| Back to Home Page | Back to Book Index
|
1 Samuel
Chapter Fifteen
1 Samuel 15
Chapter Contents
Saul sent to destroy Amalek. (1-9) Saul excuses and
commends himself. (10-23) Saul's imperfect humiliation. (24-31) Agag put to
death
Samuel and Saul part. (32-35)
Commentary on 1 Samuel 15:1-9
(Read 1 Samuel 15:1-9)
The sentence of condemnation against the Amalekites had
gone forth long before
Exodus 17:14; Deuteronomy 25:19
but they had
been spared till they filled up the measure of their sins. We are sure that the
righteous Lord does no injustice to any. The remembering the kindness of the
ancestors of the Kenites
in favour to them
at the time God was punishing the
injuries done by the ancestors of the Amalekites
tended to clear the
righteousness of God in this dispensation. It is dangerous to be found in the
company of God's enemies
and it is our duty and interest to come out from
among them
lest we share in their sins and plagues
Revelation 18:4. As the commandment had been
express
and a test of Saul's obedience
his conduct evidently was the effect
of a proud
rebellious spirit. He destroyed only the refuse
that was good for
little. That which was now destroyed was sacrificed to the justice of God.
Commentary on 1 Samuel 15:10-23
(Read 1 Samuel 15:10-23)
Repentance in God is not a change of mind
as it is in
us
but a change of method. The change was in Saul; "He is turned back
from following me." Hereby he made God his enemy. Samuel spent a whole
night in pleading for Saul. The rejection of sinners is the grief of believers:
God delights not in their death
nor should we. Saul boasts to Samuel of his
obedience. Thus sinners think
by justifying themselves
to escape being judged
of the Lord. The noise the cattle made
like the rust of the silver
James 5:3
witnessed against him. Many boast of
obedience to the command of God; but what means then their indulgence of the
flesh
their love of the world
their angry and unkind spirit
and their
neglect of holy duties
which witness against them? See of what evil
covetousness is the root; and see what is the sinfulness of sin
and notice
that in it which above any thing else makes it evil in the sight of the Lord;
it is disobedience: "Thou didst not obey the voice of the Lord."
Carnal
deceitful hearts
like Saul
think to excuse themselves from God's
commandments by what pleases themselves. It is hard to convince the children of
disobedience. But humble
sincere
and conscientious obedience to the will of
God
is more pleasing and acceptable to him than all burnt-offering and
sacrifices. God is more glorified and self more denied
by obedience than by
sacrifice. It is much easier to bring a bullock or lamb to be burned upon the
altar
than to bring every high thought into obedience to God
and to make our
will subject to his will. Those are unfit and unworthy to rule over men
who
are not willing that God should rule over them.
Commentary on 1 Samuel 15:24-31
(Read 1 Samuel 15:24-31)
There were several signs of hypocrisy in Saul's
repentance. 1. He besought Samuel only
and seemed most anxious to stand right
in his opinion
and to gain his favour. 2. He excuses his fault
even when
confessing it; that is never the way of a true penitent. 3. All his care was to
save his credit
and preserve his interest in the people. Men are fickle and
alter their minds
feeble and cannot effect their purposes; something happens
they could not foresee
by which their measures are broken; but with God it is
not so. The Strength of Israel will not lie.
Commentary on 1 Samuel 15:32-35
(Read 1 Samuel 15:32-35)
Many think the bitterness of death is past when it is not
gone by; they put that evil day far from them
which is very near. Samuel calls
Agag to account for his own sins. He followed the example of his ancestors'
cruelty
justly therefore is all the righteous blood shed by Amalek required.
Saul seems unconcerned at the token of God's displeasure which he lay under
yet Samuel mourns day and night for him. Jerusalem was carnally secure while
Christ wept over it. Do we desire to do the whole will of God? Turn to him
not
in form and appearance
but with sincerity.
── Matthew Henry《Concise Commentary on 1 Samuel》
1 Samuel 15
Verse 1
[1]
Samuel also said unto Saul
The LORD sent me to anoint thee to be king over his
people
over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of
the LORD.
Hearken —
Thou hast committed error already
now regain God's favour by thy exact
obedience to what he commands.
Verse 2
[2] Thus saith the LORD of hosts
I remember that which Amalek did to Israel
how he laid wait for him in the way
when he came up from Egypt.
I remember —
Now I will revenge those old injuries of the Amalekites on their children: who
continue in their parents practices.
Came from Egypt —
When he was newly come out of cruel and long bondage
and was now weak
and
weary
and faint
and hungry
Deuteronomy 25:18
and therefore it was
barbarous instead of that pity which even Nature prompted them to afford
to
add affliction to the afflicted; it was also horrid impiety to fight against
God himself and to lift up their hand in a manner against the Lord's throne
whilst they struck at that people which God had brought forth in so stupendous
a way.
Verse 3
[3] Now
go and smite Amalek
and utterly destroy all that they have
and spare them
not; but slay both man and woman
infant and suckling
ox and sheep
camel and
ass.
Destroy —
Both persons and goods
kill all that live
and consume all things without
life
for I will have no name nor remnant of that people left
whom long since
I have devoted to utter destruction.
Spare not —
Shew no compassion or favour to any of them. The same thing repeated to prevent
mistake
and oblige Saul to the exact performance hereof.
Slay
… —
Which was not unjust
because God is the supreme Lord of life
and can require
his own when he pleaseth; infants likewise are born in sin
and therefore
liable to God's wrath. Their death also was rather a mercy than a curse
as
being the occasion of preventing their sin and punishment.
Ox
… —
Which being all made for man's benefit
it is not strange if they suffer with
him
for the instruction of mankind.
Verse 6
[6] And
Saul said unto the Kenites
Go
depart
get you down from among the Amalekites
lest I destroy you with them: for ye shewed kindness to all the children of
Israel
when they came up out of Egypt. So the Kenites departed from among the
Amalekites.
Kenites — A
people descending from
or nearly related to Jethro
who anciently dwelt in
rocks near the Amalekites
Numbers 24:21
and afterwards some of them dwelt
in Judah
Judges 1:16
whence it is probable they removed
(which
dwelling in tents
they could easily do) and retired to their old
habitation
because of the wars and troubles wherewith Judah was annoyed.
Shewed kindness —
Some of your progenitors did so
and for their sakes all of you shall fare the
better. You were not guilty of that sin for which Amalek is now to be
destroyed. When destroying judgments are abroad God takes care to separate the
precious from the vile. It is then especially dangerous to be found in the
company of God's enemies. The Jews have a saying
Wo to a wicked man
and to
his neighbour.
Verse 7
[7] And Saul smote the Amalekites from Havilah until thou comest to Shur
that
is over against Egypt.
To Shur —
That is
from one end of their country to the other; he smote all that he met
with: but a great number of them fled away upon the noise of his coming
and
secured themselves in other places
'till the storm was over.
Verse 8
[8] And
he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive
and utterly destroyed all the
people with the edge of the sword.
All —
Whom he found. Now they paid dear for the sin of their ancestors. They were
themselves guilty of idolatry and numberless sins
for which they deserved to
be cut off. Yet when God would reckon with them
he fixes upon this as the
ground of his quarrel.
Verse 9
[9] But
Saul and the people spared Agag
and the best of the sheep
and of the oxen
and of the fatlings
and the lambs
and all that was good
and would not
utterly destroy them: but every thing that was vile and refuse
that they
destroyed utterly.
Vile —
Thus they obeyed God only so far as they could without inconvenience to themselves.
Verse 11
[11] It
repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from
following me
and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel;
and he cried unto the LORD all night.
Repenteth —
Repentance implies grief of heart
and change of counsels
and therefore cannot
be in God: but it is ascribed to God when God alters his method of dealing
and
treats a person as if be did indeed repent of the kindness he had shewed him.
All night — To
implore his pardoning mercy for Saul
and for the people.
Is turned back —
Therefore he did once follow God. Otherwise it would have been impossible
he
should turn back from following him.
Verse 12
[12] And
when Samuel rose early to meet Saul in the morning
it was told Samuel
saying
Saul came to Carmel
and
behold
he set him up a place
and is gone about
and
passed on
and gone down to Gilgal.
A place —
That is
a monument or trophy of his victory.
Verse 13
[13] And
Samuel came to Saul: and Saul said unto him
Blessed be thou of the LORD: I
have performed the commandment of the LORD.
They —
That is
the people. Thus
he lays the blame upon the people; whereas they
could not do it without his consent; and he should have used his power to
over-rule them.
Verse 18
[18] And
the LORD sent thee on a journey
and said
Go and utterly destroy the sinners
the Amalekites
and fight against them until they be consumed.
A journey — So
easy was the service
and so certain the success
that it was rather to be
called a journey than a war.
Verse 20
[20] And
Saul said unto Samuel
Yea
I have obeyed the voice of the LORD
and have gone
the way which the LORD sent me
and have brought Agag the king of Amalek
and
have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.
The king — To
be dealt with as God pleaseth.
Verse 21
[21] But
the people took of the spoil
sheep and oxen
the chief of the things which
should have been utterly destroyed
to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God in
Gilgal.
But the people
… —
Here the conscience of Saul begins to awake
tho' but a little: for he still
lays the blame on the people.
Verse 22
[22] And
Samuel said
Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices
as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold
to obey is better than sacrifice
and to hearken than the fat of rams.
Sacrifice —
Because obedience to God is a moral duty
constantly and indispensably
necessary; but sacrifice is but a ceremonial institution
sometimes
unnecessary
as it was in the wilderness: and sometimes sinful
when it is
offered by a polluted hand
or in an irregular manner. Therefore thy gross
disobedience to God's express command
is not to be compensated with sacrifice.
Hearken —
That is
to obey.
Fat —
Then the choicest part of all the sacrifice.
Verse 23
[23] For
rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft
and stubbornness is as iniquity and
idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD
he hath also
rejected thee from being king.
Rebellion —
Disobedience to God's command.
Stubbornness —
Contumacy in sin
justifying it
and pleading for it.
Iniquity —
Or
the iniquity of idolatry.
Rejected —
Hath pronounced the sentence of rejection: for that he was not actually deposed
by God before
plainly appears
because not only the people
but even David
after this
owned him as king. Those are unworthy to rule over men
who are not
willing that God should rule over them.
Verse 24
[24] And
Saul said unto Samuel
I have sinned: for I have transgressed the commandment
of the LORD
and thy words: because I feared the people
and obeyed their
voice.
I have sinned — It
does by no means appear
that Saul acts the hypocrite herein
in assigning a
false cause of his disobedience. Rather
he nakedly declares the thing as it
was.
Verse 25
[25] Now
therefore
I pray thee
pardon my sin
and turn again with me
that I may
worship the LORD.
Pardon my sin —
Neither can it be proved that there was any hypocrisy in this. Rather charity
requires us to believe
that he sincerely desired pardon
both from God and
man
as he now knew
he had sinned against both.
Verse 26
[26] And
Samuel said unto Saul
I will not return with thee: for thou hast rejected the
word of the LORD
and the LORD hath rejected thee from being king over Israel.
I will not —
This was no lie
though he afterwards returned
because he spoke what he meant;
his words and his intentions agreed together
though afterwards he saw reason
to change his intentions. Compare Genesis 19:2
3. This may relieve many perplexed
consciences
who think themselves obliged to do what they have said they would
do
though they see just cause to change their minds.
Hath rejected thee
… — But he does not say
he "hath rejected thee from salvation."
And who besides hath authority to say so?
Verse 29
[29] And
also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man
that
he should repent.
Strength of Israel — So
he calls God here
to shew the reason why God neither will nor can lie; because
lying proceeds from the sense of a man's weakness
who cannot many times
accomplish his design without lying and dissimulation; therefore many princes
have used it for this very reason. But God needs no such artifices; he can do
whatsoever he pleaseth by his absolute power.
Repent —
That is
nor change his counsel; which also is an effect of weakness and
imperfection
either of wisdom or power. So that this word is not here used in
the sense it commonly is when applied to God
as in Jeremiah 11:1-23
and elsewhere.
Verse 31
[31] So
Samuel turned again after Saul; and Saul worshipped the LORD.
Turned —
First
that the people might not upon pretence of this sentence of rejection
withdraw their obedience to their sovereign; whereby they would both have
sinned against God
and have been as sheep without a shepherd. Secondly
that
he might rectify Saul's error
and execute God's judgment upon Agag.
Verse 33
[33] And
Samuel said
As thy sword hath made women childless
so shall thy mother be
childless among women. And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the LORD in
Gilgal.
As
… —
Whereby it appears
that he was a tyrant
and guilty of many bloody actions.
And this seems to be added for the fuller vindication of God's justice
and to
shew
that although God did at this time revenge a crime committed by this
man's ancestors 400 years ago
yet he did not punish an innocent son for his
father's crimes
but one that persisted in the same evil courses.
Hewed —
This he did by divine instinct
and in pursuance of God's express command
which being sinfully neglected by Saul
is now executed by Samuel. But these
are no precedents for private persons to take the sword of justice into their
hands. For we must live by the laws of God
and not by extraordinary examples.
Verse 35
[35] And
Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death: nevertheless Samuel
mourned for Saul: and the LORD repented that he had made Saul king over Israel.
To see Saul —
That is
to visit him
in token of respect or friendship: or
to seek counsel
from God for him. Otherwise he did see him chap. 19:24. Though indeed it was not Samuel that came
thither with design to see Saul
but Saul went thither to see Samuel
and that
accidentally.
── John Wesley《Explanatory Notes on 1 Samuel》
15 Chapter 15
Verses 1-35
Thus saith the Lord of Hosts
I remember that which Amalek did to
Israel.
National sins and national punishments
We turn from Saul to the case of those against whom he was sent.
“Thus saith the Lord of hosts
I remember that which Amalek did to Israel
how
he laid wait for him in the way
when he came up from Egypt.” Then God does remember
sin. He not only notices it
but remembers it. A lengthened period had
transpired since the Amalekites had thus manifested their sympathy with the
enemies of Israel
by throwing hindrances in the way of God’s chosen people as
they came out of Egypt to Canaan. And
to all appearance
their sin might have
been regarded as consigned to oblivion. But God had declared that it should not
be forgotten. (Exodus 17:14
Deuteronomy 25:17-19.) Upon
the oblivion of four centuries there broke the awful tones of Almighty Justice:
“I remember that
which Amalek did” From that Infinite Mind there had been no
obliteration of the crime; clear as the day on which it had been committed
that sin stood out to view. “I remember.” Divine forbearance with generation
after generation had been long
but upon them that forbearance had been lost
and it is evident they had not profited by it. They still remained the foes of
Israel; their conduct as a nation was marked by excessive cruelty; and it was a
horrible notoriety which their king had obtained for the multitudes of mothers
whom
in his bloodthirstiness
his sword had rendered childless. In the
determination on the part of God now to punish
the utterance of which was
prefaced by those emphatic words
“I remember
” we are distinctly taught the
lesson that the conduct of nations is a point to which the eye of God is
directed
and that it is the matter for which His just penalty will be
reserved. Whole nations come within the reach of His rod. By the individuals
composing a community
and whose personal welfare or woe is necessarily
identified with the condition of the community
there is a great danger that
national sin should be regarded rather as an abstraction than as a reality
rather as an ideal than a substantial criminality. But it is not thus that God
in the incident before us
deals with it. He affixes it
as a substantive
charge
upon the community. We have a rule here to which we find no exception.
But nowhere does this rule meet with so fearful an exemplification as in the
case of that very people whose guardian God showed Himself to be in this act of
visiting Amalek’s transgression--that very Israel on whose behalf He was now
standing up to repel insult and to avenge injury. “I remember”--read it in
those seventy years’ exile from the land which had been given for an
inheritance--that long and dreary period
during which Zion’s history was thus
announced in plaintive tones by the prophet
“How doth the city sit solitary
that was full of people! how is she become as a widow!” etc. “I remember”--read
it in its reiterated and double-telling tones in that second destruction which
succeeded a second opportunity given to the Hebrew people of a sound national
repentance and reformation--that second opportunity which was lost when
formalism was substituted for spiritual religion. Hark to the words of mingled
compassion and judgment which fall from His lips as He stands over against the
city and wasps
“O Jerusalem
Jerusalem
thou that killest the prophets
” etc.
If national sin brings with it national calamity
then the lengthening out Of
our prosperity must depend on the caution which is exercised
lest any sin
should be permitted and indulged
until it shall become distinctive of our
national character. Is there nothing among ourselves over which there floats
audible to the men who seek the best welfare of their country and deprecate its
woe
the sound of that sentence
“I remember?” Are not its murmurs to be heard
at this moment
amid political excitements and difficulties of administration?
“I remember” the Sabbaths which are systematically broken by those who take
their pleasure on my holy day. “I remember” the intemperance of those who “rise
up early in the morning that they may follow strong drink; that continue until
night
till wine inflame them.” “I remember” the want of truthfulness in the
manner of conducting business
the unjust advantages taken of the buyer
the
false representations made by the seller
although my word has declared that “a
false balance is abomination to the Lord
but a just weight is His delight.” “I
remember” the concealed iniquity of men who
with a fancied impunity
perpetrated the foulest crimes
reckless of every consideration but that of
inconvenient exposure. Our patriotism
to be effective
must be of the right
stamp; and to prove itself of this stamp it must itself consent to learn its
lessons from that chief source of all instruction
the Scriptures--confirmed
as the sacred teachings are
by the dispensations of Divine Providence There
may be a diversity in the manner in which individuals may have been guilty
in
reference to the sum total of the public guilt. Some may have been the direct
actors
and others may have been partakers in their sins. From all which has
been stated it will follow--
1. That it is a duty constantly incumbent upon us
as members of the
community
to inquire into our personal relation to that public criminality of
which God says
“I remember it
” and to make it the matter of our individual
repentance and humiliation. If personally
and through God’s grace
these
things cannot be described as committed by me
yet do I give any sanction to
them in others? Do I protest against them? Do I exert my influence to lessen
their amount?
2. The sins of nations
which call down wrath
being thus the
accumulation of the sins of individuals
those will do most to prevent public
calamity
to ensure national prosperity
and thus will do most for their
country
who make a stand for God against that which would displease Him; who
in their own immediate spheres
seek
in dependence upon His grace
to yield to
His authority
and to illustrate His religion; and who “let their light so
shine before men that they may see their good works
and glorify their Father
which is in heaven.” Personal religion is the best patriotism. The fear of God
pervading men’s hearts is the surest provision against national calamity
because it is the opposite of national sin. Go
then
and exercise your civil
privileges
your social rights
in the fear of the God of nations. Set Him at
your right hand. (J. A. Miller.)
The commission of judgment
The Amalekites are supposed by some to have descended from Amalek
grandson of Esau (Genesis 36:12) But against this view it
may he forcibly objected:
1. That a nation so powerful and so widely diffused
could scarcely
have sprung up in so short a period;
2. That the seat of Esau and his posterity was much more easterly
than the realm of the Amalekites; and
3. That it is not easy to suppose such near relatives of Israel
exposed to such a doom
while Edom and Moab were so scrupulously spared on
account of their relationship. But it is not improbable that a brave and
warlike chief like Esau might
through his family
wield a powerful influence
among the desert tribes
and even supply them with a name. The matter
however
is not of importance
compared with the consideration of their crime and its
punishment. The assault of the Amalekites was an offence of high aggravation.
It was made when Israel had newly entered on their wanderings (Exodus 17:8-16); and as the first onset
of enemies it was marked by singular audacity
and attended with peculiar
danger to Israel. They were ringleaders They broke the peace
and inaugurated a
hostile dealing with the people. Moreover
their attack was entirely
unprovoked. Besides the manner of attack was treacherous and cruel (Deuteronomy 25:17-19)
“he smote the
hindmost of thee
even all that were feeble behind thee
when thou wast faint
and weary.” Hence
in Deuteronomy 25:18
the real point of the
charge against Amalek is this: “he feared not God.”
There was something peculiarly daring and insolent in his conduct.
