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