad or ha’boqer v_elo nasher bahem ish – “And he said, Saul, ‘Let us descend after Philistines – night, and let us plunder in them until light, the morning. And not may we cause to leave in them man.’” What a difference a meal makes! It is the night of the same day.

After eating and getting a bit of rest, Saul impetuously determines to go after the Philistines. There is nothing wrong with this, but it is a rather rash decision, especially when considering that he has already made one blunder that cost them a greater victory. As for the reaction…

^{36 (con’t)} And they said, “Do whatever seems good to you.”

vayom_eru kal ha’tov b_eenekha aseh – “And they said, ‘All the good in your eyes you must do.’” Ever obedient to the desires of Saul, as is traditionally the case with military men, they anticipate a greater slaughter. Therefore, they rally behind the king. However…

^{36 (con’t)} Then the priest said, “Let us draw near to God here.”

vayomer hakohen niqr_evah halom el ha’elohim – “And he said, the priest, ‘Let us near, here, unto the God.’” This would be Ahijah, noted in verses 3 & 18. It is likely that his words are the reason for the otherwise inexplicable mention of the altar in the previous verse. With an altar to the Lord, Ahijah may have thought, “Why would you build an altar to the Lord and not stop to ask Him for His direction concerning such a great matter?’’

Saying “near, here” refers to the altar. Saying “the God” signifies that he is referring to the Lord. Using the article is expressive. It refers to the one true God in relation to man. It is used to reveal those who are in a right relationship with Him, or to contrast those who are not in a right relationship with Him. Ahijah is ensuring the former through his petition.

³⁷ So Saul asked counsel of God, “Shall I go down after the Philistines?

vayishal shaul belohim ha’ered akhare ph_elishtim – “And he asked, Saul, in God, ‘I will descend after Philistines?’” The word shaal, to ask, is common. But in this case, it makes a punny, “And he asked, Asked, in God.” Saul petitions as Ahijah suggested. To not do so, especially after it was suggested to him, would have been unconscionable, especially when the law has already been violated.

Saul, however, doesn’t just ask if he should descend after the enemy…

^{37 (con’t)} Will You deliver them into the hand of Israel?”

khatit_enem b_eyad Yisrael – “You will deliver them in hand Israel?” The question is actually a prudent afterthought. Saul may have thought, “The Lord may say to pursue the Philistines, but He may not deliver them in our hands because we have offended Him when the men failed to drain the animals’ blood.” Hence, the additional thought will provide the full scope of what should be expected.

^{37 (con’t)} But He did not answer him that day.

v_elo anahu bayom ha’hu – “And not He answered in the day, the it.” We are left to guess why an answer was not given. The continued narrative seems to answer the matter, but does it? For all we know, Saul’s double question, “shall we descend after,” and “will you deliver,” may have been the reason no answer was given. It may be the Lord would have taught him a lesson if only the first question was asked.

It also could be that the Lord was upset because the people ate blood, and this was a way of getting that rectified. Or perhaps Saul figured someone had violated the oath he had made. If so, then he wanted to know. The latter option seems to be what Saul is thinking…

³⁸ And Saul said, “Come over here, all you chiefs of the people, and know and see what this sin was today.

vayomer shaul goshu halom kol pinoth ha’am u-d_eu u-r_eu bamah hay_ethah ha’khatath ha’zoth ha’yom – “And he said, Saul, ‘You must approach here, all corners the people, and you must know, and you must see in what it was the sin, the this, the day.’” The word pinnah signifies a corner.

As a corner provides strength, support, and stability to a wall or a side of something, so does the leader to a group of people. Saul calls these leaders to determine why the Lord has not responded. This word, pinnah, is used to describe Christ –

“The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone [pinnah].
²³ This was the Lord’s doing;
It is marvelous in our eyes.” Psalm 118:22, 23

These corner supports from among the men are called to stand and participate in order to hopefully obtain a decision concerning the matter at hand.