He seems to have deliberately chosen the earliest period of assaulting them
undismayed by the terrible doings of the past
and undeterred by the pledged
protection and guidance of the future. It was an eager and determined defiance
of the God of Israel. Such an attitude and bearing must be providentially taken
notice of. The sovereign Lord will set Himself right at once with the nations.
“His counsel shall stand.” The daring sinners have despised His covenant with
Israel; He will meet this by another covenant regarding them. Their destruction
is decided by oath. Such is the whole case against Amalek. It might seem as if
the bare statement of it were enough to vindicate the Divine dealing with them.
But inasmuch as ungodly men have inveighed against this dealing
and have drawn
from it dark colours wherewith to sketch a gloomy caricature of the Most High;
and
particularly
inasmuch as natural feeling even in the good is ever liable
to a relapse into disloyal sympathy with offending fellows
a few further
remarks on the subject may do some useful service.
1. Whatever objection may be raised against the dealings of God in
the case of Amalek applies equally to innumerable similar cases. Take
for example
the destruction of Lisbon by an earthquake in 1755. Here we find actually
occurring substantially the same woe that was denounced against Amalek. There
is the same sudden
violent
widespread
indiscriminate ruin. The only
differences are these: The destruction affected only a portion of the people;
and the instrument employed was a blind material force
instead of an army of
rational and moral beings. But these affect not the real identity of the two
cases. On the question of justice
or of mercy
they fall into the same
category. He who impeaches the justice of Amalek’s overthrow must be prepared
in consistency to carry his condemnation over the whole breadth of God’s
providential government. To slay a great criminal
fierce
malignant
and
strong
was in one view an act of self-defence
in another
an act of
retribution; and to do it at the command of a holy God was a teat and a
training of the highest spiritual affections of a creature.
2. No individual Amalekite suffered more than he deserved. To this it
will be immediately answered: This is impossible
for children were involved in
the doom of adult sinners. We own the fact
and the difficulty growing out of
it. We are persuaded
moreover
that no reasoning of man shall ever fully
dissipate the mysterious darkness that hangs about the death of infants. But
the mystery and gloom refer mainly to the fact
not to the matter of its
occurrence. It is indeed a sad and awful thing to see young buds torn violently
from the stem of life by the rude hand of war. But
alas! the hand of other
spoilers has made larger havoc. Disease has filled
by millions
more infant
graves than war. Will they who cavil at the commanded slaughter of the sword
explain and vindicate the larger mortality of disease? They call the ills of
infancy natural. It is a gross mistake. They are unnatural
abnormal
manifestly punitive. And when we say punitive
we approach nearer a solution of
the great problem--instead of
as some affirm
adding to its gloom. For whether
does it present
most difficulty
to view this wide-wasting death of yet
irresponsible beings as the infliction of pure sovereignty
or as the result of
violated law! Is it not clear that when we interpose the idea of a federal
relationship
a principle of representation
by which sin transmits its doom
as by natural descent it transmits its virus
to each rising generation
we
have advanced a step outwards from the dark nucleus of the difficulty.
3. The visitation of vengeance was a valuable means of moral
influence. To Israel’s heart it was fitted to carry impressive conviction of
God’s immovable determination to carry out
His purposes of love
to be their
bulwark against surrounding heathenism
and to preserve them for the glories
and the happiness of the future. To Israel’s conscience it was fraught with
most powerful stimulus--awfully reminding them of the lofty supremacy
unswerving veracity
and unsparing righteousness of their God. And so this
dreadful sentence of extermination is most useful. The Lord has need of it. It
is one of a series of judgments that lift their terrible tops in sight of
hostile heathenism
and stand as sentinels of God around the sacred people.
Human life is a sacred thing. But He surely knows this full well who has so
carefully hedged it about
who marks even a sparrow’s fall
and who has in
gratuitous tenderness left yet to this abode of rebels its music and its
flowers. And the honour of that mighty Lord
the safety of His people
the
accomplishment of His grand remedial designs
are immeasurably more sacred. (P.
Richardson
B. A.)
It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king.
Saul rejected
The story is graphic and pathetic. This is Saul’s victory and also
his defeat. Our defeats are often wrapped up in our victories. Some of our most
dismal failures are hidden from us by the glare of a partial and disastrous
success. Saul succeeded and failed. He conquered Agag
but disobeyed God. And
so the glory of his victory is lost in the darkness of his defeat. A man may
conquer the greatest of earth’s kings
but his life is a consummate failure if
he disobeys the King of kings. And so
instead of praising Saul’s victory let
us meditate on Saul’s sin. His sin was the sin of disobedience
the sin by
which our first parents fell. In Saul’s defence of his sin we possess a study
of conscience unsurpassed in the literature of the world. Samuel on hearing of
Saul’s disobedience goes to meet him. Saul is the first to speak. “Blessed be
thou of the Lord: I have performed the commandment of the Lord.” Was he honest
in saying this? he may have been. Other men have lied as outrageously and still
believed themselves to be speaking the truth. The heart is deceitful above all
things and is oftentimes unconscious of its own deceitfulness. To be sure he
has preserved the life of Agag
but then imprisonment is a heavier punishment
to a proud king than death itself. The people have been destroyed. This is the
one thing essential. No danger can come from a king in chains. Saul has
whittled down tire Divine commands a little
but only a little; and who is so
foolish as to think that God will notice the swerving of a heir’s breadth from
what He commands? And reasoning thus we sometimes pare off the edges of God’s
commandments
blissfully unconscious that we are doing anything positively
wrong. To be sure
we are not keeping God’s commandment to the letter
but He
does not expect us to keep it so. It is enough if we kill the Amalekites. There
is no need of killing Agag. We take delight in slaying the Amalekites
but we
are opposed to killing Agag. And later on we discover to our sorrow that Agag
is the chief of the Amalekites and that ruin lurks in the survival of anything
which God commands us to destroy Saving Agag costs many a child of God his
crown. “I have performed the commandment of the Lord
” so Saul says
and while
he speaks his sentences are punctuated by the lowing of oxen and the bleating
of sheep. A man’s conscience may be so drugged that it will not cry out against
him
but some outside voice is sure to break forth in condemnation. God never
leaves Himself without a witness. And if the animals are dumb
then the
inanimate earth will speak. Abel’s blood will cry even from the ground. Saul
had said nothing about the sheep
and so the sheep supplied what Saul had
forgotten to mention. In their innocence they bleated out Seal’s guilt. The
universe is so constructed that a guilty man cannot hide his sin. You assert
your innocence
and yet my senses take knowledge of the evidences of your
guilt. You say you do not drink too much; what meaneth
then
this reddening of
the eyes and trembling of the hand? You say your heart is clean; what meaneth
then this rottenness that trickles now and then into your talk? You say you are
an honest man; what meaneth then this style of living which runs beyond the
limits of your income? You say you are a Christian; what mean these scores of
duties unperformed
bleating evidences of your unfaithfulness? “And Saul said
They have brought them from the Amalekites.” Mark that word “they.” We might
have expected it. When a man is driven into a corner
the most convenient
trapdoor through which he can make his escape is that little word “they.”
Conscience
when stirred
endeavours to shift responsibility. “They did it.” So
says every man not brave enough to face the consequences of his own misdeeds.
Why do you not
O preacher
preach spiritual and Scriptural sermons? Do not
begin your answer with
“Well
my people!” And why
O Christian man and woman
do you not inaugurate that reform which your town needs? Please do not say
anything about the people. Let each man bear his own responsibility without
flinching. But even those of us who are most ready to make a scapegoat of the
people do not wish to be too hard on them. We would be merciful and
considerate. We can see reasons why the people act as they do. “The people
spared the best of the sheep.” Only the best There was good reason for that. Why
destroy the best of the sheep? Why cause unnecessary destruction? Extravagance
certainly is not pleasing to God. We have used the same argument many a time We
believe in saving the best of the sheep. We are so afraid of being reckless
that we drop into disobedience. We would rather disobey God than kill one extra
sheep. We are as afraid of killing good sheep as Judas was of wasting precious
ointment and for the same reason. Many of God’s commands sound reckless
and so
we curb His Divine impetuosity by our prudence. We do not hesitate to kill the
best sheep for our own banquets
but when it comes to killing them for God that
is quite another matter. But the people in this case bad not preserved the
sheep for selfish uses. They had kept them with lofty and beautiful intentions.
“The people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen
to sacrifice unto the
Lord thy God.” To put these sheep to religious uses is certainly better than to
slay them indiscriminately in the fury of war. God said to slay both ox and
sheep
but it matters not to Him how they are slain. So Saul reasoned and so do
we reason. There is a streak of the Jesuit in us all. If the end is good
we
will not be too punctilious about the means. God cares for results. Methods are
of comparative unimportance. The church must meet its expenses. It matters
little how we raise the money
providing we raise it. It makes no difference
how we get people to church
providing we get them. The Bible must be defended.
It matters little what arguments are used
providing the blessed Book is saved.
The sheep are to be slain. It matters little how or where they are slain
whether on the altar or on the side of one of God’s hills. It must be
acknowledged that God in His word lays tremendous emphasis on the How
but if
we are only zealous to increase His glory we feel confident He will not
scrutinise too closely our spirit and methods. This is Saul’s apology. It gives
us a full length portrait of the man. While he speaks we feel we are looking on
a soul going to pieces
a moral character in the process of disintegration
a
king degenerating into a slave. Every sentence which he speaks tarnishes the
gold in his crown and falls like a blow upon his sceptre
which first shivers
and tinnily breaks. It is the sacrifice of the will which is pleasing to God.
Obedience is the queen of the virtues. Disobedience is the mother of sins. It
is the vine
and other sins are only branches. Because of disobedience Saul
lost his crown
and so shall we
if like him disobedient
lose the inheritance
which is ours. (Charles E. Jefferson.)
Saul rejected
On the top of the Hartz Mountains in Switzerland the figures of
travellers
in certain states of the atmosphere
take on a gigantic size to the
eye of an observer below
and every movement they make is exaggerated. In the
career of King Saul
as it is presented to us in Scripture
we see the figure
of a man raised to a dizzy height
his actions prelected
as it were
upon the
clouds
so that all mankind may learn from them the desired lesson that Jehovah
reigns
and that it is an evil end bitter thing to sin against him. Note--
I. Saul’s
elevation. If ever man was king by Divine right
it was Saul. Never were
greatness and royalty more suddenly thrust upon one than in this ease. The
priest and prophet
Samuel
gave him his title of king.
II. Saul’s
disobedience. This was seen plainly on two occasions: the first
when he
sacrificed at Gilgal
contrary to an express command; the second
when he
refused to smite Amalek utterly
and offer all the spoil to Jehovah. But these
occasions simply brought to the surface an underlying state of disobedience
which only waited its tempting inducements to appear. But before this last
outward disobedience there had been a slowly increasing departure from the living
God in the heart of the king
so that
when the wicked and justly punished
Amalekites were put under the ban he was not equal to the occasion and he
yielded to the temptation of the hour. The devoting of the whole nation to
destruction was no arbitrary act of barbarism that assumed to be under Divine
appointment
but a literal and genuine visitation from heaven upon those who
richly deserved it. The phrase “utterly destroy” is in the original “put under
the ban.” This ban was an old custom
originating before the time of Moses
but
formulated and regulated by him
as were so many other social customs amidst
which Israel grew up. In its simplest form it was the devotion to God of any
object
living or dead.
III. The ground of
Saul’s rejection. It is stated in the briefest language. Because thou hast
rejected the word of the Lord
He hath rejected thee from being king. The
rejection was already an accomplished fact in the Divine purpose
although its
execution was for a time delayed. In this complete rejection we are instructed
in God’s ways by seeing that it proceeded on no technical and superficial
grounds
as if the Almighty was an austere man
reaping where He had not sowed
and eager to secure a reason for condemning His servant. Even under the old dispensation
how spiritual was God’s claim; how identical with that which rests on us today.
The sacrifices of God have always been a broken spirit and a contrite heart.
Outward acts have never been accepted in place of an inward submission and
penitence.
IV. The false
repentance of Saul. It had much of the appearance of a godly sorrow that leads
to peace. It surely was sorrow. It showed an aroused and alarmed conscience.
Saul comprehended himself; saw the conflict within between his better and worse
nature. Again and again he awoke to his sin and folly with bitter tears in
after days
but never reached the point where he could say
in the wonderful
words of his successor
“Against Thee
Thee only
have I sinned.”
V. The mystery of
sin and punishment. Who can understand his errors
or those of any man in
ancient or modern times
delineated in the Bible or in our own literature? Who
can find the key to a sinful life
and unlook all its mysteries and
incongruities? What is sin but an irrational
abnormal
strange thing
making
everyone’s life at points an enigma
and best described as a mystery in its
origin
development
and results in eternity? Who shall attempt to fathom the
connection between wrong-doing and punishment
and foresee the consequences of
single transgression? Who is to say what a sin is in its real nature
and what
its results ought to be in a holy government? We cannot tell when our
characters have become so consistent in evil that God passes judgment on us
and tears from our hands all that He gave us
and for which we are called to
live. God has left the consequences of sin in the unseen future
like the
shadows of mountains when the sun is behind us. This may be because He wishes
us to be more afraid of sin than of its results. This man
whose downfall was
the result of his own misdeeds
was
in the hands of Providence
a scourge for
Israel
sent to them
as we read
in God’s anger. The career of a sinner can be
understood only when we see to what uses it is put in the world’s discipline.
If we are obedient to God He will turn our lives into a blessing upon men. If
we rebel
He still can use us turning our actions into scourges. To each of us
is offered a kingdom
invisible but real
as old as eternity. (Monday Club
Sermons.)
Saul’s disobedience and rejection
The intoxication of power is upon him
impelling him directly in
the teeth of the Divine warning. He is occupying dangerous ground. Our passage
shows the turning point in Saul’s history.
I. Let us observe
the occasion which brought about the crisis. God had given him a commission to
ban the Amalekites
the ancient enemies of Israel. The crisis in Saul’s life
had come. He fails to meet it
in the spirit of a true man of God. His soul
finds temptation in a moment when power and success and human adulation have
intoxicated him; he yields to the snare
and falls to rise no more. At the
turning point of his life he is weighed in the balances and found wanting. The
whole sad transaction and all its terrible consequences are summed up in one
word--disobedience to positive Divine command. It breaks upon us at once. It is
complete and fully manifested in a single transaction. But definite steps led
up to it. It can be accounted for. It should have been avoided.
II. As the
disobedience was complete and inexcusable
so the punishment was prompt
definite
and final. “God hath rejected thee from being king over Israel.”
Successive steps led to its accomplishment. God caused Samuel to withdraw from
him. He took his good Spirit away
and allowed an evil spirit to come upon him.
He was left to his own rash
self-willed
and self-pleasing nature. He was
allowed to work out his own destruction and the ruin of his dynasty
while God
quietly but diligently prepared a better man to take his place on the throne of
Israel. A great and solemn principle emerges here--the basis-principle upon
which all right and enduring relations to God must rest
--to wit
obedience.
There can be no happy relations between a sovereign Creator and dependent
creatures upon any other scheme
even though that sovereign Creator be properly
viewed as a tender Father. The whole question needs to be restated with
firmness. The sentimentality of a spurious faith
which claims heaven and yet
the right to please self
is a travesty upon the word of God and upon every
serious utterance of human consciousness. And yet this sentimentality is
seeking to interpret the preaching of salvation by the cross in the interest of
selfish indulgence
and is going far to justify the sneer of the enemy
“that
morals are divorced from religion;” for what are any Christian morals worth
that do not mean obedience to the living God? Let Saul’s sad fall by reason of
disobedience warn us at thin point. In conclusion we may draw out a few brief
lessons.
1. The danger of a
halfway surrender to God
a consecration which has its reservations. Such a
course is an insult to God. It is the very worst spirit of bargain making. It
marks off a section of our individuality
into which God has no right to come
with His demands. Saul was willing to serve God in being a king if he would
have his way when the spoil was at hand. He was quite willing to fellowship
Samuel and have his endorsement if he could sacrifice when he pleased. But this
spirit brought him to a bad end.
2. See how disobedience
demoralises the spirit and sets it upon unworthy shifts His character drooped
lower and lower as he sought his way out from the consequences of disobedience
by unworthy shifts. When we have sinned it is better to be open and ingenuous
with God and man
and while sorrowing for the sin
meekly receive the
consequences in the full purpose of immediate amendment.
3. The folly of
those in authority
as parents
pastors or teachers
yielding to the tastes and
entreaties of the young
the wayward
or the undisciplined for the privilege of
doing that which is wrong either in itself or in its tendency. Saul pleaded
that he yielded to the wishes of the people when he saved the best of the
spoil. So with many now in the place of solemn and responsible authority. But
this is simple weakness where we have the right to expect strength. This
weakness does not lesson the guilt before God. (W. G. Craig
D. D.)
The commission given to Saul
The command given to Saul was unmistakable and imperative. And
this was to be in fulfilment of the legacy of judgment and vengeance left to
the people by Moses long before. In Moses’ words you have hints of the real
character and life of the Amalekites that are to be associated with Samuel’s
words
in which he calls them “the sinners
the Amalekites.” Here you have
their character of bloodthirsty
treacherous marauders. The days of old needed
the destruction of such as the Amalekites; and if Israel had to do the work it
was needful that they should be utterly destroyed. It was better for the world
to be without such sinners
and it was required
for Israel’s sake
that Saul
and his people should have no gain from the conquest. God often does thus with
the ill-gotten wealth of wicked nations. Where are all the riches of the mighty
monarchies of old? Where is the bloodstained wealth of the ruined Roman Empire?
Who can tell? God swept
it
away
for a curse--the curse of conquest and
oppression--was upon at Consider
Saul’s violation of the law of obedience.
Saul gave himself to spoilation; the attempted shelter under fear of the people
belied itself; his repeated words “that they had brought the spoil to sacrifice
to the Lord thy God” were an attempt to justify sin by profession of
good intention
and to degrade religious service of God into formal acts of
ceremonial observance. The answer to all his excuses and explanations was
simple and as imperative as the commands he had neglected
“Because thou hast
rejected the Word of the Lord
He hath also rejected thee from being king.”
There are many lessons taught us in these things
among which
let us note the
following
for they touch solemn matters in the life of each of us.
I. It is evident
that a professedly good or creditable intention will not justify a bad act. It
is true that
the real character of any act is in the intention of the doer;
but you cannot judge acts as though they were isolated
and to be taken each on
its own merits. The intention that is behind one act may itself be a depraved
spiritual act or represent a spiritual state that; God hates.
II. Nor can God be
honoured in one way at the cost of dishonouring Him in another. Obedience to
one command that is built out of the ruins and breach of another
must be
displeasing to God. If we do
we shall add to non-performance of some duties
the vitiating of those we do observe.
III. So
also
are
we to learn that offerings to God are abomination if they do not express
obedient love. For they may represent “pride
vain-glory
or hypocrisy” they
may be a service of self that is all the more real for being hidden under the
veil of Divine honour
or they may be a following of custom
or a sensuous
dependence upon superstitious services for acceptance with the Lord. God’s
supreme demand is loving obedience: the submission of the heart
the sacrifice
of the will the offering up of self
the fasting from the self-willed
indulgence of our own thoughts and intents. (R. G. B. Ryley.)
Saul rejected
What are the lessons with which the narrative is charged?
I. The danger of
mistaking partial for complete obedience. “Blessed be thou of the Lord: I have
performed the commandment of the Lord.”
1. God requires
literal obedience.
2. God’s language
never exceeds Gods meaning.
3. Conscience is
seen most clearly in minute obedience.
II. The possibility
of giving a religious reason for an act of disobedience.
I. The people
spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen to sacrifice unto the Lord thy
God”
1. One duty must
not be performed on the ruins of another. It was a duty to sacrifice
but
sacrifice must not be offered upon disobedience.
2. God’s
commandment must not be changed by men’s afterthought. Lucky ideas
sudden
inspirations
and the like
mean ruin
unless well tested.
III. The danger of
being seduced into disobedience by social clamour. “I have sinned: for I have
transgressed the commandment of the Lord
and thy words: because I feared the
people
and obeyed their voice.” The people who tempt are not the people who
can save.
