Saul And Amalek
I Samuel 15
What was so terrible about Saul's sin with Amalek?
Did Saul lose his kingdom simply because he listened to the people's suggestion to offer some of the best sheep from Amalek
as sacrifice to YHVH, and kept Agag alive for an extra day or two instead of killing him immediately? Or was it because he
didn't admit his guilt immediately, but instead made up excuses?
It doesn't seem fair that Saul would lose his kingdom
to David, especially since David's sin appeared to be much more severe.
The details of Amalek's first attack against
Israel were recorded in the book of Exodus, (Ex 17:8-16) but the official command to destroy him was given in the book of
Deuteronomy (Deut 25:17-19) and it had to be fulfilled once Israel were established in their land and achieved
rest from their enemies. It thus became the responsibility of the king of Israel to destroy Amalek.
Several hundred
years passed from the time of Joshua until the monarchy was finally established in Israel, with the coronation of Saul. (I
Samuel 12)
Israel needed a strong king to guarantee its security and economic prosperity. The king was to represent
YHVH to the people but not be His replacement. For this reason it became the task of the prophet to insure
the proper balance. By advising the king in all matters of state, the prophet assured the proper development of the relationship
between YHVH, the King, and the people. This was precisely the relationship between Samuel and Saul, (and later between Nathan
and David, Isaiah and Hezekiah, etc.). Samuel the prophet was to make sure that Israel, under Saul, would grow closer to YHVH.
Periodically the prophet would make certain demands to assure that Israel would attribute their success to YHVH, and not only
to the king. (I Sam 13:1-14)
Due to the special nature of the battle against Amalek YHVH commanded Saul to totally
destroy everything belonging to Amalek. (I Sam 15:2-3)
Saul invited the entire nation to the city of Gilgal for a public celebration of the victory over Amalek.
"And it was told Samuel, saying: Saul and his army have come to the Carmel (not to the desert where they had been fighting)
and, behold, he is setting him up a monument and has passed on and gone down to Gilgal."
I Sam 15:12
Gilgal was chosen as the gathering site - where Saul was officially anointed as king, (I Sam 11:14) to
thank YHVH for this victory, and offer thanksgiving sacrifices. The highlight of this celebration was to be the public slaying
of Agag, Israel's archenemy, by Saul. For this reason Saul and the people took animals from the booty and kept Agag alive.
(I Sam 15:9) When Saul met Samuel at Gilgal he proudly announced: "I have fulfilled YHVH's commandment." Even after Samuel
inquired regarding the sheep and cattle, Saul promptly responded: "From the Amalekites they
were taken, in order to offer Sacrifices to YHVH, your Elohim, and the rest was totally destroyed." I
Sam 15:13-15
Saul considered this a proper form of celebration. Therefore, when Samuel countered, charging him that
he had not been careful in following YHVH's command, Saul insisted once again: "I have listened
to YHVH's command, and I have followed the path upon which YHVH sent me, and the people took from the sheep and cattle solely
to offer sacrifices to YHVH in Gilgal." I Sam 15:16-21
Samuel was not convinced. Once again he
censured Saul, claiming that he had not listened to YHVH, (I Sam 15:22-23) until Saul finally 'admitted' his sin:
"And Saul said to Samuel, I have sinned, for I have transgressed YHVH's command, for
I feared the people and listened to them." I Sam 15:24
Saul's
admission of guilt is usually understood as sincere, but simply too late. However, if Saul was indeed sincere, why was he
punished so severely? After all, he had good intentions, and admitted his guilt and hopefully learned his lesson. Was
"listening
to the people" so critical in the definition of 'king of Israel'? If Saul truly accepted his guilt, why didn't he resign and
transfer his rule to someone worthier, as Samuel suggested that he do? (I Sam 15:28-29)
Was Saul's admission of guilt in I Samuel 15:24 sincere or was it rather an attempt to appease Samuel?
Saul truly believed that he did nothing wrong at all. He was sure that he followed YHVH's command properly. In his opinion,
his celebration at Gilgal would make YHVH's Name even greater. Even though Samuel challenged this gathering, Saul was sure
that his actions have been flawless. However, after his first two confrontations with Samuel, Saul realized that he could
not convince Samuel of his sincerity. Instead, he concluded that Samuel judged him wrongly and was too demanding. Even though
Saul still respected Samuel and remained thankful for his many years of guidance, he now felt that he understood the situation
better. As his own honor was at stake, it was not so easy for Saul to accept Samuel's rebuke. At this point in their dispute,
in order to make sure that the celebration continues, Saul outwardly admitted his guilt to appease Samuel,
though inwardly he disagreed with him.
Saul asked for forgiveness and invited Samuel to join him in
the ceremony.
"Saul said to Samuel, I have sinned, now atone my sin and return with
me to the celebration, so that I can bow down to YHVH." I Sam 15:24-25
Samuel refused to return
with Saul to the celebration, instead, he turned to leave. In a desperate attempt to prevent Samuel from leaving, Saul reached
for his cloak, begging him to stay, and the cloak ripped. Realizing the meaning of this action, Samuel informed Saul that
YHVH will 'rip away' his kingdom and will give it to someone else more worthy. (I Sam 15:26-29)
But Saul, worried
about his honor, refused to give up!
"And Saul said, I have sinned,
but now please honor me, in the eyes of the elders and all of the people who have gathered for the ceremony
at Gilgal, and return with me so that I can bow down to YHVH your Elohim."
Samuel agreed to return
with Saul but insisted that he kill Agag instead of Saul, thus attributing the glory of Agag's death to YHVH and not to Saul.
Most likely, the argument between Samuel and Saul took place 'back stage', and not in the public eye. The people may
have noticed that there was some tension between the two leaders, but they did not hear the prophecy that Saul would lose
his kingdom.
Samuel went home and mourned his 'disciple' who went astray, and they never saw each other again. Saul, upset that his
'rabbi' no longer understood him, continued to lead Israel. It was only on the day before his death that Saul finally realized
his mistake. (I Sam 28)
But why was he punished so severely?
Even though Saul's intention (for making this public
ceremony) may have been noble, the result was exactly the opposite of what YHVH intended. YHVH's command
to not take any booty from Amalek would have left a lasting impression upon the entire nation. Usually, when
victorious soldiers return from battle, they are laden with the spoils of war. Imagine the impression when hundreds of thousands
of soldiers returned home from victory empty handed! Everyone at home would ask what happened, and the soldiers would all
need to explain to their families and friends at home how the war with Amalek was different. This would have left a lasting
impression upon the nation and help them recognize its significance. Despite his good intentions, Saul's decision to celebrate
the victory with a public ceremony would impress upon the people that Saul alone, without YHVH's help, defeated Amalek. Because
recognizing YHVH's help was so crucial, Israel's king needed to learn to forfeit his own honor in favor of YHVH's honor. Instead,
Saul became obsessed with his own glory, as reflected by his statement 'honor me'. Even though his intentions were pure, he
missed the point and thus lost his kingdom, not so much because of a specific sin, but because he lacked this necessary trait
of humility.
Not listening to YHVH's command was at the root of why Saul, the first king of Israel, lost his kingdom.
Related Topic:
Samuel And Saul
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
