Bible Commentaries
1 Samuel 15

Verses 1-35

IX

SAUL’S UNPARDONABLE SIN, AND ITS PENALTY

1 Samuel 15:1-35

It is needful to devote an extended discussion to this one chapter: 1 Samuel 15. The matters to be considered are stem, awful, deep, and far-reaching, involving doctrines concerning the sovereignty and supremacy of God over nations and rulers, and his judicial administration in irreversible punitive judgments.

It is a caricature of God, divesting him of holiness and justice, which represents him as merciful only.

There is widely prevalent today a weak, sickly sentimentalism, which revolts at any view of the divine character other than his compassion, which divests sin of demerit and makes all punishment mere temporary chastisement and remediable. Henry Ward Beecher voiced the sentiment in his proposition: "All punishment is remediable." The sentiment developed into a probation after death, and a purification by the fires of purgatory equal in atoning and cleansing power to the blood of Christ. Such sentimentalists find 1 Samuel 15 a nut as hard to crack as our Lord’s own teaching concerning his final judgment and the eternity of punishment. Four passages serve well as an introduction to this chapter:

1. Jehovah’s own declaration of his character and attributes to Moses, Exodus 34:6-8: "And Jehovah passed by before him, and proclaimed, Jehovah, Jehovah, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abundant in lovingkindness and truth; keeping lovingkindness for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin; and that will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation."

2. God’s taking away from Nebuchadnezzar the heart of a man and giving him the heart of a beast "till thou know that the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will" (Daniel 4:25).

3. Paul’s teaching on Mars’ hill in Athens concerning God as the only object of worship and his government of nations (Acts 17:22-28).

4. Our Lord’s declaration to the woman of Samaria, that God is a Spirit, and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth (John 4:23-24).

The first great doctrine involved is that Jehovah in his sovereignty over a nation may blot it out, root and branch, when the measure of its iniquity is full. We have already found examples of this law in the case of the Canaanite nations who had left the territory assigned to them as children of Ham when the earth was divided, and occupied the territory divinely allotted to the children of Abraham, but even Israel was held back from the land until the measure of the iniquities of these nations had become full. We have now to find in the story of Amalek the fitness of the application of the doctrine to them.

It is possible but not probable that they were the children of that Amalek named as a descendant of Esau in Genesis 26:12; Genesis 26:16; 1 Chronicles 1:36. If so, they are out of the territory of Edom (Esau) and ranging as a predatory tribe over all the Negeb, or South Country, expressly allotted to Israel. Without provocation they desperately assaulted Israel on the approach to Sinai in the battle of Rephidim, so graphically described in Exodus 17:8-15, on which occasion their doom was announced by Jehovah: "I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under Heaven. . . . Jehovah will have war with Amalek from generation to generation." When Israel had sinned at Kadesh they combined with the Canaanites to inflict a defeat on it. Again, in the time of the judges they combined with the Midianites to destroy Israel, Judges 3:12-13. Moses, in one of his great farewell addresses, reminds Israel of the evils done by Amalek, and recalls the doom pronounced at Rephidim, and urges Israel to execute Jehovah’s will when they are established in the land, Deuteronomy 25:17-19.

We find in far later times the last Amalekite known in history, Haman at the Persian court, seeking the destruction of captive Israel (Esther 3-8), and see him hanged on the gibbet erected for Mordecai. And now, as Saul is victorious over all his enemies, Samuel, as God’s prophet, demands the execution of the long-pending and richly deserved doom. From the beginning and all along they have sought with persistent and incorrigible malice to thwart God’s purpose to establish a nation as the custodian of his oracles, and through which all the nations of the earth were to be blessed. Amalek must perish or the world cannot be saved. It was not a mere political necessity, as voiced by Cato: "Carthage must be destroyed or Rome will perish." It was a spiritual necessity involving the only hope to all nations.

The second doctrine involved is that the instrument by which such a ban is executed must consider the doomed nation and all its property as "devoted to Jehovah for destruction," and hence no part of the spoils must be used to aggrandize the executor, or for offerings on Jehovah’s altar – they are "devoted." And it is this very feature which divests the executor of all moral responsibility. He is merely God’s sheriff executing a judicial sentence, and hence must act without private malice, vanity, or greed. The terrible case of Achan when Jericho was "devoted" was well known to Saul, and should have admonished him.

In later Jewish history, Nebuchadnezzar, the executioner of the divine will against Jerusalem, is called "God’s Ax," and when the ax presumed to attribute to its own prowess the defeat of Israel, God humbles him as he did Saul; and when his successor, Belshazzar, blasphemously misuses the sacred vessels of the destroyed Temple, then it is that a hand appeared and wrote on the wall, "Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin," and that night Belshazzar died and Babylon fell.