2. Where God has
spoken distinctly there should be no human consultation
IV. The certain
withdrawment of the best influences of life as the result of disobedience. “And
Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death.” Parents
ministers
friends
gone! There are some incidental points of application:--
1. Sin discovers itself:
“What meaneth this this bleating of the sheep in mine ears
and the lowing of
the cattle which I hear?”
2. Sin will be
punished. Four hundred years elapsed before the sword fell upon Amalek (Deuteronomy
25:17; Deuteronomy
25:19). Time has no
effect upon moral distinctions
or moral judgments. (J. Parker
D. D.)
Saul’s continued disobedience
A course of action more certainly calculated to insult the majesty
of Heaven cannot be conceived than that which Saul adopted. It is true the
command was partially obeyed
but the only case in which obedience was rendered
was that in which there was no temptation to gratify selfish feeling. Where
however
anything could be turned to his own personal advantage
there the
command of God was recklessly trifled with. Look attentively at Saul in this
matter. When Jonathan had done nothing to deserve death
there was no mercy for
him in his father’s heart; and it required the downright and peremptory
prohibition of all Saul’s army to save the innocent son alive. But
when a duty
was rendered imperative by that God who is not bound to give
in any case
His
reasons for action
Saul was deputed to put Agag to death
when to have done
this would have been but an act of simple obedience
he ventured to disobey
and spared the man whom God had marked for destruction. It was
in Saul’s view
a matter of pride to have his triumph graced by the presence of a conquered
king
to make Agag feel that he owed his life to his own clemency
and that he
held its prolongation on the tenure of his conqueror’s will. He found a greater
gratification in ell this than in simple obedience to God. Samuel goes
after a
night spent in grief and in prayer
to be the bearer of the tidings of God’s
displeasure. But what strange scene is this which breaks upon us as the
messenger of the Lord reaches Gilgal? Much as we know of Saul
and accustomed
as we have become to the proofs of his moral obtuseness
we are hardly prepared
for the downright self-complacency
for the cool effrontery of the words which
he addressed to Samuel
“Blessed be thou of the Lord: I have performed the
commandment
of the Lord.”
I. We are reminded
that a great amount of direct sin may be committed and nevertheless disguised
under a loud profession of obedience to God. There is
in some individuals
a
forwardness in certain forms of duty which cost no self-denial at all; a
forwardness
also
in the announcement of what has been done which is
in
itself
to practised eyes a ground for suspicion that all is not right behind
the scenes We sometimes notice individuals overdoing the thing that is
courteous and polite--“glaringly civil”--towards those who come on the errand
of Christian fidelity
and whose business is with souls in prospect of the
great account. There is so much joy expressed at seeing them
there is so much
interest taken in their presence
there is such a sudden burst of cordiality
as that upon the very amazement excited there follows the suspicion that
something is going on which there is an effort to conceal. Let us aim after
such a walk and conversation as that we can be natural in our demeanour
and
not artificial and forced
such a life as will bear inspection behind the
scenes
and as will not compel those who watch for souls to ask
as they look
around
what meaneth this or that? what meaneth this unholy gratification? what
meaneth this unsubdued temper?
II. The answer of Saul
teaches that the men who
to gratify their own purposes
will lead others wrong
and countenance them in evil-doing
will be the very first to expose them when
they want to excuse themselves. And Saul said
“They--not I--for the people
spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen
to sacrifice unto the Lord thy
God; and the rest we have utterly destroyed.” Ah! study well that sentence
“They” did it. Would that its impressiveness might be felt by the thousands who
are too ready to be led by the advice
by the example
of those who ought to
have but one rule for their own conduct and for their Influence over others
too
and that rule God’s word--God’s will. There are some who will lead you
into evil for the sake of getting countenance to themselves in their own want
of religion. How many have had to mourn at last
when they have found their
advisers converted into their accusers
when they have seen their companions in
guilt stand as the witnesses for their condemnation.
III. There are other
erroneous principles in this answer of Saul.
1. He evidently
implied that a formal act of obedience might be taken as a set-off against an
act of direct disobedience. He implied that
putting one thing over against the
other
God would be satisfied in the long run. If he intended to offer
sacrifice at all
it was upon the principle of compromise and composition. He
would have given God a part of the spoil
that he might have kept a much larger
portion for himself. He would have offered a fraction
that the extensive remainder
might not have rendered his conscience uneasy. In those sacrifices which you
offer to God no equivalent is found for the want of obedience. Obedience
as a
principle
has a value far above sacrifice
as an action; it is “better than
sacrifice”--better
as the principle must be superior to the form in which it
is embodied--better
as the affection which sends a gift is more valuable than
the gift itself. How
then
with justice
can the one be substituted for the
other? The offering and the sacrifice have a value as embodiments of the
principle of obedience and love--then only are they acceptable; but as
substitutes for principle they have no acceptableness.
2. Another error
in Saul’s answer to which Samuel addressed himself was this
that
admitting he
was in fault
there was no great harm in his sin after all. The king of Israel
did not
indeed
use these words
but doubtless the prophet gathered that this
was his real sentiment. “For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft
and
stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.” Here we see a class of sins
mentioned whose heinousness was undoubted. Witchcraft God had forbidden to be
tolerated on any account. Iniquity is here undoubtedly put for flagrant
violation of God’s law; such
for instance
as the idolatry mentioned
immediately after. The probability is that the king of Israel plumed and prided
himself upon his public acts in reference to these very points. You have acted
as though you thought witchcraft was a great crime
and so it is; but then
rebellion such as that which you have manifested is as bad. Your rebellion
what has that
been but putting God out of His proper place of authority
and
consulting your will and your inclination instead of listening to His voice.
The actual amount of our guilt must not be adjusted by the external form of the
transgression in which it issues--by its classification according to outward
appearance Saul congratulated himself on being thought far superior to the
consulter of those who had familiar spirits
and would have been shocked at the
idea of being regarded as an idolater; but God thought him just as bad as
though he were the one or the other. It is well for us to recollect that in
spirit we may be bearing the very same kind of guilt before the eye of
Omniscience which we are condemning in the declared conduct of others. (J.
A. Miller.)
Saul’s dethronement
Saul has thrown away his last chance
and Samuel mourns for him in
the bitterness of his soul. Rationalistic writers
who would fain remove the
miraculous out of Scripture
and explain the currents of its history by the
play of human passions
have maintained
in strange inconsistency with the
facts before them
that it was Samuel who compassed Baal’s misfortunes. They
argue that
displeased with the king for supplanting him in the rule and the
affections of the people
he had secretly wrought his fall. How utterly
inconsistent such a view is with the facts of Baal’s history
especially how
utterly inconsistent it is with the true relation of Samuel to Saul
as disclosed
in the history
need hardly be stated. So we read that Samuel
when be bad
heard of Saul’s transgression
“cried unto the Lord all night.” and again in
the last verse of the chapter
that “Samuel mourned for Saul.” The prophet’s
tears and entreaties could not avert the doom that was inevitable. Saul had
sinned away his last
chance
and he was finally rejected. Saul
after setting
up a monument
commemorative of his victory
at Carmel
had gone down to
Gilgal. Samuel having learned of his movements
proceeded thither to meet him.
An interview followed. “Blessed be thou of the Lord: I have performed the
commandment of the Lord.” The refutation of Saul’s falsehood is not far to
seek. It comes from the sheep and the oxen
the very spoils which he has spared.
The veil of his false piety is in a moment rent off
and his true position
before God revealed. The fearful nature of that position flashes upon him; Saul
must face the sad reality. The act of disobedience which had caused his
rejection betrayed his whole character as carnal and estranged from God. We are
struck here with the cowardice of his self-vindication. “They have brought them
from the Amalekites;” “the people spared the best of the sheep and of the
oxen.” He himself has had no share in the sin--the transgression is the act of
the army! In their obedience
however
be will claim a part
“The rest we have
utterly destroyed.” We blame our circumstances
we blame others
we blame God;
how slow we are to blame ourselves! The first symptom of a right state of mind
is when the sinner
in self-condemnation and sorrow
acknowledges his guilt as
his own. Saul
so brave in the battlefield
so generous when his better nature
was called into play
roils his guilt on others. The people did it; he himself
was innocent. What moral cowardice! But his reply is not more cowardly and mean
than it is false. They did it
he declares
“to sacrifice unto the Lord thy
God.” Who can for a moment believe that Saul spoke what was true? The assumed
motive of sacrifice was a hollow falsehood
an afterthought
as flimsy as it
was false. Further
one is struck with the profane daring of Saul’s reply. The
spoils were spared
he says to sacrifice
unto the Lord; it is as if the
mention of such a motive would so gratify the Lord am to lead Him to compound
with him for his transgression. Let us mark finally the spirit of estrangement
from God which breathes in Saul’s reply The people spared the spoils
” he says
“to sacrifice unto the Lord thy God” It is not “the
Lord my God
” for
alas!
Seal’s guilt has estranged him from God. A great barrier has arisen between him
and the Lord. God is no longer his
but Samuel’s God. How cad the fall! (Henry
W. Bell
M. A.)
Christian culture
I. No excuse
however plausible
can ever justify disobedience to a Divine command.
II. God held Saul
responsible for this disobedience
and personally punished him for it
though
be plead that it was the act of the people.
III. Sacrifice
“instead of obedience” is a loathing to God.
IV. God uses
strange means
sometimes
to betray guilt. (Homiletic Review.)
The self-righteous
Solomon
in his Proverbs
writes: “Most men will proclaim everyone
his own goodness; but a faithful man who can find?” and also
“There is a
generation that are pure in their own eyes
and yet is not washed from their
filthiness.” Solomon discovered the self-righteous in his day. Cloaks of
superior piety covered hearts full of impiety. Our Saviour likewise witnessed
much of outward cleanliness
but inward wickedness. Semblances of piety
only--shells without the kernel. In all ages and among all nations this class
is found One of the most vivid illustrations of a self-righteous man is that
presented in Saul’s character. Note in what his self-righteousness consisted:
1. In partially
heeding the Lord’s commands Partial service and fondness for spoils exhibit his
true character. Society today is tinctured with like partial service and
fondness for spoils.
2. In endeavours
to appear good. The ready salutation was common in the East; his assertion of
fidelity unasked was egotistic. Moreover it was false.
3. In excusing
self and condemning others. “They did it.” He shirks responsibility
he would
be seen of men as the true captain
when in fact he was the real hypocrite.
4. In commanding
sacrifice in justification of disobedience. He claims that the spoils were for
religious purposes. What vain justification! As well may the dealer in ardent
spirits argue that he does his damning work that he may build a church. Good
deeds cannot stone for disobedience without repentance. If we become enamoured
of our goodness
our piety is vain
and exclusion from Christ’s kingdom is
certain. It was the hidden rock that sent the City of Columbus
with her
precious freight
into the mighty deep. The hidden defect in the car wheel
brings wreck and ruin to the train. The hidden flaw in the column or arch tells
the story of disaster and death. The hidden defect of self-righteousness will
bring upon us irreparable ruin. Clothe yourselves with Christ’s righteousness.
(W. E. Fetcham.)
Partial obedience a sin
This fragment of ancient history teaches--
I. That partial
obedience to the commands of God is not satisfactory to Him.
II. That the
performance of one duty cannot atone for the neglect of another.
III. That there is
in sin a sad tendency to self-multiplication. History abounds in examples of
this self-propagating power of evil. Men get entangled in wickedness
and then
with a view to free themselves
they plunge deeper into the labyrinth.
“I am in blood
Stepp’d in so far
that
should I wade no more
Returning
were as tedious as go o’er.”
--Shakespeare.
The beginning of evil is like the escape of water from a great
canal or capacious reservoir; it is like the falling of a spark upon
combustibles. No one can tell when or where its ravages wilt end. Will they
ever totally end? Beware of such beginnings!
IV. That obedience
to popular demands is not synonymous with obedience to God. (W. Jones.)
Showy profession
as the most florid people do not always enjoy the firmest state of
health
so the most showy professors are not always the holiest and most
substantial believerses (A. Toplady.)
And it grieved Samuel
and
he cried unto the Lord all night.
Samuel’s grief over Saul
It is the distinguishing mark of God’s children that they sigh and
cry for the offences and affronts committed against their God. One prophet
wished that his head were waters
add his eyes a fountain of tears
that he
might weep day and night (Jeremiah 9:1) Another
declared
his tears ran like rivers
because men kept not God’s laws (Psalms 119:136). Another
said
he had continual sorrow in his heart for his unconverted brethren (Romans 9:2). And when God
would point out the grand mark by which his own were to be known
he says
“Go
through the midst of the city
the midst of Jerusalem
and set a mark upon the
foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be
done in the midst thereof” (Ezekiel 9:4). When
wickedness is going on in the streets
or in the secret chambers
do you shut
your door about you
and cry unto the Lord all night? or do you look on with
something like interest
and smile when you ought to sigh
and laugh when you
ought to weep? A school
mistress was once telling me of something that a girl had
done wrong; and while she was describing the fault in a very lively manner
several of the children smiled
and scarcely suppressed a laugh. She
immediately turned to them with a solemnity and concern which I can never
forget
and said
“Now
girls
you have made her sin your own
those who could
laugh at it could do it.” The girls looked alarmed
and I hope they would not
again so thoughtlessly make a mock at sin. (Helen Plumptre.)
Grief over a fallen brother
Bishop Thirlby was appointed by Queen Mary
and went as her
ambassador to Rome to swear anew England’s allegiance to the Pope. But when he
performed the ceremony of degradation over Archbishop Cranmer
he wept with
keenest sorrow as he did it. (H. O. Mackay.)
Verses
14-23
Verse 14
What meaneth then this
bleating of the sheep in mine ears.
Hypocrisy
1.I
learn
first
from the subject that God will expose hypocrisy. A hypocrite is
one who pretends to be what he is not
or to do what he does not. Saul was only
a type of a class. There are a great many churches that have two or three
ecclesiastical Uriah Heeps. When the fox begins to pray
look out for your
chickens. A man of that kind is of immense damage to the Church of Christ. A
ship may outride a hundred storms and yet a handful of worms in the planks may
sink it to the bottom. The Church of God is not so much in danger of the
cyclones of trouble and persecution that come upon it as of the vermin of
hypocrisy that infest it. Wolves are of no danger to the fold of God unless
they look like sheep Oh! we cannot deceive God with a church certificate. If
you have the grace of God
profess it. Profess no more than you have. But I
want the world to know that where there is one hypocrite in the church
there
are five hundred outside of it
for the reason that the field is larger. There
are men in all circles that will bow before you
and who are obsequious in your
presence
and talk flatteringly
but who
all the while they are in your
conversation
are digging for bait and angling for imperfections. In your
presence they imply that they are everything friendly
but after awhile you
find that they have the fierceness of a catamount
the slyness of a snake
and
the spite of a devil. God will expose such. The gun they load will burst in
their own hands; the lies they tell will break their own teeth; and at the very
moment they think they have been successful in deceiving you and deceiving the
world
the sheep will bleat and the oxen will bellow.
2. I
learn
further
from this subject how natural it is to try to put off your sins
upon other people. Human nature is the same in all the ages Adam confronted
with his sin
said: “The woman tempted me
and I did eat;” and the woman charged
it upon the serpent; and
if the serpent could have spoken
it would have
charged it upon the devil. I suppose that Adam was just as much to blame as Eve
was. You cannot throw off the responsibility of any sin upon the shoulders of
other people. Here is a young man who says; “I know I am doing wrong
but I
have not had any chance. I had a father who despised God
and a mother who was
a disciple of godless fashion. I am not to blame for my sins--it is my bringing
up.” Here is a business man. He says: “I know I don’t do exactly right in
trade
but all the dry goods men do it
and all the hardware men do this
and I
am not responsible.” God will hold you responsible for what you do
and them
responsible for what they do. “If thou be wise
thou shalt be wise for thyself;
but if thou scornest
thou alone shalt bear it.”
3. I
learn
further
from this subject what God meant by extermination. There may be
more sins in our soul than there were Amalekites. We must kill them. Woe unto
us if we spare Agag. Here is a Christian who says: “I will drive out all the
Amalekites of sin from my heart.” Here is jealousy
down goes that Amalekite.
Here is backbiting
down goes that Amalekite. And what slaughter he makes among
his sins
striking right and left. What is that out yonder lifting up his head?
It is Agag--it is worldliness. It is as old sin he cannot bear to strike down.
It is a darling transgression he cannot afford to sacrifice. I appeal for
entire consecration. Christ will not stay in the same house with Agag. You must
give up Agag or give up Christ. Jesus says: “All of that heart or none.”
4. I
learn
further
from this subject that it is vain to try to defraud God. Here
Saul thought he had cheated God out of those sheep and oxen; but he lost his
crown--he lost his empire. You cannot cheat God. The Lord God came into the
counting house
and said: “I have allowed you to have all this property for
ten
fifteen
or twenty years
and you have not done justice to My poor
children. When the beggar called upon you
you hounded him off your steps. When
My suffering children appealed to you or help
you had no mercy. I only asked
for so much
or so much; but you did not give it to Me
and now I will take it
all.” God asks of us one-seventh of our time in the way of Sabbath. Do you
suppose we can get an hour of that time successfully away from its true object?
No
no. As you go into the world
exhibit an open-hearted Christian frankness.
Do not be hypocritical in anything; you are never safe if you are. In the most
inopportune moment the sheep will bleat and the oxen bellow. Have no mercy on
Agag. Down with your sins--down with your pride--down with your worldliness. I
know you cannot achieve this work by your own arm; but Almighty grace is
sufficient (T. De Witt Talmage.)
Sell deception
Let our subject be the
danger of self deception and half-heartedness in the religious life. We shall
not have to do with people wholly irreligious and immoral
with those we
commonly term sinners; but with a kind of semi-religious
or professedly
religious people--people always hovering about the kingdom of God
but who
never truly and heartily enters into it; one part of whose life seems alway to
contradict and undo another.
I. The
master evil--want of whole-hearted surrender and obedience to the will and
commandment of God. This it was which ran through
vitiated
and spoiled the
whole life and course of the unhappy king
Saul. No more ill-fated
unhappy
unprofitable enigma to himself
to God
and to the world
than a man who has
never more than half a mind or heart to anything. Such a man can serve neither
world well and truly
for he dare not give himself up wholly to the present
and be cannot give himself up to the world to come
the kingdom of God. He
knows and believes both too much and too little. This description applies to
many professing Christians. They have too little gospel in them to make them
blessed in the Lord; and enough perhaps to make them ashamed and miserable in
the day of visitation--the still small voice only heard at intervals
but the
bleating of sheep and the lowing of oxen generally gross and loud enough to
close their ears to the music of heaven and eternity.
II. Herein
is displayed lamentable weakness of faith and purpose. There was a fatal
weakness of soul and character about Saul
which showed itself at every great
crisis
and at length brought his days to an end in calamity
disgrace
despair. He was not a man to be kept true to his avowed faith and principles
was too easily turned aside; he put his hand to the plough
and yet looked
back; he reminds us of those in the gospels who said
“Lord
I will follow
Thee
but.”
III. The
deceiving love of self
self interest
covetous desires
vain ambitions
bender
us insensible to the sovereign claims of God and truth. It is so easy
while
professing to give ourselves to God and His holy service
to seek and serve
ourselves meanwhile
and keep in view low earthly ends--even to fight against
prevalent forms of error and evil more for the sake of our own advancement and advantage
than from pure loyalty to the cause of truth and righteousness. We may win the
spoils of the enemy
and in so doing spare Agag the king
take the master-evil
home into our own hearts and households
seek our own reputation and interest
and not the glory of God.
IV. We
have here also a melancholy example of sparing sins and evils that should be
slain
sheltering and harbouring them under false pretences
by unworthy pleas
and excuses. The mark of a true man and Christian to allow no known sin
least of
all favourite
profitable
accustomed
pleasant sins.
V. How
short and easy the stage between this evil partiality
this indulged
insincerity at given points
and a blinding hypocrisy throughout the man.