³⁹ For as the Lord lives, who saves Israel, though it be in Jonathan my son, he shall surely die.”

ki khai Y_ehovah ha’moshia eth Yisrael ki im yeshno b_eyonathan beni ki moth yamuth – “For alive Yehovah the ‘causing to save Israel,’ for if it exists in Jonathan, my son, for dying, he will die.” When Saul mentions Jonathan by name, which would lead one to otherwise think he suspects him, he is probably saying, “I don’t care whose fault it is, even to my own son Jonathan, that person will die.”

Thus, Saul is actually certain that it cannot be him. However, because of his words, the reaction is…

^{39 (con’t)} But not a man among all the people answered him.

v_eein onehu mikal ha’am – “And not he answering from all the people.” It seems unlikely that every leader in the camp except Saul knew that Jonathan ate honey, but something prompted them not to respond. Maybe they had no idea what their men had done during the battle and didn’t want to speak about what they didn’t know.

Maybe they were embarrassed about how the men fell on the animals without draining the blood. Whatever the reason for their silence, Saul has spoken and now he has to follow through…

⁴⁰ Then he said to all Israel, “You be on one side, and my son Jonathan and I will be on the other side.”

His words are emphatic: vayomer el kal Yisrael atem tihyu l_eever ekhad vaani v_eyonathan b_eni nihyeh l_eever ekhad – “And he said unto all Israel, ‘You, you will be to side one, and I and Jonathan, my son, we will be to side one.’” In order to establish the parameters he set, he has to first take this action. Only after can he pare down the offender based on the side chosen.

^{40 (con’t)} And the people said to Saul, “Do what seems good to you.”

vayom_eru ha’am el shaul ha’tov b_eenekha aseh – “And they said, the people unto Saul, ‘The good in your eyes you must do.’” The imperative verb is an indication that they fully support Saul’s idea. If he thinks it’s a good idea, then he must do accordingly…

When you are wrong about something you’ve done
Don’t project it on others, as if that is okay
Why would you put them under the gun
When it’s your lips that started the fray

This is the kind of thing lefties are famous for
Not acknowledging the wrong they have caused
Instead, they pin it to someone else’s door
This unholy attitude must be permanently paused

Just let your pride go, and then press on
No need to try to justify yourself
For you, a bright new day will dawn
When you put such things on the shelf

III. Behold Me, I Will Die (verses 41-45)

⁴¹ Therefore Saul said to the Lord God of Israel, “Give a perfect lot.”

vayomer shaul el Y_ehovah elohe Yisrael, habah tamim – “And he said, Saul, unto Yehovah God Israel, ‘You must give-ward spotless.’” The meaning is, “Give a spotless lot.” It seems that the Lord was consulted earlier by the Urim and Thummim. When the Lord didn’t respond, Saul decided to cast lots instead.

Some translate this as innocent instead of spotless. That is somewhat the idea, but it doesn’t convey the sense of the word. The word tamim signifies entire, coming from tamam, to be complete. It speaks of something being perfect or without blemish. Thus, it is something blameless. But blameless does not necessarily extend to innocent.

A newborn may be blameless, but he still bears original sin and is thus not innocent. Saul isn’t asking who is innocent, but for the Lord to extend a blameless, or spotless, lot. However, the result of the lot may also provide what is spotless. In asking to “give spotless,” what is given may not be what is at fault, but what is not at fault. Understanding this…

^{41 (con’t)} So Saul and Jonathan were taken, but the people escaped.

vayilakhed Yonathan v_eshaul v_eha’am yatsau – “And he was caught, Jonathan and Saul. And the people went out.” If it was innocence that was being looked for, the lot wouldn’t have taken Saul and Jonathan. The sense of them being caught is reflected in Job –

“He catches the wise in their own craftiness,
And the counsel of the cunning comes quickly upon them.” Job 5:13

Because Saul’s side was caught, he has to figure out the reason for that. To do so, he must identify the supposed culprit…

⁴² And Saul said, “Cast lots between my son Jonathan and me.” So Jonathan was taken.

vayomer shaul hapilu beni u-ven Yonathan b_eni vayilakhed Yonathan – “And he said, Saul, ‘You must cause to fall between me and between Jonathan my son.’ And he was caught, Jonathan.” The use of the word fall means “as the lot falls.” Saul is imploring throughout the whole process by using imperative verbs.

