Explore the Bible: Judged

• The Explore the Bible lesson for July 10 focuses on 1 Samuel 15.

The Command

The establishment of Israel’s monarchy had been dubious from the beginning. Yahweh made it exceptionally clear the people’s desire to have a king was contrary to Israel’s identity as the covenant people of God. Yet, Yahweh was the one who chose Saul as king. Samuel, although no longer functioning as judge, continued to function as prophet and priest. He remained the essential go-between for Yahweh and Saul. Samuel remains the most important figure in Israel, because the covenant with Yahweh transcends any other authority, even the king. Samuel’s instruction to Saul comes with a preface makes the “chain of command” clear (1 Samuel 15:1).

In 1 Samuel 15:2-3, Yahweh calls for the enactment of a part of the covenant that had been long delayed—vengeance against the Amalekites. This seminomadic people lived in and around the Negev desert in southern Israel and northern Arabia. The story of their attack on the people of Israel as they came out of slavery in Egypt has been long remembered (Exodus 16:8-16), and eventual retribution against them was part of the covenant itself (Deuteronomy 25:17-19). Generations later, the time of their punishment has come, and Saul and the armies of Israel are to be Yahweh’s instrument. The terms of the punishment are among the harshest in Scripture, and have been a challenge for generations of interpreters. (See further discussion at the end of the lesson.) In terms of the narrative of 1 Samuel 15, however, no one flinches at the instructions. They are abundantly clear, and neither Samuel nor Saul questions the command. 

The Compromise

In spite of clarity of instruction, Saul and his army find exceptions. Agag, king of the Amalekites, is the lone person spared, and the best of the livestock escape destruction, as well. The narrator notes at this point only the quality of what was spared and the simple declaration, “they were unwilling to destroy completely” (1 Samuel 15:9). Saul will give a more extended explanation later in the chapter. Without more explicit description from the narrator, it is left to the reader to determine Saul’s level of honesty about the incident.

Before any other verdict is given, Yahweh and Samuel spend the night in grief over Saul’s disobedience and, therefore, the choice of Saul as king. Yahweh’s pain is that Saul “has turned away from me” (1 Samuel 15:11). Whatever justification Saul may later offer, Yahweh’s perspective is that disobedience is turning away. Saul had been asked to lead the covenant people and to enact a covenant command. Instead, he was unwilling and turned away. Samuel’s grief is poignant and left open to several possibilities. He may have been grieving specifically for Saul, for Israel’s future, for his own part that he would play in Saul’s tragedy or all of the above.

The Condemnation

Samuel must crisscross Israel to deliver his message, and he discovers along the way Saul has built a monument to his victory on Mount Carmel before heading to Gilgal (1 Samuel 15:12). Saul greets Samuel with a blessing and a bold-faced lie, “I have carried out Yahweh’s instructions.” Samuel “hears” once again, the action that has defined his life from the time he was child hearing God’s voice in the night. This time, although he hears the bleating of sheep and lowing of cattle. Yahweh’s voice already has told him the truth about Saul’s disobedience, and now the evidence speaks for itself. Saul has transported the livestock and Agag from the desert of Shur in the south to Carmel in the north to Gilgal in the west, and it never occurred to him that this might be a problem. Saul’s first words after being confronted are blaming others—“the soldiers spared!” Only now does Saul mention a desire to offer the livestock in sacrifice. Saul seems to forget for a moment he is charge of the soldiers and their actions. It is also noteworthy that sacrificing to Yahweh was scheduled for after setting up a monument in his own honor.

Samuel has had enough, and now relates to Saul (and the readers) the further content of Yahweh’s message in the night. Yahweh chose Saul when he counted himself nothing and placed him at the head. Yahweh sent him on a mission, but Saul (not the soldiers!) disobeyed and “pounced on the plunder” (1 Samuel 15:19). It is striking the way Yahweh’s brief history of Saul parallels another passage from Deuteronomy. After Yahweh instructs the Israelites to drive out and destroy the inhabitants of Canaan, he reminds them of their history, that his choice of Israel was based solely on gracious love, that their part of the covenant is obedience, and there are consequences for disobedience (Deuteronomy 7:1-11). Saul is, in this moment, reflecting the negative side of the role of Israel’s king as prime keeper of the covenant. If there is one person for whom obedience in Israel is paramount, it is the king.