VI. It is
a vain thing to throw the blame on others
to allege public opinion and custom
in self-justification and defence
when we are disobeying the plainly expressed
will and commandments of God. We cut ourselves off
in this way
from all true
kingship
not in Israel only
as Saul; but is a greater
holier
ever during
kingdom
the kingdom of God. (Watson Smith.)
The rigour of Divine law
In approaching the
fundamental principles suggested by the narrative
we ought to note two useful
incidental points:--
1. That
man cannot evade Divine retribution (1 Samuel
15:2).
2. That
kindness to the good ensures Divine compensation (1 Samuel
15:6).
Kindness is self- rewarding. Beneficence bears an immortal fruitage. Passing
from these introductory points we are brought into full contact with the
lessons of the incident. We may learn:--
I. The
transcendent importance of rendering literal obedience to Divine requirements.
The argument turns on the word literal. Learn that Divine language never
exceeds Divine meaning. There is significance in every word; you cannot
amputate a single syllable
without doing violence to the Divine idea.
II. The
fearful possibility of resting satisfied wits partial obedience. Are you
satisfied because your life is right in the main? God will not be satisfied. He
examines the minutest fibres of life. Verily the best of men need be clothed in
Christ’s righteousness
or they will be consumed in the fire of Divine trial.
III. The
utter impossibility of rendering disobedience well-pleasing to God. A religious
reason is adduced in justification of disobedience. God said
Exterminate
but
the people said
Sacrifice. God
however
rejected the offering which was
presented at the expense of obedience. Learn then:--
1. That
Divine requirements are absolute.
2. That
God will not allow one duty to be performed on the ruin of another. Let no man
forsake God’s temple in order that he may visit the sick. Let it stand as a
vital clause in your life-creed
that God will not accept one duty at the
expense of another!
IV. The
danger of being seduced into disobedience by social clamour. Lessons suggested
by Saul’s circumstances:--
1. That
there is a higher law than the verdict of society. Popular opinion is fickle:
moral law is immutable.
2. That
there is a crisis in which social force can yield us no assistance. Saul was
placed in that fearful crisis. He had obeyed the people
but now the people
could be of no service to him! The people could violate Divine law
but could
not avert Divine judgment! (Joseph Parker
D. D.)
Verse
20
Yea
I have obeyed the voice of the Lord
and have gone the way
which the Lord sent me.
Saul’s obedience
We invite your attention to some features of Saul’s character
as
drawn out by the way in which he obeyed the Divine command.
1. First
let us notice the zeal and alacrity with which Saul
proceeded to carry out the Divine will. Unlike Moses
who complained of his
want of eloquence when bidden to go to Pharaoh in Jehovah’s name
and plead for
the deliverance of his oppressed countrymen--unlike Jonah
who positively
refused to bear the dread message with which he was charged to the inhabitants
of the great city of Nineveh
and fled to Tarshish
to escape an unwelcome
tax--Saul displayed a commendable zeal in executing the command that was laid
upon him. It is obvious that he undertook the work willingly
and executed it
zealously. No victory could be more complete. The King was a prisoner. The
people were slain. In the King’s estimation the Divine command was fully
carried out. Saul does not seem to have had the slightest misgiving as to the
correctness of his own interpretation of the Divine command. He felt that be
bad done a great work
and that on this occasion no one could breathe a word
against him. Poor deluded
self-conceited King of Israel! We are often told
that history repeats itself
and it is certain that the history of Saul
King
of Israel
has been often reproduced in the history of the Church of Christ.
Jehu did a work for God
and he did it with alacrity. He destroyed the
worshippers of Baal--nay
more than this
for it is said that he “destroyed
Baal out of Israel.” And yet the future of that man was a sad one. We read that
he “took no heed to walk in the law of the Lord God of Israel with all his
heart; for he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam
which made Israel to sin”
(2 Kings 10:1-36). The Pharisees in the
time of our Lord had a zeal for God. They reverenced the law of Moses
and paid
to it a certain obedience (Matthew 23:1-39). And yet upon no body of
men did our Divine Master so pour forth the torrent of His indignation as upon
those arrogant
self-righteous
self-satisfied Pharisees. And is there not a
voice of warning for us in these instances of antiquity Men of wealth may
dedicate that wealth to God. They may build a church
or a hospital
or a
school. And yet that building so externally lovely may be hideous--hideous
I
say
to that God “that seeth in secret.” Self
and self alone
may have been
its foundation stone It may be but a monument of human selfishness and
ambition. Another man may take an interest in the missionary cause and devote
his wealth to the spreading abroad of the knowledge of God. This indeed is a
good object
and worthy of our best energies But
oh! if men engage in the work
from any but the highest motive--the desire of saving precious souls for whom
Christ has died--if being men of narrow views they seize it as an opportunity
for advancing their own religions party; if above all they allow their
so-called religious zeal to deaden their instincts of common justice and even
humanity; if they would fain silence all but those as narrow-minded as
themselves--surely they have not caught fully the spirit of our Divine Master.
2. We have seen that Saul’s obedience was marred by a spirit of
boastful self-confidence. And his history is instructive
because the spirit of
Saul still lives in the religious professor of the present day. Tell the
respectable man as he leaves the church porch that he is a sinner
that there
is iniquity in his “holy things”--sin in his prayers
sin in his praises--tell
him
in the touching language of the good Bishop Beveridge
that his very
repentance needs to be repented of
and that his tears need washing in the
blood of Christ
and he indignantly repudiates the charge
and says
“Yea
I
have obeyed the voice of the Lord
and have gone the way which the Lord sent
me.” Self-confidence is the mark of the natural man. Self-distrust is the mark
of the genuine disciple of Christ. (C. B. Brigstocke.)
Verse 22
Behold
to obey is better
than sacrifice.
Obedience and sacrifice
Saul’s misconduct supplied
the occasion for the announcement of an absolute and eternal truth.
I. That sacrifice
is only circumstantially necessary
but obedience is essentially so.
1. Sacrifice is either an atonement for offence
and then
however
excellent the remedy
it cannot for its own sake be as acceptable to the
Creator as the healthful action which renders the remedy unnecessary.
2. It is the suffering occasioned by transgression
and then it
cannot be so pleasant to a parent as the obedience which prevents the
suffering. Hence as sacrifice is a remedy for moral disease
it is good
but as
obedience is the pulsation of unimpaired health
it is better.
II. Sacrifice is a
relative good--obedience is personal and therefore better. The idea may be thus
expressed:--Sacrifice is required because of the relation of God to other
beings than the offerer
but obedience is demanded by the relation of the
individual to God.
III. Sacrifice is
temporary
obedience eternal. When God’s will shall be done on earth as it is
in heaven
sacrifice shall be no more needed on earth than in heaven.
IV. Sacrifice is
good as a means; therefore
to obey
being the end
is better.
1. Such sacrifices only were accepted of old
as God had commanded.
Thus they were only valuable as they were related to obedience
and for its
sake.
2. The great sacrifice is valuable as an atonement for man’s
disobedience.
“Being made perfect He
became the Author of eternal salvation to all them that obey Him.” (William
Knox.)
Of the duty which God
requireth of man
This text is a reproof given
to one that wore a crown
teaching him
that though he was Israel’s sovereign
he was God’s subject. In the words we may notice the duty which God requires of
men
which is obedience. What they are to obey is the voice of the Lord
whereby He manifests His will: it is His revealed will
whatever way He is
pleased to notify it to them. Hence the obedience in the text is called
hearkening. The excellency and eminency of this duty. God delights in it. All
other things must yield to it
but it to none.
1. The duty which man owes unto God. That is obedience. We are in a
state of subjection to God. He is our Superior
and His will we are to obey in
all things. He is our King
and we must obey Him as His subjects. He is our
Father
and we must show Him all respect
reverence
and affection as His
dutiful children. He is our Lord and Master and we must yield Him the most
cheerful and unlimited service
as is our reasonable duty. He is our supreme
Lawgiver
and we must receive the law at His mouth
every law and precept
every ordinance that is stamped with His authority
whatever is subscribed with
a “Thus saith the Lord
” readily obeying it.
2. Of whom the Lord requires this duty. No man can be free from this
duty more than he can be a God to himself.
3. The rule of that obedience. It is the will of God. His will is our
supreme law. Not the secret will of God; for that which God never revealed to
man
cannot be his rule; but the revealed will of God (Deuteronomy 29:29).
4. The properties of this obedience which God requires of man.
5. On what accounts do we owe this obedience to God. On these
principally
Obedience and sacrifice
compared
That obedience is due to
God from all His intelligent creatures
I suppose none will deny. It is the
original unchangeable law of creation
which every after discovery served not
to undermine
but to support and confirm. It was the religion of man in the
primitive state of innocence; and it shall be the religion of heaven
when we
shall see our Maker as He is. The very excellence of truth itself lies in its
influence on holiness
and the very purpose of every sacred institution is to
form our minds to a habit of obedience
and subjection to the will of God. In the
meantime
it is of the utmost moment
that
we have clear and just conceptions
of the nature and principles of obedience.
I. I am to open a
little
and make a few remarks upon the history which gave occasion to the
words of the prophet.
1. How easily are people misled into disobedience by their present
interest
or carnal inclinational how ready are these to mix themselves in all
our actions
and to turn what was intended as an instance of obedience
into an
act of impiety and transgression!
2. You may observe how natural it is for people
when challenged for
any fault
to lay the blame of it upon others
even when there is little
prospect of hiding their own guilt.
3. We may see it is an unusual thing for men to imagine they have
been obedient to God even in that very action
by which they have in a
remarkable manner shown their disobedience. True obedience is always humble
and sensible of the imperfections attending it. Ostentatious obedience
if it
were for no other reason
is an abomination in the sight
of God. How often
does it happen that the excuses for sin are the aggravations of it? It is very
remarkable
though melancholy to reflect upon
that those excuses for sin which
carry in them the most daring profanity
are commonly most stupifying to the
conscience. Such is the state of all those who fortify themselves in an evil
practice
by embracing loose principles
who
having first given way to
unbridled inclination in the breach of God’s laws
steel themselves against
conviction and repentance
by a denial of His truth.
5. How great is the folly of men who hope to atone for their
disobedience by any compensation
but particularly by religious rites!
II. I proceed to
show in what respects it is that obedience is opposed and preferred to
sacrifice
or justly called better. It is not uncommon to hear this passage
produced in order to prove the value of moral above positive precepts. Moral
precepts
I suppose you know
are precepts of perpetual and unchangeable
obligation
and positive
such as either have not
or do not seem to have
any
intrinsic excellence in themselves
but depend upon the immediate and express
institution of God. Now
though no doubt
if it is done with proper care
and
upon legitimate principles
a distinction may be stated between these different
kinds of duties; yet it is plain
that this cannot be the spirit of the passage
before us.
1. Obedience is preferred to sacrifices
as they were uncommanded
free
and voluntary. If we attend to the sacrifices under the law
we shall
find them of different kinds; particularly
we shall find them distinguished in
this respect
that some of them were expressly and positively ordained
and
others were left to the goodwill or spontaneous inclination of the offerer. The
observation of the Sabbath
of circumcision
of the passover
the daily burnt
offering
the annual sacrifice on the great day of expiation
the trespass
offering
and many others
were so indispensably necessary
that no opposition
was to be presumed or imagined between them and the moral law. Nay
the whole
circumstances of these rites were precisely specified
and those who varied
anything in the manner of their observation were to he cut off from their
people. (Exodus 12:19; Exodus 31:14). I must further observe
that even with respect to voluntary or
free-will offerings
though they were left at liberty whether they would offer
such at all or not; yet if they did offer
the manner in which it behoved to be
conducted
was appointed precisely. Now
nothing can be more plain
than that
the sacrifices which Saul and his people had in view to offer
or at least
pretended to have had in view
were voluntary or free-will offerings. When you
remember this you will see with how great lustier and force the prophet opposes
sacrifices of this kind to obeying the voice of the Lord: “Hath the Lord as
great delight in burnt offerings
as in obeying the voice of the Lord?” As if
he had said
“Can you imagine that God will be as well pleased with gifts of
your own devising
as with a strict and punctual execution of the orders which
Himself had given; especially when the very sacrifices you would offer to Him
are purchased by the breach of His express command?”
2. Obedience is opposed to sacrifices
as they are false and
hypocritical. Even in those sacrifices that were most expressly appointed
and
of the most indispensable obligation
there might be an essential defect
from
the inward disposition not corresponding to the outward action. Reason
as well
as scripture
teacheth us
that in all acts of worship the sincerity of the
heart makes the chief ingredient.
3. Obedience is opposed to sacrifices
as they are dead and formal. I
am not at this time to mention all the ends which an infinitely wise God
intended to serve by the appointment of sacrifices: but everyone must be
sensible
that they could be of no avail without taking in the principle from
which they were bought
and the temper and disposition of the offerer. There
was no doubt very much of outward form in the Mosaic economy; and the ritual
practices bore so great bulk in it
that
by way of comparison with the
spirituality of the gospel
it is called the law of a carnal commandment. But
it would be mistaking it very much to suppose that God was fully satisfied with
or desired that His people should rest in the outward form. This is plain from
many passages of scripture (Psalms 5:7; Psalms 26:6; Psalms 51:16-17). In opposition to this
however clear a dictate both of reason
and scripture
it seems to have been the disease of ancient times
to imagine
that the sacrifices were somehow necessary or useful to their Maker in
themselves; and that He was pleased with the possession of the gift
independent of the disposition of the giverse This led both Jews and Gentiles
to suppose that the more numerous and costly the victims the greater would be
their influence (Micah 6:6). This conduct
so dishonourable to God and so inconsistent with
the holiness and purity of His nature
had no sufficient excuse either among
Jews or Heathens. But surely it is still more criminal among Christians. The
gospel
as a dispensation of clearer light and greater purity is called the
ministration of the Spirit. God is a spirit; and they that worship Him must
worship Him in spirit and in truth.
4. In the last place
obedience is opposed to sacrifices
as they are
misplaced and unseasonable. In the ancient dispensation
time and place were as
much ascertained as any circumstance that belonged to the temple service; and
nothing could be more contrary to the spirit of that economy
than taking any
liberty with the order which God Himself had established. The same general rule
is to be observed at all times. We must attend to the intimations of
Providence
and
as far as they can be clearly discerned
discharge those
duties to which we are immediately called. Everything is beautiful in its place
and season
and is then not only most acceptable to God
but most useful to men
It is so far from being any disparagement of sacrifices
that it is their very
excellence
to be confined to their time and place. And the maxim in the text
will apply with equal propriety to every duty of the moral law the most
excellent of them may be misapplied True religion and undefiled before God and
the Father
is
to visit the fatherless and the widow; and yet
if the time of
Divine worship be unnecessarily chosen for that purpose
or if too much time be
consumed in it by those whose presence cannot be useful
it is a rejected
sacrifice.
III. I proceed now
to make some practical improvement of what has been said. From what has been
said you may learn what are the great characters of acceptable obedience; and
I think
they may be reduced to the three following:--
1. It must be an implicit obedience.
2. A second character of true obedience is
that it be self-denied
and impartial
that it be not
directed or qualified by our present interest.
3. A third character of obedience is
that it be universal
without
any exception. From what hath been said on this subject
you may see
that the
true notion of obedience is inconsistent with the notion of merit
as if we
could lay our Maker under some sort of obligation. You see how Saul justified
himself
and said
“Yea
but I have obeyed the voice of the Lord.” But
in the
judgment of God
there was no consideration had of what bad been done
but a
severe sentence of condemnation upon him for what he had neglected. True
obedience is always considered
in this light
as a debt due to God
for the
performance of which nothing can be claimed
but for the neglect of which a
penalty is incurred. (T. Witherspoon.)
To obey is better than
sacrifice
I. our obedience
must be prompt. We begin a holy life with the question
“What wilt thou have me
to do?” The moment God answers we should run to do His bidding. “Run” is the
word (Psalms 119:32)
II. It must be
exact. When Saul said
“I have obeyed the voice of the Lord
” he meant it as
certain loose and careless people count obedience It is not enough
however
for us to do fairly well When God says “Pay!” He means to the uttermost
farthing;
when He says “Go to Nineveh
” he means Nineveh and nowhere else “Whatsoever He
saith onto you
do it.”
III. It should be
unquestioning. If ever a man was excusable for “wanting to know
” it was Saul
when commanded to exterminate Amalek. Was the requirement just? Was it humane?
Was it politic? But that was God’s affair God must be permitted to justify
Himself. There was no uncertainty as to the Voice
IV. Our obedience
should be cheerful. We make too much of duty and obligation
and too little of
the joy and privilege of service Let us come up from the association of
mercenaries and galley slaves to the high level of filial devotion. We are sons
and daughters of God
brethren of Christ. He was once “sent” upon a painful
toilsome errand; His obedience was prompt
exact
unquestioning
and joyous.”
“In the volume of the book it is written
‘I rejoice to do Thy will.’“ Let the
mind that was in Christ; Jesus be also in us. (Homiletic Review.)
No true worship or service
without an obedient heart
We are all apt be form a
false estimate of our character
and to approve ourselves in the face of
heaven
and maintain our uprightness in the presence of men when miserably
deficient in our duty when deeply stained with the spots of guilt and
rebellion. Commonly indeed it happens
as in the case before us
that the truth
of the matter is made manifest to our fellow creatures; that even they are not
often
or not long
deceived in farming a judgment of our character: but
however this may be
“shall not God find it out?”
1. If the Creator prescribes a method in which He will be honoured
and served
it is not for the creature to substitute any other method of his
own. Every religious service derives its value from its accordance with the
will of God: all other services will be disowned and rejected. For instance
the Almighty has ordained
that His blessings shall be obtained by prayer: it
is not for us to say
that He knows our wants already
better than we can
detail them; and that therefore it is useless to pray. The value and efficacy
of sacrifices resulted entirely from the appointment of God; and they could not
possibly be acceptable
unless as offered in obedience to Him. Had Saul offered
thousands of sheep and oxen
not of the spoils of Amalek
but from his own flocks
and herds
in an impenitent and self-confident disposition
the Lord would have
abhorred them all; how much more then
when the animals had been spared in
direct
disobedience to His positive command. But so it was
that the people
were always resting on the outward form
and overlooking the thing signified;
mindful of the service
but regardless of the heart. And for a plain reason:
because the service itself was easy
and satisfied the deluded conscience
and
left the offender in quiet possession of the sinful habits in which he
delighted: and because the submission of the heart was irksome and painful
and
required a discipline
a humiliation
a change of character and of life
which
the offender was little disposed to undergo.
2. Without a sincere and humble spirit of subjection
without a holy
and obedient heart
all our prayers and all our services are nothing in the
sight of God; are founded in hypocrisy; are no better than a mockery of his
name. Submission to the authority and will of God must ever be essential to
true religion under every dispensation; and few persons there are
who doubt
this as a speculative truth. But there is a vast difference between the outward
submission of an unrepentant and ungodly heart
and the inward submission of the
penitent and the pious! It is the subjection of mind
the surrender of the
affections to the will and law of God
which constitutes an acceptable service.
Pardon is graciously promised to all who truly repent
and the word of God
assures us
that it will be extended to none besides: upon what ground then can
the unrepentent sinner presume to ask forgiveness? And how can that man dare to
implore of God the grace to repent
who has no intention and no real desire of
repenting? He is but adding insult to his sin. How can the wilful sinner who
lives
and is yet determined to live
in any course of guilt
really pray for
deliverance from the bondage of sin? Does he expect that a miracle will be
wrought to deliver him against his will? So far from resolving
he does not
even wish to be changed from sin to holiness
from the world to God. In truth
it is not prayer at all; it is but the semblance and pretence of prayer.
3. Let us look well to the root and to the fruit of our sacrifices:
see that they are all offered in an humble and obedient spirit
that we feel
and desire what we say in the awful presence of a holy God: see that the
submission of our lives is consistent with the submission of our persons before
Him; that whatsoever we do
we do out of respect for His authority
out of love
for His law
and obedience to His command. (J. Slade
M. A.)
Obedience better than
sacrifice
I think that in this verse
there is first a voice to professing Christians
and then
secondly
to
unconverted persons.