In response to the petition, it notes that the lot caught Jonathan. The issue is whether the Lord deems Jonathan’s actions as wrong, or if He is just answering the lot as requested. Saul, not the Lord, is the one who brought up the issue of sin. When Achan did wrong, the Lord explained it to Joshua.

Saul appears certain that the problem is disobedience, but that needs to be read into the account. Despite this, he is asking to identify what he feels is the cause. With the lots having done so…

⁴³ Then Saul said to Jonathan, “Tell me what you have done.”
And Jonathan told him, and said, “I only tasted a little honey with the end of the rod that was in my hand.

vayomer shaul el Yonathan hagidah li meh asitah vayaged lo Yonathan vayomer taom taamti biqtseh ha’mateh asher b_eyadi m_eat d_evash – “And he said, Saul unto Jonathan, ‘You must cause to declare-ward to me what you did.’ And he caused to declare to him, Jonathan. And he said, ‘Tasting, I tasted in extremity the branch which in my hand little honey.’”

It is apparent that Saul believes the lot has identified Jonathan as the one who sinned, despite that not being exactly what he asked. There is a fault against his adjuration, and he wants to know who committed it. Jonathan, having been identified, confesses that he ate honey. Because of that, he commits himself to Saul’s hand…

^{43 (con’t)} So now I must die!”

hin_eni amuth – “Behold me, I will die.” Some translations render this as a question. But with the 1^st person interjection, that seems unlikely. Jonathan essentially says, “Here I am. I submit to death according to your words.”

⁴⁴ Saul answered, “God do so and more also; for you shall surely die, Jonathan.”

vayomer shaul koh yaaseh elohim v_ekhoh yosiph ki moth tamuth Yonathan – “And he said, Saul, ‘Thus He will do, God, and thus He will cause to add. For dying you will die, Jonathan.’” The words are a proverbial expression well paraphrased by the NKJV. Saul is saying that because Jonathan broke his ridiculous oath, God should not only agree and execute the sentence, but He should add even more ruinous heaps upon Jonathan in the process.

However, the people in attendance have had enough. They can clearly see Saul’s decision is rash, unacceptable, and contrary to the very thing that brought about the victory in the first place…

⁴⁵ But the people said to Saul, “Shall Jonathan die, who has accomplished this great deliverance in Israel? Certainly not!

The words are unusual: vayomer ha’am el shaul ha’yonathan yamuth asher asah hayshuah ha’g_edolah hazoth b_eyisrael khalilah– “And he said, the people unto Saul, ‘The ‘Yah Has Given’ will die? Who – he did the salvation, the whopping, the this, in Israel? Profane-ward!’” The response of the people concerning Jonathan includes the definite article before the name. This is either unprecedented or a very unusual thing in the Bible.

Normally, when a definite article is used, it calls for an explanation of the name rather than stating the name. For example, the Gilead means the Perpetual Fountain. Jonathan means Yah Has Given. The article implies they are asking, “The ‘Yah Has Given’ will die?”, rather than, “The Jonathan will die?”

The people are flabbergasted that Saul would even consider such an outrage. Jonathan had trusted in the Lord alone for the salvation, even stating explicitly that it is the Lord who provides it. Therefore, he was the instrument of the Lord in the process.

How can it be that the Lord would use him in this manner if he were not the Lord’s to use? The choice was not Saul’s to make, and the Lord had already provided His blessing upon Jonathan.

^{45 (con’t)} As the Lord lives, not one hair of his head shall fall to the ground, for he has worked with God this day.”

khai Y_ehovah im yipol misarath rosho artsah ki im elohim asah ha’yom ha’zeh – “Alive Yehovah if it will fall from hair his head earthward. For with God he did, the day, the this.” Because of the obvious error on Saul’s part in his decision-making, the people have jointly overridden his word. Not only will Jonathan not die, but not a hair will be clipped or plucked from his head.

*^{45 (fin)} So the people rescued Jonathan, and he did not die.