The judgement still has not been rendered. The “trial” (whose verdict already is known to Samuel, but not Saul or yet the readers) continues with a question. “Why?” Saul’s answer is to: (1) insist on his own obedience, seemingly without realizing that his keeping Agag as a living trophy means he did not; and (2) blame the soldiers again for the livestock, while offering again the excuse they were wanted for sacrifice. Walter Brueggemann points Saul here refers to Yahweh as “your God” (1 Samuel 15:21), a detail which highlights the increasing distance between Saul and Yahweh.

The judgment is delivered in poetic form. No off-the-cuff remarks will do for this moment of import. The highest style of the Hebrew language is necessary for this prophetic speech, which describes God’s desire for obedience instead of sacrifice, and the rejection of Saul as king. Only now does Saul reckon with the truth and confess his sin. Only now does he confess that fear of his own people caused him to give in to their desires. (Determining how honest this and the other confessions of the soldiers being solely responsible for taking livestock are is left to the reader.) The chapter ends in a flurry of dramatic action, with Saul desperately grasping at and tearing Samuel’s robe and Samuel interpreting the act symbolically, with Samuel agreeing to help Saul save face before the people (a particular concern of Saul’s), and finally with Samuel himself completing Saul’s task and killing Agag. 1 Samuel 15:35 closes the chapter and highlights the tragedy. Samuel will not see Saul again until the day he died, but he mourned for him every day in between, and Yahweh himself grieves over Saul.

Saul was undone by disobedience. This particular disobedience he acknowledges stemmed from the fact that Saul feared the people more than he feared God. It is striking that nowhere in the chapter does he reckon with why he kept Agag alive. His self-awareness of his sin only went as far as what others had done that he had not prevented. It was not his soldiers who took Agag as a trophy. He never acknowledged, and possibly never considered, what part his own desires played in his downfall. This pattern will largely continue as Saul continues as a lame-duck king, trying to prop up himself and his legacy when Yahweh has other plans.

Appendix: “Totally Destroy”

The passages in the Old Testament in which Yahweh orders his people to “totally destroy” other nations are some of the most challenging in Scripture. They are all the more striking in that nowhere within Scripture are these texts explicitly seen as a problem. The ancient Israelites, the prophets and the writers of the New Testament apparently did not see a great contradiction between commands like that of 1 Samuel 15:3 and the repeated description of God as “gracious and compassionate” (Jonah 4:2, and many more). The literary purpose of the Amalekite ban, as well as that on the Canaanite tribes, seems clear. Israel is to be distinct from the nations in their worship and conduct. Threats to Israel’s obedience to Yahweh are to be dealt with decisively. Scripture is abundantly clear idolatry leads to destruction—of individuals and of whole societies. The challenge in these texts is that Israel itself is instructed to be the means of that destruction. Certainly, the tribes of Israel existed in a time of incredible violence, and the Amalekites and other nations posed a serious threat to Israel’s existence. And yet, even though Amalekites are described as thoroughly wicked (1 Samuel 15:18), that description hardly can apply to children and infants, to say nothing of livestock. The instruction from God to kill them is deeply troubling, if not outright unbelievable, and simple answers to this dilemma deserve skepticism. 

The fact the Amalekites reappear in subsequent texts, however, indicates “totally destroy” was not as total as one would think. The Amalekites are mentioned again in I Samuel 27 and 1 Chronicles 4. It seems likely Saul’s description of their destruction was hyperbole. A similar pattern occurs with the Canaanite tribes “destroyed” by Joshua and the Israelites, and who later appear in the same narrative occupying different parts of the land. Perhaps the instruction itself should be understood in some sense as hyperbole, as well. Even so, it remains a challenging set of texts.

The biggest continuing threat these texts pose is the temptation that, if one uncritically accepts God wants all the Amalekites destroyed, one starts to see Amalekites everywhere. Any serious threat to “our” existence or even a threat to the notion of pure worship could lead to seeing “them” as the Amalekites and “us” as the Israelites charged with their destruction. This much is sure: We are the people of the New Covenant, and no matter how the people of God worked in the past, we believe God has decisively dealt with sin through the death of his own Son. Threats to safety in the New Testament are primarily seen as opportunities to live out faithful obedience to the way of Christ in the joyful hope of resurrection. Jesus’ is the only blood we are called to claim.