I. Who have made a
profession of your faith in Him. Probably
there are some of you who may be
living in the neglect of some known duty. It is no new thing for Christians to
know their duty
and yet to neglect it. If you are failing to keep the least of
one of Christ’s commands to his disciples. I pray you be disobedient no longer.
It may be that some of you
though you are professed Christians
are living in
the prosecution of some evil trade
and your conscience has often said
“Get
out of it.” You are not in the position that a Christian ought to be in; but
then you hope that you will be able to make a little money
and you will retire
and do a world of good with it. Ah! God cares nothing for this rams’ fat of
yours; he asks not for these sacrifices which you intend to make. Possibly
too
there may be some evil habit in which you are indulging
and which you
excuse by the reflection
“Well
I am always at the prayer meeting; I am
constantly at communion
and I give so much of my substance to the support of
the Lord’s work.” I pray you give up that sin! To obey is better than sacrifice
in the matter of caring for the sick and needy of all classes. We rejoice in
the number of hospitals which adorn our cities. These are the princely trophies
of the power of our holy religion. There are no nobler words in our language
than those inscribed on so many walls--“Supported by voluntary contributions.”
We glory in them. Rome’s monuments
Grecian trophies
Egyptia’s mighty tombs
and Assyria’s huge monoliths
are dwarfed into petty exhibitions of human pride
and vanity before the sublime majesty of these exhibitions of a God-given love
to our fellow men; but all these homes of mercy and healing become evils to
ourselves though they are blessings to the distressed
if we contribute of our
wealth to their exchequer and neglect personally to visit the fatherless and
widows in their affliction
to feed the hungry
to care for the sick
and do
not
like the Master
go about doing good Give as God has given to you; but
remember God acts as well as gives. “Go thou and do likewise.” Sacrifice
but
also obey.
II. But my main
business is with the unconverted.
1. God has given to you in the gospel dispensation a command. It is a
command in the obeying of which there is eternal life
and the neglect of which
will be and must be your everlasting ruin. That command is this: “Believe on
the Lord Jesus Christ
and thou shalt be saved.”
2. Now
this first point being clear
that God has given a command
the second remark is that the most of men
instead of obeying God
want to
bring Him sacrifice. They suppose that their own way of salvation is much
better than any that the Almighty can have devised
and therefore they offer
their fat of rams. This takes different forms
but it is always the same
principle. One man says
“Well now
I will give up my pleasures; you shall not
discover me in low company; I will give up all the things that my heart calls
good
and will not that save us? “No
it will not. When you have made all this
sacrifice
all I shall or can say of it is
“To obey is better than sacrifice.”
“Well
but suppose I begin to attend a place of worship?” Remember therefore
that all that you can do in the way of outward religion is nothing but the
sacrifice of the fat of rams; and “to obey is better than sacrifice
and to
hearken than the fat of rams.” “Yes
” says another
“but suppose I punish
myself a good deal for all that I have done? I will abstain from this
I will
deny myself that
I will mortify myself in this passion
I will give up that
evil.” Friend
if thou hast any evil give it up; but when thou hast done so do
not rely upon that
for this oughtest thou to have done
and not to have left
the other undone. God’s command is “Believe!”
3. “To obey is better than sacrifice
and to hearken than the fat of
rams.” And now I have to show that it is so. It is better in itself. It shows
that you are more humble. It is really a more holy thing. It is a holier and a
better thing to do one’s duty than to make duties for one’s self and then set
about them. But not obeying and not hearkening to the gospel
sinner
you must
perish. There is the way of salvation
and thou mush trust Christ or perish;
and there is nothing hard in it that thou shouldst perish if thou dost not. (C.
H. Spurgeon.)
Obedience
The fact we want to
emphasise is the supremacy of obedience. There is nothing said against
sacrifice for it is a service of Divine ordination from the earliest times.
They are the expressions of the highest conditions of being. Best men live to
sacrifice
and what is more they live by sacrifice. Sacrifices were designed to
subordinate the material to the moral and to show that the gold and silver and
the cattle upon a thousand hills are God’s. They further indicate the fact that
even a material service may have spiritual ends. But notwithstanding all that
can be said for sacrifice
there is “a more excellent way.” There is a higher
law of life There are other and more commendable ways by which we can attest
our loyalty and prove our love
and that is by obedience. Was he not acting
within his right in disposing of the spoils
and prisoners of war? Did not
other kings exercise this prerogative
and were not the Israelites to be like
other nations in having a king? Why then should King Saul be unlike other
kings? Why abate his privileges or place restrictions upon his actions? Why
deprive him of his prerogatives? How like this is to man who goes forth in the
pride of intellect and the boast of lordship saying in effect
“Am I not king?
Are not this earth and these heavens all inferior to me? Is it not mine to
subdue the earth and control and subordinate to my uses and for my comfort the
forces of Nature?” “Yes
man. I admit thy supremacy. I loyally bow to thy
kingship. I pay dues to thy lordship. I am at thy service as I am for thy use
but I will not be forced into a blind and unconditional servitude. You must
honour me and obey my laws or I refuse to acknowledge thy authority.” The
commonest facts of life give evidence that man conquers by obedience and rules
by submission. He cannot force Nature to do what he may list. The utmost he can
do is to direct and utilise her forces. He must first learn obedience
and by
obedience he commands those potent elements with which earth
air
fire and
water are invested. If the mariner would take his ship across the sea he must
observe the law of winds and currents. No arrangement of Nature can be changed.
No law can be abrogated. Man investigates
discovers
blends
controls
adapts
subordinates and utilises
not by an imperious authority but by obedience.
Things are as they are
and he must submit to them. This is true of human life.
The case of a successful Scotchman is apt to our argument. Having risen to a
splendid position
he was asked the secret of his rapid advancement; he gave
the reply: “by bowing
” or by civility
by obedience. Fancied dignity is the
sure road to degradation whereas humility leads by an unerring law to
exaltation. The principle of the text applies with equal force to spiritual
life. It is alone by obedience to the eternal law of moral right and spiritual
life that a man can be saved. Obedience to God is the prime position of man.
“To obey is better than sacrifice.”
1. It is an exhibition of nobler qualities. A fanatic or even a
hypocrite may sacrifice but it is only the true man who obeys. Robbers and
murderers have presented oblations to the gods and even to the professed
servants of the One only God
but vain all such acts in the absence of
obedience to the Divine moral code.
2. Obedience is a higher service than sacrifice. A better set of
forces are put in motion by obedience. Sacrifices are external
obedience is
internal. Sacrifices are part of a carnal ordinance
obedience is of the
essence of spirituality. The one looks earthward
the other heavenward.
Sacrifices may be an accommodation to a party and jealousy for the honour
of a
sect
obedience is loyalty to truth. Sacrifices may have an ear for the praise
of man
obedience for the glory of God.
3. Obedience is more akin to the conditions of heaven. Sacrifices can
play no part in the services of the celestial temple
while obedience is the
secret of heaven’s harmony and peace. The true heart is more capacious than the
largest band The body is at best but a poor instrument with which to actualise
thought and holy purpose. What
we must do is to bring every thought into line
with God’s will. We must obey Him by first giving Him our heart. (M.
Brokenshire.)
The principle of obedience
I. It is a false
obedience when obedience is refused the moment the law of God stands alone. In
Soul’s onslaught upon Amalek
there was
up to a certain point
a perfect
agreement between duty and inclination
God’s service and self-interest There
was no zeal test of obedience until Amalek had been smitten to the last man
and
that man the King. The people of Israel were eager to indulge their ancient
enmity against Amalek
but were not willing to exterminate the flocks and
herds. Herein lies Soul’s condemnation He forsook the path of duty the moment
it went forward alone
and other things--inclination
custom
self-interest--did not point the same way There are times when religion goes
further than we are inclined to go
requires more than we are disposed to
render; parts company with our inclinations
and tastes
and purposes
and
habits. The test of obedience is then. We must not suppose that we are serving
God when we attend religious services
perform religious duties
keep the
Divine law only so long and so far as inclination
interest
custom point the
same way.
II. It is a false
obedience which is regarded as justifying or excusing disobedience in certain
matters and in occasional instances. Many claim for themselves what has been
justly termed a dispensing power. On the ground of their general good conduct
general attention to religious duties
general obedience to the Divine law
they hold themselves excused
or warranted in occasional departures.
III. It is a false
obedience when disobedience to God in any form and under any circumstances is
regarded as a trifling thing. It seemed a light matter to Saul to act as he did
But we can easily see that his slight disobedience involved great principles.
1. It assailed and dishonoured the character of God. To spare Agag
was to charge God with partiality
was to give to His decree as iniquitous
character.
2. It degraded the whole transaction. When Israel and Saul went forth
to battle they were invested with the awful dignity of executing a Divine
judgment. But Saul’s conduct would have made it simply a vulgar marauding
expedition.
3. It involved a degradation of religion God is regarded as One who
might overlook the disobedience if only He is made a sharer in the spoil. (Homiletic
Magazine.)
Obedience better than
sacrifice
I. The prophet’s
assertion
“To obey is better than sacrifice.” The sense in which be here uses
the word “better” is obvious. He means to say that it
is more pleasing and
agreeable to the will of God. The word sacrifice
in the text
may be
understood as comprising the whole of the Jewish Ritual
or that prescribed
form of ceremonial observances
consisting of offerings
purifications
and
solemnities of different kinds
to which they wore required strictly add
circumstantially to adhere. Let us next enquire into the meaning of the term
obedience
as it is here used. Obedience in general signifies compliance with
the revealed will of God. But this compliance may be two fold
either outward
or inward From this explanation
then
of the terms employed
we may now see
the meaning of the prophet’s assertion
when he declared that “to obey is
better than sacrifice.” He meant to assert that “an inward and habitual
disposition of heart to fear and obey God is far more pleasing in His sight
than the most correct and scrupulous attention to the positive institutions of
religion
where this disposition is wanting.” That such is the meaning of this
passage appears more certain from the several assertions to the same effect
which are scattered throughout the Scriptures. What does the Lord declare by
His prophet Hosea? “I desired mercy
and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of
God more than burnt offering.” Attend also to the following passage from the
prophet Micah: “Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams
or with ten
thousands of rivers of oil?”
II. What
then
may
we conclude were the prophet’s reasons for this assertion?
1. That obedience of which he speaks
that inward submission of the
heart to God
that habitual disposition of the soul to fear and serve Him
is
the one grand requisite in religion. That man has most religion who has most
piety; who in his soul most constantly realises the presence
most humbly bows
to the will
most sincerely desires the favour
and most devoutly longs for the
glory of God. And hence it is that the fear of God
as comprehending all these
constituent parts of true piety
is so frequently used in Scripture for the
whole of religion.
2. Another reason was this: The end of sacrifice itself was but to
promote and secure obedience. It is true that the greater part of these
institutions were of a typical nature
and had a typical meaning. This was
their immediate design; but their ultimate object in all this design was to
lead men to holiness and to teach them to worship God in spirit and in truth.
And now let us apply it to our own case
and see how far we are concerned in
the conclusions to which this discussion has led. In the first place
then
let
us remember that true religion under every dispensation is the same. The
internal and spiritual part of religion is the same now as it has always been.
There is as great a propensity among many who are called Christians
unduly to
appreciate and exalt the external and ceremonial part of religion
to the
neglect and injury of the internal and spiritual part of it as there ever was
among the people of Israel. I will produce some few instances in proof and
illustration of this remark. Some
like Saul of old
act as if they thought
that an attention to the positive institutions of religion would excuse
or
even justify the disobedient and unhumbled state of their heart. Again
there
are others who act like those Pharisees of old
whom our Lord condemned for
their hypocrisy and iniquity; who “paid tithe of mint
anise
and cumin
but
omitted the weightier matters of the law
judgment
mercy
and faith.” They are
mere formalists in religion. Further
there are still other persons
who regard
and use the positive institutions of religion with a superstitious regard. They
think that the very attendance on them communicates a portion of sanctity to
the soul
and secures an interest in the blessings and privileges of the
Gospel. These are some of the ways in which persons unduly appreciate and exalt
the external and ceremonial part of religion
to the prejudice of real
spiritual Christianity. I would wish you to go from the performance of these
outward duties with your affections more weaned from the world
and more set on
things above; with your faith strengthened
your hops increased
your love
inflamed
your desires after spiritual things enlarged
and more ardent. (E.
Cooper.)
The supremacy of obedience
The supremacy of obedience
in religion. Nothing can justify its absence
can make up for failures in it.
1. The moral element in religion
to which obedience belongs
is in
the Scriptures exalted high above the ceremonial of which sacrifice is a part.
2. Obedience is of the essence and spirit of religion
whereas
sacrifice is one of its forms. Our religious forms and services draw their
meaning and value from the spirit of obedience in which they are rendered.
3. Obedience is itself an end in religion whereas sacrifice is simply
the means to that end. To train His people in obedience
to set
up and
enthrone this great principle in their natures
God instituted the whole round
of sacrifice and service in the old dispensation.
4. Obedience is continuous and eternal
whereas sacrifice is
intermittent
and may cease.
Apply this principle to
two cases:
1. To those who are willing to serve God
but only in their own way.
Religious service is a matter of personal assertion. It is far easier to
indulge our own impulses and fulfil our own energy of will in methods of our
own
than to work where and as God has appointed
in daily self-denial.
2. To those who imagine that they can cover moral failures by
religious gifts and services
who act as though the faults of daily life could
be covered by large gifts to religion
and diligent attention to its forms. God
will never accept sacrifice in the place of obedience. The sacrifice of the
cross draws its value and merit from the perfect obedience
the complete
submission of the Incarnate Son. (Homiletic Magazine.)
Obedience
One of the strongest
proofs of a sound religion is to be thankful for any heights which it is
possible to scale; but to be much more thankful for the continuous valley in
which human duty is best discharged. In all true religions
especially in those
like the one in which you and I believe
there are at times inducements to
spiritual rapture and spiritual depression. Sometimes these aspects are the
main ones
but
as Samuel says to the old king
“To obey is better than
sacrifice; and hearkening to God than the fat of rams.” All through Christ’s
life
however deep any man’s devotion
He said it was not those who in an
enthusiastic ecstatic passionate manner
say
“Lord
Lord
but those who do the
will of the Father in heaven
” who were acceptable. He did not mean by this to
rebuke only the hypocrite
but those whose religion consisted of rapture
enthusiasm
and ecstatics. There is in a religion corresponding to these
homely
commonplace affairs a principle higher than prayer; deeper than
feeling; more admirable than rapture--the ordinary unvarying principle of
obeying. Unfortunately
a great deal of religion means far more importance to
confessions of religion than it does to the great downright common sense of
honest
unchanging
unchangeable religion. Too much of our religion has been
experimental; too much rapture
and too much depression. Read the 119th Psalm
that great lyric of obedience
one of the greatest things that man ever wrote.
Never were the two songs of faith and obedience so sweetly mixed together. “Thy
word is a lamp unto my feet.” “Teach me Thy statutes.” “Order my footsteps.”
There is as much of poetry and the practical in that one psalm as in all other
compositions. It came from the true soul of a great man. This obedience
or as
we call it
duty
is independent of all feeling. Am I secure tomorrow of the
emotion which I feel today? All things conspire with me and against me. There
are times when the soul is barren
days when the old familiar passages of the
poets will not stir you
days of the ordinary and commonplace
days when the
common things of life seem to sink below the common
and seem offensive in
their minuteness
when there seems very little in life
when good is felt to be
very far off. At these times is there nothing for me to do? Yes! for here comes
the great solemn cry--“obey!” Never mind whether it is plain ground or not. “To
obey is better than sacrifice.” If obedience springs from habit
it may not be
lovable
but it is useful
and it is always good. Unconscious obedience is
good
the perfectness of a man’s habit shows the depth of his original
teaching
though there are times when habit sets itself up at the expense of
thought
still it is like capital
and not to be despised. Habit is more than
effort
the ease with which a man does a thing without thinking shows well how
he learnt his lesson. It is comparatively independent of thought; it may exist
upon a vow; it may exist for years upon a promise. The soldier who is once
enlisted is not constantly thinking of the foundations of his obedience; the
dress he wears
the sign upon the banner
the name borne by him will even
assist him. To do the will of God and keep His commandments--it is the height
of true religion
it is the basis of true religion. The greatest enthusiasts do
not throw it aside; the biggest rationalists
with all their ribaldries
are in
favour of it; the Romish Church
with all its pomps
believes in the commandments.
We do not say that a man cannot be obedient
and at the same time rapturous; we
do not say it is not possible to have both sacrifice and obedience; we do not
say that a man cannot have rapture and prayer
and keep the commandments--but
“obedience is better than sacrifice.” The obedient man is most unlikely to
trust in himself. He who learns obedience will seldom trust in it. The most
obedient man is the one who says
“I am as unprofitable servant.” When men get
wise they will rind that obedience is not only safety
but that it has a beauty
of its own. Its ready presence under all circumstances
its infusion into all
things
its continuance
when faith is gone
hope is low
prayer is impossible
trust is broken
when God seems for a time out of sight
when immortality is a
dream
when friends are faithless
when the heart is sad
is not that noble
which is not driven by things like these? Is not that the grace of graces which
stays under these circumstances? Those who know where true beauty lies love flowers.
Not your big exotics of foreign bloom which have to be put in glass houses--but
the green grass of old England that knows no time
that the frost cannot kill
which bears the leaf and still is there
flowering by the wayside; which
resists all pressure
defies all storms
always in season
never in bloom. That
is obedience; and if you do not see its beauty you will get wiser perhaps as
you get older
and learn
at last
its constant
unchanging
unvarying
homely
humble
and yet truly beauteous aspect that renders it the greatest of graces
and the noblest of duties; better than sacrifice
deeper than prayer
loftier
than rapture
always in season. Underlying the emotion which belongs to all
creeds
possible to all peoples
obedience will never do any harm
if it does
no good. If it will not save men
it will not kill them. But it will do good.
“Obedience is better than sacrifice
and to hearken than the fat of rams.”
Better to do the will of God than to be courteous
ecstatic
devotional
or
enthusiastic. (G. Dawson
M. A.)
Willfulness of Saul
In these words are
contained a lesson which Saul had never learnt. He served God and appeared
zealous in His cause
so far as the way of doing this suited his own pleasure
and purposes; “all that was vile and refuse” of the goods of the Amalekites
“that he destroyed utterly;” but whenever self had to be denied
and God’s will
made the rule of action instead of his own
then he rebelled. Even in the
apparently religious act of worshipping God
after the severe rebuke which
Samuel inflicted on him
his words are
“Honour me now
I pray thee
before the
elders of my people
and before Israel
and turn again with me
that I may
worship the Lord thy God
” his own honour seems to have been that which
prompted him to worship and not sorrow for his sin. In fact
Saul never really
worshipped God at all
he worshipped self
and he never learnt this great and
important truth
that obedience to God is the only thing pleasing in His eyes
and that whatever a man may do from motives of selfishness
yea
though he
fight God’s battles and advance His religion
it is all displeasing in His
sight
“who seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance
but the Lord looketh on the heart.” The subject
then
which is brought before
us by the text is this
that simple obedience to God’s commands is the only
thing which is really pleasing in His sight. You must observe that Saul was not
an open rebel. And part of the command he certainly had performed; in fact he
had performed it just so far as it required no self-denial. And so may Saul
stand to us as a type of those who profess to be Christians
and act in a
measure as Christians
and who nevertheless follow their own ways
just as
though they were under no Christian vows at all. Let us look at one or two
examples of great and holy men in Scripture
and see how the example of
obedience was set by them. Remember Abraham
and how he was proved and found
faithful. Moses was ordered by God to go and appear in His name before Pharaoh
and though it was a dangerous mission
and he felt himself unfitted for the
work
yet he obeyed. The holy Apostles also were simply called by Christ
and
commanded to follow Him
and they obeyed. But why should I quote other
examples
when we have that of our Lord Jesus Christ
of whom we read that He
“became obedient unto death
even the death of the cross.” You may observe also
that Abraham and Moses
whom I have quoted as two eminent examples of
obedience
are two of those whom the Apostle has mentioned in his catalogue of
men of faith. In fact
faith and obedience are necessary parts of each other;
there can be no obedience without faith
and faith without obedience is dead
And it is easy to see that Saul was a man without faith. The duty of obedience
is put in a very high place by the text
when it tells us that obedience is
better than sacrifice. You will observe that Saul made God’s service the excuse
for breaking His commands: to make offerings to God was no more than it was his
duty to do
but then it was not to be done at the expense of a still higher
duty: no sacrifice
however costly
could possibly make amends for breaking
God’s law in one single point. And has not this been so from the beginning?