Rather: vayiphdu ha’am eth Yonathan v_elo meth – “And they redeemed, the people, Jonathan. And not he died.” To translate this as rescue diminishes the intent of the word. It is padah, to sever, and thus to redeem. As the Topical Lexicon says –

“The verb appears about fifty-nine times and consistently features God, or one acting on His behalf, stepping in at personal cost to liberate the helpless.”

It is as if they bought back Jonathan from the sentence spoken through Saul’s continued obstinacy. Nothing in the narrative, or at any later time, indicates that Jonathan did anything wrong. He acted in innocence, relied on the Lord, gave honor to the Lord, etc.

Saul, on the other hand, vowed rashly, failed to consider the implications of his vow, and then continued to make rash statements and decisions that only further highlighted his own foolish stand.

This is a great place to stop for the day. Despite the next verses forming their own complete thought, analyzing them together will show how they complement each other as the narrative continues to move forward.

As for the events in this passage, when we look at how Saul handled things, we can see that instead of stopping, considering what took place, and then relenting in his failed choice of words, acknowledging he was wrong, Saul continued to make himself look foolish.

Eventually, his flippant attitude towards what is morally right will cost him the kingdom. It is a high price to pay for moral weakness. But it is what defined him and how we remember him.

When we are approached about a matter of moral integrity, it can be hard to stand up and say, “this is what is right” without a basis for doing so. But if we are going to defend what we believe, we can always appeal to the source of our faith, be it in the church, in our political choices, or for any other stand we must make.

In the church, the Source of our faith is God. But that must be more fully defined, or it can mean many things. Buddhists have their view, even if they don’t actually believe in God. Rather, their view of religion forms its own “god.”

Muslims, Hindus, Mormons, etc., have their view of God (or gods) as well. To say, “This is what God expects,” leaves the door open for too much. For the Christian, our faith in God is in how He has presented Himself. That is found in His word. Therefore, to appeal to a particular religious stand, we should appeal to the Bible when stating a claim about God.

Go to the source, and you will be much stronger in your argument. Saul did not appeal to Scripture, and his vow failed to consider what Scripture says about vows. Rather, it was his own vow as the king that he imposed upon the people.

That reduced the entire concept of what God expects to what Saul alone expected. From there, he backed the authority up to God as if that is what God expected. Politicians and military leaders do this all the time, claiming that their view on a matter is God’s view. That is not a smart place to be.

Instead, let us stand on the word, in its proper context, when we refer to such things. In this, we will be conducting ourselves properly in His presence. This is what will glorify God as we live our lives before Him.

Closing Verse: “The Lord redeems the soul of His servants,
And none of those who trust in Him shall be condemned.” Psalm 34:22

Next Week: 1 Samuel 14:46-52 Grasping for all, and then some, yes, it’s true… (And Saul, He Caught the Kingdom, Part II) (29^th 1 Samuel Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He is the One who abases the haughty and exalts the humble. He regards the lowly, and the proud He knows from afar. So yield yourself to Him, trust Him, and believe His word. In this, He will do great things for you and through you.

1 Samuel 14:31-45 (CG)

³¹ And they will cause to strike in the day, the it, in the Philistines from Michmash Aijalon-ward. And he dimmed, the people, very. ³² And he made [k.], the people, unto booty [k.]. And he took flock and cattle and sons cattle, and they slaughtered earthward. And he ate, the people, upon the blood. ³³ And they caused to declare to Saul, to say, “Behold! The people sinning to Yehovah to eat upon the blood.”

And he said, “You dealt covertly! You must roll unto me, the day, stone whopping.” ³⁴ And he said, Saul, “You must scatter in the people, and you said to them, ‘You must cause to approach unto me man, his ox, and man, his sheep.’” And they slaughtered in this, and they ate, and not they will sin to Yehovah to eat unto the blood. And they caused to approach, all the people, man, his ox, in his hand the night. And they slaughtered there. ³⁵ And he built, Saul, altar to Yehovah. It, he caused to begin to build, altar to Yehovah.

³⁶ And he said, Saul, “Let us descend after Philistines – night, and let us plunder in them until light, the morning. And not may we cause to leave in them man.”