When Adam end Eve were placed in the garden of Eden they were not placed there
without a law: the command given them was simple indeed
but still it was a
command
by keeping of which only they could stand; had Adam offered never so
many sacrifices
had called never so much on the name of the Lord
yet if he
eat of the forbidden tree he was guilty. In speaking of obedience to God’s laws
I have not
of course
so much in view the great moral laws. No one would fancy
that he might murder or steal; but obedience to God is something much more than
this. It is not an occasional act of obedience which we are called upon to do
it is a constant battle against ourselves
and against the evil nature within
us
and a constant striving to root out all desires and thoughts which are
contrary to the will of God. Perhaps I am presenting here the sterner face of
religion; nevertheless
though it be not so pleasant to think of what we owe to
God
as to speak of what He has done for us
yet it is for our good to keep in
mind the vows and obligations which are upon us
and to remember that our
Christian profession does mean something
and that to be a soldier of Christ is
not merely a matter of words
but something very real and substantive indeed. (H.
Goodwin
M. A.)
Obedience better than
sacrifice
Great and glorious is
sacrifice; final and abiding its effects. On that sacrifice all access to God
depends. By faith in that sacrifice does every sinner in every age approach
God. What can we conceive greater
better
more honoured
more glorious? God
has given it us to trust to: He has given it us also to imitate. Let sacrifice
be our rule of life: sacrifice for God and for man; sacrifice for love: to
spend and to be spent
as He spent and was spent
who was our Sacrifice. Let
our whole life be a sacrifice; rendered up to Him with whose precious blood we
ere bought. Too much we cannot think of
trust to
realise in our hearts and
lives
that his sacrifice. And yet when we have meditated on it all we can
when we have cast ourselves in humble trust on its efficacy
when we have
magnified it in our esteem
and striven to live it out in our lives--even then
there is one thing better
one thing greater
one thing more glorious--one
thing before which even the lustre of the Redeemer’s sacrifice pales: before
which all other sacrifice is worthless and not to be mentioned. And that more
glorious thing is--obedience. The Lord’s sacrifice was but part of His
obedience. “Being found in fashion as a man
” from whom obedience was due
“He
become obedient unto death
even the death of the cross.” Listen to his own
prophetic words: “Sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not: then said I
lo I
come
to do thy will
O God.” That is
“sacrifice and offering do not fulfil
do not exhaust Thy holy will: it is not suffering
it is not expenditure of blood
but it is the calm and willing submission to Thee
the ruling life after thy
way
the direction of thought
word
and deed
body
soul
and spirit
affection and energies
in the line of thy blessed will--this it is which
includes sacrifice--this which
more than that sacrifice
because of wider
extent
and fuller capacity
pleases and glorifies Thee.” And this the Redeemer
came to do
and amply fulfilled. It is to obedience that Bethlehem owes all its
carols
Genesareth all its miracles
Calvary all its glories
Olivet all its
triumph. His miracles
His teachings
His lovings: none of these reaches over
the length and breadth and depth and height of His glorification of the Father:
but His obedience does: in this one word all is compromised: His death
as its
noblest example. His obedience was greater than His death
for it included it:
more glorious than his death
for it gave it all its virtue for propitiation
and all its power to save sinners. His death is past and gone by. “He dieth no
more.” But His obedience abides foreverse “And when all things shall have been
put under Him
then shall the Son Himself also be mede subject to Him who puts
all things under Him
that God may be all in all.” Truly
then
His obedience
is His one character
His glory of glories. Let us come down now from the
propitiation of the Redeemer as part of His perfect obedience
to our own
little circle of duties
appointed for us as His were for Him. “To obey is
better than sacrifice
” is in some little danger of being forgotten among us
or at all events not remembered as it should be. And I will tell you in what
particular way. Religion
among us
has taken a certain fixed place and
standing: has been worked
so to speak
into the fabric of society. Its words
and phrases
and certain conventional duties corresponding to them
have gained
the freedom of the world’s citizenship
and are no longer the peculiar badge
which they once were. Certain points of religious morality are made much of
and properly
by all who would be thought religious
even in the ordinary
respectable sense of the word. We live
there can be no doubt of it
in days of
great religious stir; in days of great sacrifice
and likewise of great
opportunity of appearance of sacrifice at very little cost: in days when
only
to give you one instance of that which I mean
a rich man
sitting in his
library
may without ever putting forth a hand to actual charitable work pour
by a few strokes of his pen his thousands along the various channels of public
and private beneficence. And there is some danger
there is much danger
lest
we should mistake all this sacrifice at so cheap a rate
all this doing good
made easy
for the patient faith
the lowly obedience
the blessed and blessing
beneficence of the Christian life. Is there not
then
here
while sacrifice is
enjoined
truth in doctrine rigorously maintained
party opinion and party
limits inflexibly observed
and yet the very plainest rules of Christian
conduct and Christian self-denial publicly violated--is there not and must
there not be a forgetting of obedience in comparison of sacrifice? When those
who would not for any earthly consideration overstep some prescribed line of
observance
are for pleasure and the display of person almost daily
overstepping the sobriety of the Christian life and the fair limits of
Christian example
surely we may say that we are losing obedience in our care
for sacrifice. All the sacrifice for which we are called on
should be part
of
should spring out of
our personal life with God Our profession should
revolve round our practice
not our practice round our profession. Our
obedience should not be confined to things convenient and times convenient
but
being the fruit of love shed abroad in our hearts
should extend over all things
and all times. (H. Alford
B. D.)
Obedience better than
sacrifice
I. That in which
God delights.
1. Obedience. Obedience to God becomes the best educator of man’s
moral faculties. And obedience will prompt and rightly estimate material
sacrifice.
2. In such material sacrifice as is the pure and simple
correspondence of an obedient heart. Material bulk is not necessarily moral
wealth. Material things are hardly wealth at all in this relation. Truth has no
mechanical measurement. Love is worthier than the fat of rams.
3. All true sacrifice
then
is moral in ire essence and beginning.
The spirit of obedience will prompt the acceptable deed.
II. Saul’s fatal
disregard of God’s command. Note several particulars:--He did not seriously
realise the circumstances of the case. He forgot who Amalek was
and what he
had done in the past to Israel. The prophecy of Balaam (Numbers 24:20) had doubtless never really impressed him. The success of the sword
had made him forget the word.
1. A man in such a state of wilful inattention is most liable to
disobey. From scant attention will spring moral obliqueness He has hardly
reflected what obedience demands. He is filled more with the spirit of selfish
conceit than as anxious endeavour to do God’s will.
2. Disobedience is loss of God’s favour. “Ill-gotten gains breed
weary pains
and one wrong act a life-long fact. The wrong step of a king will
ruin bring.”
III. Samuel’s
impassioned rebuke. This rebuke was thus aflame for several reasons
1. Because specific direction had been given
and reasons for the
attack.
2. Because from the first Samuel himself had ever desired to listen
unto God; but Saul was not seriously attentive.
3. Because of the flagrant disobedience of Saul.
4. Because of Saul’s untruthfulness.
5. Because of his feeble attempt to evade both the questioning of
Samuel and the inevitable issue which he knew must ensue. Obedience is honour;
disobedience disgrace. And obedience is the devotion of the heart
without
which material sacrifices
however costly
are worthless. (Homiletic
Magazine.)
The commands of God to be
obeyed
Consider some of the
lessons of instruction which we may derive from the narrative.
1. Learn
first
that whenever God’s commands are plain we are not to
question or alter them so as to suit our inclinations
but implicitly to obey
them. Have we no Sauls among God’s professing people at this day--persons who
perform some duties
and neglect others equally imperative upon them? Is our
obedience thus partial? Are there some sins in which we live continually
some
duties which we constantly neglect? Think not that the discharge of one duty
will be any excuse for the neglect of another; nay
rather be assured that this
itself proves your heart not to be right with God.
2. Learn from this subject that if we would have our sins forgiven
we must be deeply sensible of the evil of them
and confess them heartily unto
God. Such was far from being the case with Saul. Hear him represent his own
cause
and you can scarcely find anything wrong
even in those transactions in
which you are sure there must be great blame.
3. Learn
again
from the narrative to be solicitous for the honour
that cometh from God
and not for that of men. We see that Saul
when convicted
by Samuel of having so imperfectly executed the commission God had given him
is far more anxious that he should pay him respect before the elders and the
people than that be should pray
to God for him that his sin might be pardoned.
And such is the case with formalists in general: they are anxiously sensitive
to the opinion of their fellow creatures; comparatively careless about the
estimation in which they may be held by the great Ruler of heaven and earth.
4. Learn lastly
from this account
that
though Almighty God bear
with much long-suffering the conduct of sinners
He will at length execute
righteous judgment; and that be forgets neither the injuries nor the benefits
done to his people. The Amalekites had unjustly opposed Israel on their
departure out of Egypt: their descendants imitated the conduct of their
fathers
and now God determined their destruction. “It is a righteous thing
with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; and to you who are
troubled rest with us
when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with
his mighty angels.” (2 Thessalonians 1:6-10) (J. Grantham.)
The true spirit of worship
Obedience to the will of
God is the essence of all worship. Divine worship is not left to the unaided
reason of man. It is an institution and appointment of God.
1. Worship is unacceptable when the form is used for the spirit. How
much of this spiritless worship pollutes our sanctuaries! How much of empty
form is in our professed devotion! Is it a prayer? “It is all title page
without contents.” Is it praise? Is it only music without the heart? A soulless
instrument would be as expressive.
2. Worship is unacceptable when the right form is accompanied with a
wrong life. Saul intended to perform a great religious service to the Lord with
the gains of his successful warfare. If the worshipper is living in wilful
transgression of God’s Word
his exercises of devotion are no service of God.
3. The disobedience of the heart is the only acceptable worship. “To
obey is better than sacrifice.” The heart must act in accordance with the
Divine will. The motive must be right. “God
” says an old divine
“weighs not
the affections of His people to Him by their actions
so much as their actions
by their affections.” When Abraham offered up his son it was the submission of
his soul to the word from heaven that pleased God. Every part of Divine worship
must be in accordance with the will of God. He has revealed His word as our
directory. The test of worship is the Scripture. Whatever rites are
inconsistent with that word are to be repudiated. The voice of the Lord hath
spoken
and it sanctions no sacrifice now since Christ became our propitiation.
The voice of the Lord has spoken
and it commands that nothing be added to the
revelation of God. (R. Steel.)
Sacrifice interpreted
We need to have the laws
of God presented to us in severality
but also in their essence and sum. This
old Hebrew judge soars above the confusion and superstition of his age
and
anticipates some of the loftiest disclosures of revelation. Spiritual
discernment--the instinct of the Divine in us--anticipates and interprets
experience. How simple and direct religious duty appears when so presented! But
“flesh and blood” did not reveal this truth to Samuel.
I. Obedience to
God is the truth of sacrifice. The ceremonial law was not to be divorced from
the moral
they were mutually explicative and helpful. This is “reasonable
service.”
1. The principle common to both. This was found in surrender to God.
The sacrifice was an acknowledgment that all that a man has is God’s; and as
representing this “all
” of which it was but a small part
it was a valid and
acceptable offering
analogous to a “peppercorn rent
” or the fanciful services
exacted of crown-landlords
sinecurists
etc.
in feudal times.
2. Consequent identifications (verse 23). There is nothing
corresponding to “as” in the Hebrew. It is a simple
bold equation: “For the
sin of witchcraft is rebellion
and idols and teraphim is stubbornness.” A
great gain in such analogies; the outward ritual is shown to be accompanied by
a spiritual attitude
of which it is the outcome; and as such it ceases to be
trifling. The lustful man is a worshipper of “nothing
” i.e.
idols
as
the term used in the Hebrew implies; the disobedient is an idolater of self. A
similar gain to science was realised when the “correlation of physical forces”
was discovered
and men spoke of “heat as a mode of motion
” etc.
3. The spiritual expression of this principle is superior to the
ceremonial. Besides being constant and self-evident
it is more immediately
associated with our life. As involving will in its offering
it involves that
which is most essential to our personality. The will has been called “the inner
man.” It more directly and consciously contains in it our self-hood. Yet both
are imperfect. The spiritual worshipper is conscious that his obedience is not
complete; that he himself is incapable of the sacrifice of which he
nevertheless can conceive. So his gaze is drawn to Calvary and concentrated
there. In Christ the ideal of sacrifice
and yet
not more than that which God
requires
is presented. By appropriating that
identifying ourselves with it
we realise “the obedience of faith.”
II. Obedience to
God is the source of real authority over men. “Because thou hast rejected the
word of the Lord
He hath rejected thee from being king.” All true kingship and
efficient government is rooted in God. The ruler who ignores or defies the
principles of morality signs his own death warrant. The secret of the “unstable
equilibrium” of the governments of the world lies in their failure to recognise
this. The true leaders of men are those who in the first instance obey conscience.
A moral principle is in the end mightier than a parliament. Writers
public
leaders
etc.
would do well to lay to heart the fate of Saul. Had he denied
“self
” he would have kept his throne. (St. John A. Frere
M. A.)
Obedience better than
sacrifice.
Saul’s conduct is a type
of human nature in manifesting--
1. A disinclination to render a full and complete obedience to God’s
expressed will.
2. A proneness to render that to God which He does not require
and
withholding that which He demands.
3. In the excuses he makes for his disobedience. The paramount
importance of obedience will appear from the following remarks:--
I. All things are
considered by the Almighty as subordinate to His law.
II. Every
infringement of law entails punishment.
1. Punishment will certainly follow sin
as pain and suffering follow
an infringement of the material laws of the universe.
2. The protracting of the punishment is no proof of its abandonment.
3. The final punishment of the disobedient will be eternal in its
effect. Saul’s posterity lost the throne of Israel forever.
III. In order to
atone for the guilt of men who have infringed the law of God
the greatest
sacrifice has been offered. All the sacrifices under the old dispensation were
to illustrate and honour law. Christ appeared in our nature to put away sin by
the sacrifice of Himself. (T. D. Jones.)
Verse 23
Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.
Rebellion against God all malignant as witchcraft
To rebel against the clearest light and most express declaration
of the will of God: this is an action of the like malignity
even as the sin of
witchcraft. When a crime is said to be “as the sin of witchcraft
” the meaning
is that it is a fault of so heinous and provoking a nature that the obstinate
commission of it is altogether inconsistent with all true principles of
religion
and
in effect
a total renunciation of them. The word “iniquity
” in
the latter part of the text
is iniquity towards God
the forsaking His
worship
the denying Him His true honour
the turning from Him to false gods
or joining them with Him; and therefore it is expressed by two words together
iniquity and idolatry. Which two words in this place do not signify two
distinct things
but are of the same import as if it had been said in one
the
iniquity of idolatry
the perverseness or unrighteousness of serving false
gods. This their disobedience in any one known instance of immorality
this
their rebellion
is as the sin of witchcraft; and their stubbornness is as the
iniquity of idolatry. Their refusing to obey the true God
whom they profess to
worship
is like serving a false one. For wherein consists the iniquity of
idolatry
and the wickedness of serving false gods; but in this
that it
derogates from the majesty of the true God
and denies Him that honour which is
His alone peculiar due? Not that there are not degrees of disobedience in
rebelling against God; but that a wilful stubbornness in any particular disobedience
is absolutely inconsistent with the favour of God
and that there may be a
perverseness in persisting habitually in single sins
even like to the
perverseness of a total apostasy. One mortal wound destroys a man
as certainly
as many; and incorrigible obstinacy in the practice of any sin
may be of equal
malignity even as idolatry itself. Equal not perhaps as to the degree of the
particular punishment it shall bring upon him; but equal as to the certainty of
its bringing him in general to condemnation. God requires that men should serve
Him with their whole heart. But the folly of wicked men will distinguish where
there is no distinction; and they will serve God in what manner only
and in
what instances they please. This is that great deceitfulness of sin. The
external
the formal and ceremonial part of religion
they will possibly be
very fond of
but the inward and real virtues of the mind
meekness and purity
humility and charity
equity
simplicity and true holiness
for these they
would gladly commute
and make amends with any compensation. This is the great
and general corruption; this has in all times and in all places been the first
and the last error in matters of religion. Saul would needs sacrifice unto the
Lord his God
out of those very spoils
which he had presumptuously taken
against God’s express command. In following ages the whole nation of the Jews
would in like manner be always very diligent
in offering their sacrifices and
oblations
as if that would make amends for the viciousness of their lives. And
yet how often did the scriptures admonish them to the contrary (Psalms 50:13; Ecclesiastes 5:1; Isaiah 1:11; Isaiah 1:16; Hosea 6:6). Even in our Saviour’s time
after all these repeated admonitions
the Pharisees still continued to value
themselves upon their mere external performances; and yet that very Scribe who
was sent to tempt him
could not but acknowledge to our Lord that He had said
the truth in affirming that for a man to love God with all his heart
and . . .
his neighbour as himself; was more than all whole burnt offerings and
sacrifices (St. Mark 12:33). They would with great
superstition wash the outside of their cups and pots
while the inside of their
own hearts was full of unrighteousness and all uncleanness. In a word
they
would do anything rather than what was right and ought to be done; and
therefore our Saviour declares
that except our righteousness exceeds the
righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees
we shall in no case enter into the
Kingdom of Heaven. Among the several corrupters of Christianity likewise
what
is it that men have not been willing to undertake
what journeys and
pilgrimages
what hardships and abstinences
what voluntary humilities and
uncommanded austerities
what profuse gifts to monasteries or religious
societies
and unbounded zeal for propagating what they call right opinions
that is
such as happen to prevail
or be in fashion amongst them; instead of
serving God with simplicity of devotion and loving their neighbours as
themselves? If a man runs in a race
yet if he takes a shorter way to the mark
sad runs not in that course which is by the rules appointed and marked out
his
labour is in vain; and if a man professes to serve God
yet if he serves Him
not in that method of obedience which God Himself requires
but will go a
nearer way to heaven
either according to his own humour and fancy
or in the
way of any human invention whatsoever
instead of the plain rules of reason and
scripture
he may justly fall short of his reward. But no description of the
perverseness of this sort of sinning can set it forth in so lively a manner as
the giving some historical examples of it. And I shall mention two
which
contain a more exact representation of the nature of this stubbornness than any
explication of it in words could do. The one is the behaviour of Saul
in the other
actions of his life
besides that referred to in the text; the other is the
behaviour of the Jews
in their passage through the wilderness towards the
promised land. When God commanded them to return back into the wilderness
then
on the contrary they would go up into the land which the Lord had promised
them
and would fight for it presumptuously
and were defeated. In these
instances their rebellious disposition was as the sin of witchcraft
and their
stubbornness like to the iniquity of idolatry (S. Clark
D. D.)
Discord and Harmony
Among the moral difficulties of the Old Testament is the apparent
disproportion between particular acts of sin and the temporal punishment with
which God visited them. Even when we have considered the points on which Dr.
Mozley insists in his masterly lectures upon “Ruling Ideas in Early Ages”: when
we have recognised how God accommodated
as it were His will to the possible or
current conceptions of men’s minds
that out of each stage in the education of
our race He might elicit the very best character that it could produce: even
when we have made allowance for the need of teaching rough people by rough
means
and of driving plain truths into the heart of a rude and obdurate age by
strong and sudden judgments:--still it may be strange to us that the most awful
weapons in all the armoury of wrath should be sometimes brought out against
offences which at first seem little more than faults of taste or policy or a
passing temper: faults such as even good men might commit in a moment of
carelessness or irritation
or on what we should call their unlucky days. How
could it be equitable in a life thus rude and wild
a life where only the
broadest distinctions were as yet apparent
and where the subtler lines of
moral definition had not yet been traced
to doom with so terrible a sentence
the hasty word of an angry woman or of a soldier flushed with peril and
victory? Surely a part of the answer to such questions is found when we reflect
how infinitely different may be in different lives the moral significance of
the very same act. It is not only that the real quality of every action depends
upon its motive: there is often a further and a deeper meaning to be read in
the inner history of that character out of which
perhaps
the motive itself
has come. That which on the surface seems too trivial to be heeded
may be the
only outward evidence of a change which has been going on in us for years;
there perhaps alone may be revealed the drift and volume of the stream which
from some far-off spring has been flowing for many a mile beneath the ground:
and the silent
secret course of half a lifetime may be betrayed beyond recall
in that one glimpse. There are trivial acts which may disclose the bygone
stages of our moral history
just as some trick of gesture or pronunciation
lets out the secret of a man’s parentage or nationality
or as some faint and
useless trait connects a species with the ancestry of its evolution. Some such
critical significance in Saul’s neglect of the Divine command seems to be
suggested in the strange comparison by which Samuel illustrates it:
“Rebellion
” he says
“is as the sin of witchcraft
and stubbornness is at
iniquity and idolatry.” The likeness is not
on the surface
clear; there seems
no near or necessary connection between disobedience and superstition: but
perhaps their link of kindred may appear if we look more closely into the
meaning and history of the act which had provoked the sentence. We shall
I
think
find it to have been the outcome and revelation of a deep disorder such
as always tends to bewilder or distort the religious impulses of the soul. The
spirit then which came to Saul on that great day of his anointing was the
prophetic spirit of insight into the true drift and order of the world: he was
admitted to the counsels of the Almighty
and recognised the Divinity that
shapes our ends. Thus was be prepared to reign: thus did he see the truth of
history in all its lines stretched out and ordered in the sight of God: thus
did he learn the law whose conscious service was to be his sovereignty. What
might not Saul have been
where might he not have placed his name among the
beloved and blessed of God and men
if only he had enthroned the revelation of
that day for undivided empire in his heart: if only
like another Saul
he
could have looked back to the day of his conversion and declared that he had
not been disobedient unto the heavenly vision: if only like him he had
thenceforward striven “to bring into captivity every thought to the obedience
of Christy.” For is not this the secret of all his failure and misery
his
madness and his superstition
is not this the deep significance of hit
sin--that while he saw the Light he would not live by it? he knew the Law and
would not work by it: he heard the Counsel of God and held hit will apart from
it. “He was
” says Dean Stanley
“half-converted
half-aroused; his mind moved
unequally and disproportionately in its new sphere”: until “the zeal of a
partial conversion degenerated into a fanciful and gloomy superstition.” All
through his life there went the maddening elements of discord: day after day
the higher and the lower fought within him for the throne of his irresolute
distracted heart: day after day he woke to hear two voices clashing and
disputing for his guidance: and now he followed one and now the other: yet when
he chose the better he still looked wistfully at the lower life
and when he
chose the worse he trembled at the thought of God. He could neither say
with
the frank self-degradation of the heathen satirist
“I see the better and
approve it: I pursue the worse”; nor yet with the man after God’s own heart
“Teach me Thy way
O Lord
and I will walk in Thy truth: O knit my heart unto
Thee
that I may fear Thy Name.” And so he lived in discord
and he reigned by
anarchy: restless and aimless
suspicious and dissatisfied
halting between
light and darkness
and beset in that twilight by weird unhealthy thoughts like
the evil dreams that make it bliss to wake
ever falling away from that which
he saw and owned as God-like There is surely a deep meaning in the submission
with which such a life as his welcomes the influence of music. The moral
discord
the distraction and disorder of his will spread at times over all the
powers of the mind: and the strain and irritation of that restless conflict
broke out in gusts of terror and frenzy. “And it came to pass
when the evil
spirit from God was upon Saul that David took an harp
and played with his
hand: so Saul was refreshed
and was well
and the evil spirit departed from
him.” Even through his misery there came the great and constant prophecy of
music: above the discord of his soul he heard those merciful echoes of a higher
harmony; he knew that somewhere out
side all the chaos of his broken life
there
were steadfast principles of melody
and calm and measured ways
and the
eternal rhythm of an undisturbed song: he felt once more that the Most High is
He Who sweetly and mightily ordereth all things
and there is peace for those
who love His law. For “there is a rest which remaineth for the people of God.”
That great prophecy of music is among us still: still “the true harmony of
tuneful sounds” helps men to be patient through distress and conflict
and to
hope that their steps may yet be led into the sure ways of peace In the recess
of a wall in the Catacomb of St Calixtus there is a painting of Orpheus: in his
left hand he holds a lyre: the right is raised as though to mark the rhythm of
his song: and round him are the wild beasts
tamed and hushed to listen while
he plays. There is no doubt that the picture represents our Blessed Lord.
Though the artist as he painted it was surrounded by the bodies of those who
for Jesus’ sake had borne the cruelty of persecution even unto death: though he
himself
it may be
had left all to follow Christ and to be a partaker of His
sufferings: still he knew Him as the Master of all Harmony
the Prince of
Peace: still he felt that only since be took the Crucified to be his Lord had
all the wild discord and conflict of his soul passed into mysterious and most
blessed confidence of union with an eternal law of Melody. And we
if out of
the confusion and bewilderment of our days
from the weakness and hesitation of
our faith
we look back with a bitter sense of severance and strangeness to the
simple and unhindered self-surrender of those saints of old: still let us hold
fast by this--which is indeed a truth that all may test and prove:--that in
proportion as the perfect obedience of the life of Christ comes through
humility and prayer and thought to be the constant aim of all our efforts: we
shall with growing hope and with a wonder that is ever lost in gratitude know
that even our lives are not without the earnest of their rest in an eternal
harmony. (F. Paget.)
Because thou hast rejected
the word of the Lord
He hath also rejected thee from being king.
Saul rejected
We walk through the streets and see a fellow creature who had
great abilities; who was once held in great esteem; for whom a brilliant future
was predicted. We see such an one presenting that combination of indescribable
symptoms which we expressively sum up in the one word “reduced.” And the
contemplation of such a wreck is singularly depressing; the disposition of him
who could witness it without sorrow in his greatest enemy is by no means to be
envied. Saul was such a man. His history is indeed melancholy. It is
perplexing
also. Many persons
I dare say
think Saul was
on the whole
hardly treated. I can easily imagine one taking for granted that he was bad because
he is told so
and because God rejected him; but saying to himself that he does
not quite see that he was so bad--that he should never have expected to find
him so severely punished--that it is strange that David escaped on so much
easier terms. “What
sin did Saul ever commit so heinous as the sin of David?”
I. This
perplexity
and wrong estimate of Saul’s character
arises from various causes:
principally from our false views about sin and obedience. It happens that we
live in a state of society where many acts are at once offences against
society
and also sins against God. Influenced as we naturally are by what is
seen
we come
in time
to view as sins only those which are transgressions of
the laws of society
and to think little or nothing about those of which
society takes no note. So
too
about obedience. We think that it is like work
given to a servant. The more he does of it
the better servant he is. What his
feelings may be about his master make little difference
provided he gets
through his work. What he does is the only way in which we judge of him
as a
good or bad servant. Accordingly
we suppose God judges of us
His servants
by
the amount of our obedience. He issues a command
and
we suppose
the man who
obeys much of it must be better than the man who obeys very little. This is not
true. We may have gone with God’s command
just
so far as that command
coincided with our own inclination
and stopped short where the real and trying
exercise of an obedient spirit came in
where alone it was needed.
II. Guarding
then
against these common and erroneous views about sin and obedience
let us come
to some of Saul’s acts. His falling away began from the circumstance recorded
in the thirteenth chapter and first verse. Samuel came and rebuked him. This
seems hard
especially when we consider the trying circumstances in which Saul
was placed at the time: powerful enemies near at hand--many of his people
fallen away--the rest following him
trembling--Samuel not coming--and
after
all
as people would say now
“It was only a matter of form. What difference
could it make
who offered the sacrifice?” “He showed a spirit above ritual
observances--above ceremony and order.” He certainly did. So did Naaman: and
both were made to see the folly of their presumption. Some anxiety would have
been natural in any man. But Saul was more than anxious. A distinct commandment
of God forbade him to offer sacrifice
and yet he did it to secure an end which
he thought to be desirable towards the overthrow of the Philistines. He forgot
that the most trifling matter
when once it became the subject of a Divine
command
ceased to be insignificant; if for no other reason
at least for this
that its observance thereby became a test--not of regard to form
but--of obedience
to God. Now what disposition was manifested by this conduct? Was it not an
utter absence of that “faith
without which it is impossible to please God”?
What would be its effect
upon the people
when the excitement was over? What
but to encourage them in their departure from the ordinances of Him from Whom
they longed to stray
and be as the heathen?
III. The Almighty
then
did not reject this his first chosen King of Israel for any slight fault
or any momentary swerving from the path of obedience through ignorance or from
impulse
but for habitually and perseveringly going wrong in that very respect
which was of most consequence in the due execution of his office. He had to
meet the difficult question which met the Apostles
“whether he should obey God
rather than man.” They had no hesitation in arriving at a decision: neither had
he: but they decided it differently. If ever there was a time in which Saul
would have been appreciated
ours is that
time. Were he alive now he would be
just the man that would rise in the world--probably get into Parliament
lead a
party
perhaps become Prime Minister. He was the man for the people. A striking
man; able
energetic
fitted to command; above all
prepared to obey the Lord
just so far as
by suiting the people’s views
he should help to his own
exaltation. The popular religion or phase of any particular religion would be
his. All creeds just as far Divine as they were popular. None more the truth
than another. Saul’s day fell in an evil era
and
for him
under an evil
dispensation. In his time the tares and the wheat
did not “grow together till
the harvest.” The tares were rooted out at the time
and so people who came
could be shown what were pronounced tares by the Lord of the Harvest
and what
was their end. This is one very important
advantage we derive from the system
of temporal rewards and punishments and the special Providence under which the
Jews lived. By these means we can strive at
the principle on which His future
“judgment according to works” will be conducted. Thus
a line of conduct in
which we should have detected nothing very striking
either of good or of evil
when marked with God’s disapproval
arrests our attention
leads us to
examination
and acts as a corrective to the erroneous judgment on human
conduct which the time or the society in which we live had led us to form in
our minds. Many would think that Saul had succeeded. Our Lord tells us that
this is impossible. The compromise
He says
cannot be effected. God’s
rejection of Saul shows us that he did not succeed. The characters condemned
and approved in the Old Testament are marked by the very same characteristics
after all
as those which are condemned and approved in the New.
Double-mindedness
want of faith
loving this present world
loving
the praise
of men more than the praise of God
seeking to be friends with it
making that
our great aim
and the friendship of Him Who redeemed us secondary to that: a
determination to do our own will; a hesitation and insincerity in saying
come
what may
“Thy will be done”; these are ever the marks of those who are held up
as sad examples of inconsistency
to be deplored and to be avoided. (J. C.
Coghlan
D. D.)
Saul’s deserved and irrevocable doom
Before Samuel turned after Saul he delivered his conscience
and
pronounced the irrevocable doom against him. That doom was deserved
and it was
irrevocable
1. It was deserved. Saul was forewarned. He had received a plain
commission from God. He occupied a high position. He belonged to a nation that
had the light of Divine revelation. He was their king
and had pledged himself
to keep the constitution
which demanded obedience to the will of God. He was
the first king
and according to his conduct was the monarchy on the one hand
and the subject people on the other
likely to be influenced. Obedience in his
case had been concentrated on important points; but in these he had
transgressed. It therefore repented the Lord that he had made Saul king. But
his purpose of a right theocracy under a man after his own heart was not to
fail: “The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent; for he is not a man that
he should repent.”
2. It was irrevocable. God had solemnly declared that he would turn
the kingdom from Saul. He had never said that Saul would be kept in the kingdom
and found a dynasty in Israel. He was not bound to continue him in the office.
He had raised him to the throne that he might have a fair trial
and full
opportunity of acting aright. Saul was endowed by God with every advantage
with kingly qualities
surrounded with a band of men whose hearts God had
touched
appointed to special commissions
and hedged up by every means likely
to aid his fidelity. But God might change the sovereignty. When
therefore
he
beheld Saul’s conduct he is said to have repented that He had made him king.
Here we find a principle which can bear a most extensive application. God’s
dealings with us are still wrought on the same plan. He has not given His word
regarding our circumstances here. He has not pledged Himself to continue them
as they have been. He may change these. He acts towards us as a judicious
teacher
and shapes His course according to our conduct. There are reasons in
our manner of action
proceeding from our abuse of mercies
which may
necessitate a change. He may alter our worldly position
and send adversity
instead of prosperity. He may lay a restraint upon our ambition
and make us
feel by sad experience the vanity of human wishes. He may afflict our
households
or prostrate ourselves. In this respect much depends upon the
individual with regard to the providence of life. It was Saul’s disobedience
that warranted the chastisement which he received
and the change in God’s mode
of dealing with him. (R. Steel.)
The character of Saul
1.The first thought which occurs to us is--In this its first king
as in a mirror
behold Israel itself. Israel
like Saul
was chosen by God to
rule the people. Israel was gifted with grace sufficient and upheld by glorious
promises. But Israel
like Saul
has turned to his own way. Because he has
rejected the Lord
the Lord hath also rejected him from being king.
2. The second thought is--In this character behold multitudes among
ourselves reflected. How many are there
against whom nothing morally wrong can
be alleged
who are not prone to any palpable vice
who have tasted the good
word of God and the powers of the world to come
with whom everything for time
and eternity trembles on the balance
and the question is whether they will
serve the Lord in life or whether they will not. Saul forgot the Lord his God.
He sought not to Him for new supplies of that grace which had once been
imparted to him. He was like one of those foolish ones who slumbered with their
lamps burning
trusting that they would continue to burn on
but took no oil in
their vessels for a supply. He went on his way
and thought not of God. But if
forgetfulness of God be the passive symptom of the fatal disease
self-will is
the active one. It was this which misled Saul. He leaned to his own understanding.
He had his own ways
and his own calculations
where God’s will had been
already positively pronounced. (H. Alford
B. D.)
I have sinned.
Temporary religious feeling
“Some are frightened into a little religiousness in their straits
and deep necessities
but it is poor work and superficial work. They are like
an ice in thawing weather
soft at top and hard at bottom.” They melt
but to
no very great extent. It is upon the surface only that they yield to heavenly
influences. This is a sorry state of things
for it generally ends in a harder
frost than before
and the bonds of cold indifference bind the very soul. Let
those in whom there are any meltings of holy feeling take heed
for their
danger lies in being content with a partial subjection to gracious influences.
Grace will be all or nothing: the ice must all melt
and the soul must flow
like a riverse Jesus did not come to create temporary and partial religious
feeling
but to make new creatures of us. He will have nothing to do with those
Ephraimites who are as half-done cakes
which are black on one side with too
much baking
but have never been turned so as to feel the fire on the other
side. The centre of the heart must feel the warmth of Divine love
or nothing
is done. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
I feared the people and
obeyed their voice.
Saul’s excuse for disobedience
Saul makes three excuses for his disobedience
but they all shift
the responsibility for his sin. Observe:
1. Saul’s excuses are identical with those urged by sinners today: “I
intended to give some of it to God.” “I was over persuaded. I was overborne by
the influence of others.” “I did not sin wickedly and willfully.” “it was only
a mistake under a good motive.”
2. Saul confesses the flimsiness of his excuses. Some time or other
we must all come face to face with ourselves and stop making excuses
and cry
“Pardon my sin”
3. Saul confessed too late. Our sins reach their bounds and meet
their penalty.
4. Saul repented only because he feared punishment.
5. Every man should make at once an honest self-examination.
6. When convicted of sin
we should without delay confess our sin. (Homiletic
Review.)
Thou hast rejected the word of the Lord
and the Lord hath
rejected thee.
One sin too many
The whole story affords an extensive illustration of sin in almost
all of its phases of manifestation as judged by the righteous law of God.
1. We discover the simple nature of sin: it is disobedience of a
Divine command.
2. We learn
likewise
a lesson concerning the wide reach of sin.
Saul felt quite independent in his disobedience It is not possible for any man
to keep his sin all to himself. This universe is balanced with great nicety. It
cannot endure a sinner’s perversity without suffering any more than an oarsman
can tolerate a perverse boy in a boat; every time the self-willed creature
steps across the thwart he rocks the vessel
and makes it uncomfortable and
perilous for each one who has anything to do with him.
3. Next to this
we discover an illustration of the bold effrontery
of sin. Iniquity often tries to carry off shame with a show of daring
and
attempts to restore its self-confidence with a complacency of
self-congratulation.
4. Now comes a lesson concerning the certain discovery of sin. Guilt
always feels lonely; and yet
curiously enough
always imagines that everybody
knows about the crime. Conscience keeps the culprit excited
for he understands
that nature positively abhors transgression of law.
5. Once more: the story gives us an illustration of the evasive
meanness of sin.
6. Then we have a lesson concerning the hypocritical excuses offered
for sin.
7. Now just at this point we receive a lesson concerning the just
condemnation of sin.
8. There is likewise here an illustration of the aggregating force of
sin. It is hardly worth while to attempt to enumerate the acts of wickedness
which followed directly upon this first dereliction of Saul: treachery
lying
vanity
covetousness
hypocrisy--these were among them. There are degrees of
depravity
no doubt; but all sin is bad
and tends to what is worse.
9. Still another lesson meets us here
and now it is concerning the
inevitable result of sin. Saul had reached the limit of Divine forbearance.
Indeed
he had already committed one sin too many. It was of no use for him to
plead for pardon any more. There is something very strange in the subsequent
career of this monarch; he seems bewildered and off his balance. All sin left
to itself is hopeless. The kingdom was taken from this man so that he should
not injure anyone else any more. Even heathen people know that is lust. When we
were at school we used to declaim this sentence from Demosthenes’ oration: “It
is not possible
O Athenians! that a power should be permanent which is marked
with injustice
perjury
and falsehood.” Hence
finally
sin becomes massed and
destructive. It is an Arab saying that we so often quote: “The last straw
breaks the camel’s back.” No; it is the whole load that kills the camel
but it
is the last straw which makes the load complete and intolerable. When the fall
of the beast comes
all the burden tells. A time arrives at the last when just
one more little act of rebellion against God discharges all the violence of
Divine wrath in an absolute reprobation. (C. S. Robinson
D. D.)
Samuel declaring the deposition of Saul
Few characters more blameless than that of Samuel.
I. His office.
This was to declare the will of God. He was not called to decide or to
adjudicate
but to declare. When Saul was called to the kingdom
Samuel was
employed to declare to him the call of God (1 Samuel 9:17; 1 Samuel 9:20): He did not select
but declare God’s selection. So when Saul was to be set aside. Samuel was
employed to declare his deposition (1 Samuel 15:28). He did not depose
but declared God’s deposition
II. The spirit in
which he acted.
1. He was faithful to the Lord who sent him. He faithfully convicted
Saul of his disobedience (1 Samuel 15:14; 1 Samuel 15:17). He showed him the
hollowness of his vain excuses (1 Samuel 15:22-23). He fearlessly
and faithfully told him that the Lord had that day rent the kingdom from him (1 Samuel 15:26). Learn that those
who have a message from God must give it faithfully.
2. He was most tender to the sinner to whom he was sent. Had he given
way to personal jealousy
he might have been pleased at the fall of Saul; for
when he was old the people had asked for a king in a most ungrateful spirit.
But he showed no such mean jealousy.
1. When he heard of Saul’s fault he was grieved and spent the whole
night in prayer (1 Samuel 15:11). He did not give his
reproof in a hard and unfeeling spirit
but with a sorrowing heart. The lips
that seemed so severe in declaring judgment had been employed all night in
pleading for mercy.