And they said, “All the good in your eyes you must do.”

And he said, the priest, “Let us near, here, unto the God.”

³⁷ And he asked, Saul, in God, “I will descend after Philistines? You will deliver them in hand Israel?” And not He answered in the day, the it. ³⁸ And he said, Saul, “You must approach here, all corners the people, and you must know, and you must see in what it was the sin, the this, the day. ³⁹ For alive Yehovah the ‘causing to save Israel,’ for if it exists in Jonathan, my son, for dying, he will die.” And not he answering from all the people. ⁴⁰ And he said unto all Israel, “You, you will be to side one, and I and Jonathan, my son, we will be to side one.”

And they said, the people unto Saul, “The good in your eyes you must do.”

⁴¹ And he said, Saul, unto Yehovah God Israel, “You must give-ward spotless.” And he was caught, Jonathan and Saul. And the people went out. ⁴² And he said, Saul, “You must cause to fall between me and between Jonathan my son.” And he was caught, Jonathan. ⁴³ And he said, Saul unto Jonathan, “You must cause to declare-ward to me what you did.”

And he caused to declare to him, Jonathan.

And he said, “Tasting, I tasted in extremity the branch which in my hand little honey. Behold me, I will die.”

⁴⁴ And he said, Saul, “Thus He will do, God, and thus He will cause to add. For dying you will die, Jonathan.” ⁴⁵ And he said, the people unto Saul, “The ‘Yah Has Given will die?’ Who – he did the salvation, the whopping, the this, in Israel? Profane-ward! Alive Yehovah if it will fall from hair his head earthward. For with God he did, the day, the this.” And they redeemed, the people, Jonathan. And not he died.

 

1 Samuel 14:31-45 (NKJV)

³¹ Now they had driven back the Philistines that day from Michmash to Aijalon. So the people were very faint. ³² And the people rushed on the spoil, and took sheep, oxen, and calves, and slaughtered them on the ground; and the people ate them with the blood. ³³ Then they told Saul, saying, “Look, the people are sinning against the Lord by eating with the blood!”

So he said, “You have dealt treacherously; roll a large stone to me this day.” ³⁴ Then Saul said, “Disperse yourselves among the people, and say to them, ‘Bring me here every man’s ox and every man’s sheep, slaughter them here, and eat; and do not sin against the Lord by eating with the blood.’” So every one of the people brought his ox with him that night, and slaughtered it there. ³⁵ Then Saul built an altar to the Lord. This was the first altar that he built to the Lord.

³⁶ Now Saul said, “Let us go down after the Philistines by night, and plunder them until the morning light; and let us not leave a man of them.”

And they said, “Do whatever seems good to you.”

Then the priest said, “Let us draw near to God here.”

³⁷ So Saul asked counsel of God, “Shall I go down after the Philistines? Will You deliver them into the hand of Israel?” But He did not answer him that day. ³⁸ And Saul said, “Come over here, all you chiefs of the people, and know and see what this sin was today. ³⁹ For as the Lord lives, who saves Israel, though it be in Jonathan my son, he shall surely die.” But not a man among all the people answered him. ⁴⁰ Then he said to all Israel, “You be on one side, and my son Jonathan and I will be on the other side.”

And the people said to Saul, “Do what seems good to you.”

⁴¹ Therefore Saul said to the Lord God of Israel, “Give a perfect lot.” So Saul and Jonathan were taken, but the people escaped. ⁴² And Saul said, “Cast lots between my son Jonathan and me.” So Jonathan was taken. ⁴³ Then Saul said to Jonathan, “Tell me what you have done.”

And Jonathan told him, and said, “I only tasted a little honey with the end of the rod that was in my hand. So now I must die!”

⁴⁴ Saul answered, “God do so and more also; for you shall surely die, Jonathan.”

⁴⁵ But the people said to Saul, “Shall Jonathan die, who has accomplished this great deliverance in Israel? Certainly not! As the Lord lives, not one hair of his head shall fall to the ground, for he has worked with God this day.” So the people rescued Jonathan, and he did not die.