2. When the sentence of God was announced
he did all he could to mitigate
the pain. It is the duty of the minister faithfully to denounce sin; but if he
would do so effectually
he must prepare the way by tenderness
tears
and
prayers; and he must accompany his painful message by a clear evidence of
sorrowful tenderness towards the sinner. Nothing tends more to harden sinners
than hard denunciation. (E. Horne
M. D.)
I have sinned: yet honour me now
I pray thee
before the elders
of my people.
True and false repentance
How may we discriminate between a merely seeming repentance and
genuine penitence? There is hardly a passage of Scripture which could render us
mere decided assistance than that portion of Saul’s history which here claims
attention.
I. We see that
though there was confession
it was not made until Saul was actually compelled
to make it
because the evidence of his sin was incontrovertibly clear. We see
that the confession is wrung from him inch by inch
end if
only comes at last
when
as far as the facts were concerned
it made no difference whether be
confessed or not
for he was proved to be guilty. We discover at once
in this
circumstance
the opposite of that state of mind which feels the weight of
personal sin
and which longs to unburden itself; and
as we compare it with
that scripture (Proverbs 28:13) we are compelled to
regard Saul’s action rather as a bungling attempt to cover his sin--an attempt
which
after all
did not succeed--than as that unburdening of conscious guilt
which is alone consistent with true penitence.
II. A second proof
against Saul’s real penitence is his attempt to palliate the crime which he had
confessed
by throwing the blame on other persons--“The people took of the
spoil.” According to his own view
he was more to be pitied than blamed--“I
feared the people
and obeyed their voice.”
III. A third proof
against Saul was his greater anxiety to have the forgiveness of Samuel than to
receive the pardon of God--the prominent place he gave to the one above the
other consideration. “Now
therefore. I pray thee
pardon my sin and turn again
with me that I may worship the Lord.” What argued that postponement of God’s
pardon till he was reconciled to man--what but that he treated it as a matter
which did not press immediately
which could be arranged subsequently? Could
any real mourner for sin have felt thus? with such a penitent
is not the
thought of God the One exciting
all-pervading idea in his contrition? How
strange the contrast presented by the case before us
to that view of sincere
repentance of which the Psalmist was the subject! There was fervour
indeed
in
Saul
but fervour in the wrong direction. He would press his point with the
prophet
and gain forgiveness if he could
but Samuel “turned about to go
away.”
IV. A fourth
circumstance which throws suspicion on the penitence of Saul--the manner in
which he showed that all his desire was to stand well in public estimation. He
had evidently forfeited his claim on the good opinion of those around him. It
was to be expected that
having lost the favour of God
he would lose the
regard of those around him. That must be an evil state of things which would
enable a wrong-doer to obtain from public opinion an award in his favour; and
what must have become of the cause of integrity--of honour--of justice--of all
that is excellent
where
by reason of the low state of moral feeling
the
voice of society is no longer heard to pronounce its verdict
distinctly and
emphatically
against evil-doers and in praise of those who do well. In this
respect
every community incurs a deep responsibility. To a rightly-constituted
mind
even the favourable verdict of public opinion would be of little worth
except as it
echoed the verdict of the court of heaven. This is the highest
acquisition
“favour with God and man;” but the latter always in subordination
to the former
never as a substitute for it. Saul reckoned that the people would
think the better of him if he still ranked among the worshippers of God; he
knew that to have given this up would have told effectually against him. There
was something even beyond this. He knew that very much of the success of any
effort which he might make to keep his place in the good opinion of the
community would depend upon the way in which he was treated by Samuel. We blame
not Saul for being anxious about
public esteem
but we do blame him for being
more solicitous about this than about God’s judgment. (J. A. Miller.)
Surely
the bitterness of death is passed.
Death an advantage
So cried Agag
and the only objection I have go this text is that
a bad man uttered it. Nevertheless
it is true
and in a higher sense than that
in which it was originally uttered. We talk about the shortness of life
but if
we exercised good sense we would realise that life is quite long enough. If we
are the children of God
we are at a banquet
and this world is only the first
course of the food
and we ought to be glad that there are other and richer
courses of food to be handed on. We are here in one room of our Father’s house
but there are rooms upstairs. They are better pictured
better upholstered
better furnished. Why do we want to stay in the inte-room forever
when there
are palatial apartments waiting for our occupancy? What a mercy that there is a
limitation to earthly environments!
1. Death also makes room for improved physical machinery. Our bodies
have wondrous powers
but they are very limited. Death removes this slower and
less adroit machinery and makes room for something better. Mind you
I believe
with all anatomists and all physiologists
and with all scientists and with the
Psalmist that “we are fearfully and wonderfully made.” But I believe and I know
that God can and will give us better physical equipment. Is it possible for man
to make improvements in almost
anything and God not be able to make improvements
in man’s physical machinery? Shall canal boats give way to limited express
train? Shall slow letter give place to telegraphy
that places San Francisco
and New York within a minute of communication? Shall the telephone take the
sound of a voice sixty miles and instantly bring back another voice
and God
who made the man who does these things
not be able to improve the man himself
with infinite velocities and infinite multiplication? Beneficent Death comes in
and makes the necessary removal to make way for these supernatural
improvements. “Well
” you say
“does not that destroy the idea of a
resurrection of the present body?” Oh no. It will be the old factory with new
machinery
new driving wheel
new bands
new levers
and new powers. Don’t you
see? So I suppose the dullest human brain after the resurrectionary process
will have more knowledge
more acuteness
more brilliancy
more breadth of
swing than any Sir William Hamilton
or Herschel
or Isaac Newton
or Faraday
or Agassiz ever had in the mortal state or all their intellectual powers
combined. You see God has only just begun to build you.
2. Then there are the climatological hindrances. We run against
unpropitious weather of all sorts. Winter blizzard and summer scorch
and each
season seems to batch a brood of its own disorders. Have you any doubt that God
can make better weather than is characteristic of this planet? Blessed is
Death! for it prepares the way for change of zones
yea
it clears the path to
a semi-omnipresence. While death may not open opportunity to be in many places
at the same time
so easy and so quick and so instantaneous will be the
transference that it will amount to about the same thing. Quicker than I can
speak this sentence you will be among your glorified kindred
among the
martyrs
among the apostles
in the gate
on the battlements
at the temple
and now from world to world as soon as a robin hops from one tree branch to
another tree branch. Distance no hindrance. Immensity easily compassed.
Semi-omnipresence. Aye! to make that resurrection body will not require half as
much ingenuity and power as those other bodies you have had. Is it not easier
for a sculptor to make a statue out of silent clay than it would be to make a
statue out of some material that is alive and moving
and running hither and
thither? Will it not be easier for God to make the resurrection body out of the
silent dust of the crumbled body than it was to make your body over five or six
or eight times while it was in motion
walking
climbing
falling
or rising?
3. Now
if Death clears the way for all this
why paint him as a
hobgoblin? Why call him the King of Terrors? Why sketch him with skeleton and
arrows
and standing on a bank of dark waters? Why have children so frightened
at his name that they dare not go to bed alone
and old reed have their teeth
chatter lest some shortness of breath band them over to the monster? All the
ages have been busy in maligning Death
hurling repulsive metaphors at Death
slandering Death. Oh
for the sweet breath of Easter to come down on the earth!
I was told
at Johnstown
after the flood
that many people who had been for
months and years bereft
for the first time got comfort when the awful flood
came
to think that their departed ones were not present to see the
catastrophe. As the people were floating down on the house tops
they said:
“Oh
how glad I am that father and mother are not here
” or “how glad I am that
the children are not alive to see this horror!” And ought not we who are down
here amid the upturnings of this life be glad that none of the troubles which
submerge us can ever afright our friends ascended? “Surely
the bitterness of
death is past.” Further
if what I have been saying is true
we should trust
the Lord and be thrilled with the fact that our own day of escape cometh. If
our lives were going to end when our hearts ceased to pulsate and our lungs to
breathe
I would want to take ten million years of life here for the first
instalment. But we cannot afford always to stay down in the cellar of our
Father’s house. We cannot always be postponing the best things. We cannot
always be tuning our violins for the celestial orchestra. We must get our wings
out. We must mount. We cannot afford always to stand out here in the vestibule
of the house of many mansions. All these thoughts are suggested as we stand
this morn amid the broken rocks of the Saviour’s tomb. The day that Christ rose
and name forth the sepulchre was demolished forever
and no trowel of earthly
masonry can ever rebuild it. “Now is Christ risen from the dead and become the
first fruits of them that slept.” (T. De Witt Talmage.)
The bitterness of death
I. Why bitter.
Because--
1. It is accompanied with physical sufferings.
2. It is the end of earthly hopes and advantages.
3. It separates from friends.
4. There is within us a fear of the unknown realities beyond the
grave.
5. In each heart there is a consciousness of sin.
II. How this
bitterness may be changed to sweetness. Faith in Christ.
1. Makes physical sufferings trivial.
2. Assures us of hopes and advantages infinitely more important than
those which perish through death.
3. Introduces us to the friendship of all heaven
and this for all
eternity.
4. Makes to know that Christ
our Brother
and God
our Father
dominate all other realities in the world to come.
5. It clothes us with the righteousness of Christ. O death
where is
thy sting? O grave
where is thy victory? (Homiletic Review.)
And Samuel hewed Agag to pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.
The vindictive justice of God
God
who viewed Agag as an enemy to Himself and to His people
would not release him from the punishment he deserved; but inspired Samuel to
give him a just recompense of reward. This striking instance of the Divine
conduct teaches us that God is more disposed to punish His enemies than sinners
are to punish theirs.
I. I am to show
that sinners are disposed to punish their enemies. This will appear both from their
character and conduct.
1. It appears from their character
as drawn by the Searcher of
hearts. God perfectly knows their real feelings
and has clearly described them
in His word. And according to His infallible description
they are entirely
selfish. They possess not the least spark of holy love
but are under the
entire dominion of selfishness. Though their selfishness disposes them to love
those who love them
yet it no less disposes them to hate those who hate them
whether they are friendly or unfriendly to God. Esau hated Jacob because Jacob
had injured his interest. Sinners
who are under the reigning power of
selfishness
are not only hateful
but they hats one another.
2. It more clearly appears from their conduct than from their
character
that they are disposed to punish their enemies. They have been in
all ages imbruing their hands in each other’s blood. Nations have destroyed
nations
and filled the earth with violence. I proceed
therefore
to the
principal point proposed
which is
to show.
II. That God is
more disposed to punish His enemies than sinners are to punish theirs. God
knows that sinners are His enemies
and hate His existence
His perfections
His designs
and His whole government. He knows that they hate Him without a
cause
as He has always treated them perfectly right. He knows that they are
enemies to one another
and be all intelligent creatures. He viewed Agag as an
enemy to all righteousness; and He views all sinners in the same light. It may
be inquired
why God was more disposed to punish Agag than Saul was? and why in
all cases
he is more disposed to punish His enemies
than sinners are to
punish their enemies? To this I answer--
1. It is because He hates the conduct
of His enemies simply
considered
but sinners do not hate the conduct of their enemies simply
considered. Though their enemies may act sinfully
it is not their sinfulness
that
they hate. It is only because their sinfulness is pointed against them
and does them hurt
that they hurt it.
2. God is more disposed to punish His enemies than sinners are to
punish theirs
because His hatred to His enemies cannot be turned into love.
The hatred of sinners can be turned into love
because they do not hate the
character
but only the conduct of their enemies
which they view as
detrimental to themselves.
3. God’s hatred of His enemies is perfectly just
but sinners’ hatred
of their enemies is always unjust. They never hate them for what they ought to
be hated
but only for the injury which they receive from them. They do not
hate them for selfishness
which is the only thing for which they ought to be
hated; and therefore their very hatred is selfish and wicked
for which they
really deserve to be punished.
4. There is another reason why God is more disposed to punish His
enemies
than sinners are to punish theirs; and that is
His regard to the good
of the universe
which sinners totally disregard in punishing their enemies.
They are disposed to punish their enemies for their own sake
and not for the
good of others.
They are disposed to punish
merely to gratify their own feelings
whether it tends to help or hurt any other person or being besides themselves.
1. If sinners are less disposed to punish their sinful enemies than
God is to punish His enemies
then their tender mercies are unholy and
criminal.
2. If God is more disposed to punish His enemies than sinners ere to
punish theirs
then none can truly love God without loving His vindictive
justice. This is an essential tribute of His nature; and He can no more divest
Himself of it than He can divest Himself of any other essential attribute than
He possesses. He has as plainly revealed His vindictive justice in His word
and as strikingly displayed it in His providence
as anyone of His glorious
perfections.
3. If God be more disposed to punish His enemies than sinners are to
punish theirs
then His present conduct in punishing sinners is a strong
evidence that He will punish the finally impenitent.
4. If God is more disposed to punish His enemies than sinners are to
punish theirs
then all real saints are willing that God should punish His
enemies as much and as long as they deserve to be punished. Samuel was willing
to punish Agag
end hew him in pieces before the Lord
and at His command.
Every good man has that within him which approves and loves the justice of God
in punishing sin. Every good man is holy
as God is holy
and loves what God
loves
and hates what
God hates.
5. If God is more disposed to punish His enemies than sinners are to
punish theirs
then sinners must have a new heart
in order to enter into and
enjoy the kingdom of heaven.
6. If God is more disposed to punish His enemies than sinners are to
punish theirs
then sinners have no ground to depend upon the patience of God.
Sinners are extremely apt to depend upon the patience of God
supposing that He
does and will wait upon them
because He pities them
and is unwilling to
punish them. “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily
therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.” (N.
Emmons
D. D.)
Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death.
Samuel’s withdrawal from Saul
Very few bad persons are without some “redeeming quality
” as it
is called; and “redeeming qualities” are usually precisely of that kind by
which we are most fascinated. The “redeeming qualities” of a wicked man are
however
the very things which should cause us most to fear for these with whom
he comes in contact.
1. Few--very few
avoid falling into the error of mistaking what are
symptoms of possible good in the future for tokens of real good at the present
time
and from at least occasionally thinking that their deliberately formed
opinion of the entire character was after all incorrect
and that the persons
in whom these good qualities are so clearly observable cannot be wicked at all.
These
of course
will think and speak of the “redeeming qualities
” not as
redeeming qualities
but as the main features of the character
and try to
persuade themselves that it is for the sake of these they continue intimacies
which their consciences tell them require in some way to be defended.
2. Besides this proneness to self-deceit
which in greater or less
force lurks in the best of us
there are two other causes which expose us to
the danger of being injured by the “redeeming qualities” of godless men. One is
the fact that there are undoubtedly blemishes in the characters of very good
men.
3. The other source of danger is this. The very best of men are known
to entertain an affection for bad men. From this it is argued that the men are
not bad. Samuel had an affection for Saul. Saul had many “redeeming
qualities”--qualities calculated to make him exceedingly popular. Nor was this
all. He had a good deal about him to be liked
and Samuel did like him. A good
man
then
may have an affection for a bad man
without being at all mistaken
as to his character; nay
even after he had been
as in the case before us
the
very persons who had himself pronounced the Divine condemnation. We must not
then
be led astray as to the real characters of those whom we should otherwise
feel bound to regard as dangerous by the mere fact that they have awakened an
affection in those whom we justly reverence. Had we known no more than “that
there was a King of Israel named Saul
” and that the holy Samuel mourned
exceeding for him on his losing the kingdom
we should
I think
have taken for
granted that Saul was a good man
and yet you see we should have been wrong.
4. This discontinuance of personal intercourse with Saul shows us
also the limits of a good man’s companionship with a bad man. So long as there
is any reasonable hope of his “redeeming qualities” becoming so developed as to
constitute the main features
instead of the exceptional points of his
character--so long as the influence imperceptibly exercised by early
companionship seems likely to be instrumental in bringing about this change
just so long familiar intercourse with one whose grave faults we perceive may
be continued without breach of duty towards God: but so soon as that time has
gone by--so soon as these hopes seem unreasonable
then
although the regard
still linger
the familiar acquaintance must be abandoned. Every case will
of
course
have its peculiarities calling for especial consideration. But still
there are certain classes of cases in which we may reasonably suppose that our
associating with bad men will be unlikely to benefit them
in which the
probabilities are so much against it that we had better not make the attempt
in which we had better not so much look to the possibility of our improving
another as to that of his injuring us
in which the foremost thought in our
minds should be
“Evil communications corrupt good manners.” Generally
speaking
a good and a bad man cannot be much together without either being
however little or imperceptibly
changed by the other. Nor should it be
forgotten that the companionship of a good man may be a positive injury to a
bad man. He may deceive himself into the belief that his faults are not so
great or dangerous as they really are
by the reflection that a good man and a
sensible man would not like him if he were not in the main good also. Universally
on persons of about our own age and our own social position
who are obviously
and ostentatiously opposing themselves to the precepts of the Gospel
our
constant companionship is not likely to produce a good effect
except we be
more than ordinarily religious and firm ourselves. Of all the instances you
ever knew in which a woman entertained that wildest of notions that she would
be able
after marriage
to reform the man over whom her influence was
powerless before it--of all such instances--and there are numbers of them
how
many are the successes you can recall? In how many do you know the result to
have been intense and irremediable misery? No
there are those whose age or
weight of character enables them without danger or misrepresentation to attempt
the reformation of the wicked by being
to some extent
in their society. There
are those who
perhaps
to both these qualifications have superadded the
incentive of personal liking. Samuel was one of this sort
yet even to him the
time came when ha
the old man
the good man
the minister of God
the man with
a strong
affection towards Saul
felt it his duty to “see him no more.” (J.
C. Coghlan
D. D.)
Separation of Samuel and Saul
It was a final parting: “Samuel came no more to see Saul until the
day of his death.” They had now nothing in common. Their views and principles
were widely dissimilar. They sought not the same ends
and they used very
different means. Samuel so closely followed the will and way of God that he
could not have fellowship with a throne of iniquity. A lifetime’s godliness had
made Samuel very jealous of the glory of God. He would not compromise his
principles for the sake of keeping the favour of a king; and lest he should be
understood as approving of Saul’s procedure be absented himself altogether from
his court. His absence would be a constant reproof of Saul’s wilful esteems
significant token that he deemed his policy ungodly. There are circumstances in
the history of the believer
and even of the Church when separation from those
with whom there have been union and fellowship becomes a duty. When any one
finds that by his station or character he is likely to influence others
if he
openly unites with those whose policy he disapproves
he is bound to separate.
When any one discovers that he cannot
without countenancing the sin of others
continue in their fellowship he is bound to withdraw. When any one learns that
his soul is imperilled by remaining with the ungodly
he must separate. The
sacrifice of the dearest ties
the richest gains
and the most cherished
associations
must be made
when duty to Christ demands it. Our Lord has laid
down the law of a Christian in such circumstances in the plainest terms: “If
any man will come after Me
let him deny himself
and take up his cross daily
and follow Me
” etc. You may be associated in relationships that forbid your
separation. The law of Christ does not demand the believer to break up his
nuptial tie
or his filial ties; but it demands his faithful witness bearing at
home. There must be no compromise with truth--with Christ--to please any
friend. The world is not to be met half-way. We are not to conciliate by
compromise. In the sixteenth century
separation from Rome became the duty of
all enlightened souls who protested against the errors and crimes of Modern
Babylon. Samuel went away in sorrow. He mourned for Saul. He did not part with
him because his heart was steeled against him
or because of any unkindly
feeling towards him personally
he yearned after the king with all the
affection of a broken-hearted parent. Samuel mourned for Saul
for he pitied
the people. Saul was a king according to their mind
and it was to be feared
that they would approve of his infatuated policy
and thus turn away from God.
Perhaps this had an influence upon his determination to separate from Saul
that all Israel might see that he was no more a party to their monarch’s ways.
When so good a man as Samuel retired from fellowship with Saul
they might
perhaps reflect upon their own safety. But people are blind
and require long
discipline to correct their sins and reform their ways. (R. Steel.)
──《The Biblical Illustrator》