The third doctrine involved is the discrimination in Jehovah’s moral judgments, not paralleled in natural calamities as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and pestilences.

Jehovah’s discriminating justice appears in this destruction of Amalek by the precaution taken to avert from the Kenites dwelling with them, the doom of Amalek. These Kenites were descendants of Hobab, that brother-in-law of Moses who accepted the invitation of Moses: "We are going to a land which the Lord our God has promised us. Come and go thou with us, and we will do thee good." So they went with Israel and shared the prosperity promised, and were always friendly and helpful, and always sheltered from the wrath of Israel’s enemies. Jael, who slew Sisera, was of this people.

This sifting of the good from the bad before the final doom falls on the wicked, is richly illustrated in the saving of Noah from the doom of the world, and reminds us of the great intercession of Abraham, when Sodom was doomed and Lot rescued: "Wilt thou destroy the righteous with the wicked? . . . Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" (Genesis 18:23-33). It appears in the light on Goshen while Egypt was in darkness, and in all the other discriminating plagues.

The same principle of discrimination in divine justice is seen in the parable of the tares (Matthew 13:24-30), in the separation at the great judgment announced by our Lord (Matthew 25:31-46). In the same discourse, our Lord had given to the disciples a sign, by observing which they fled to Pella and escaped the doom of Jerusalem executed by Titus. Peter, referring to two notable instances of this discrimination, expresses the thought thus: "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment unto the day of judgment" (2 Peter 2:9). In the same way, John, in Revelation, before the doom falls on the spiritual Babylon, says, "Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not her plagues" (Revelation 18:4). So the Kenites, when warned, quickly withdrew from Amalek and escaped its doom.

To lead up to the next doctrine, let us glance at the terms of Saul’s commission and the fidelity of its execution. The commission runs: "And Samuel said unto Saul) Jehovah sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of Jehovah. Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, I have marked that which Amalek did to Israel, how he set himself against him in the way, when he came up out of Egypt. 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. And Saul summoned the people, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen and ten thousand men of Judah" (1 Samuel 15:1-4). Thus commissioned by Samuel, Saul summons all the national militia, 210,000 strong, and smote Amalek from Havilah in the South Country unto the boundary of Egypt. It was a hard, desert campaign against a mobile, nomad people, and resulted in a marvelous and sweeping victory. But the record closes thus: "But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fallings, and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them; but everything that was vile and refuse, that they destroyed utterly" (1 Samuel 15:9). Saul was so elated at its thoroughness and extent that he erected a memorial of his prowess. He was filled with self-complacency. But God seeth not as man seeth, nor judgeth as man judgeth. In his eyes Saul had committed a presumptuous and unpardonable sin. To make this manifest, We turn from Saul in his triumph to a different scene, one of the most touching in all history.

THE INTERVIEW BETWEEN JEHOVAH AND SAMUEL.

1 Samuel 15:10-11: "Then came the word of Jehovah unto Samuel, saying, 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 Samuel was wroth; and he cried unto Jehovah all night." In this interview is developed the doctrine of the unpardonable sin, so often referred to in both Testaments.

The sin of Saul may be thus analyzed:

1. Just what he did is thus stated (1 Samuel 15:9).

2. It was a wilful sin against light and knowledge, for it violated the clearly expressed command of Jehovah, 1 Samuel 15:3: "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."

3. It violated the central provision of the kingdom charter that the earthly king was only the viceroy of the heavenly King.

4. It was a presumptuous sin, being against the Holy Spirit, whose power resting on Saul was symbolized by his anointing, and which alone qualified him to be king and win victory.

5. It was rebellion, and classed with the capital sins of witchcraft and idolatry, which Saul himself punished with death.

6. It was blasphemous, in that it mingled human self-will, vanity, and greed with a bloody execution whose sole justification was obedience to Jehovah’s express sentence as Supreme Judge, without the human motives of vanity, gain or malice.

7. It was an eternal sin, evidenced by Jehovah’s refusal to hear Samuel’s all-night intercession, by Jehovah’s rebuke to Samuel for mourning for Saul, by the instant and permanent withdrawal of the Holy Spirit, by the sending instead an evil spirit to guide him to ruin, by the permanent separation of the prophet from him, by refusing ever again to communicate with him in any other way, and finally by withdrawing from him all that grace by which alone a man can become penitent. One may have remorse without the Spirit, but he cannot become penitent without the Spirit.

For the complete separation between Saul and Samuel, see 1 Samuel 16:1, for the permanent departure of the Holy Spirit, succeeded by an evil spirit, see 1 Samuel 16:14; for God’s refusal to communicate with Saul any more in any way, gee 1 Samuel 28:6; to show that God’s refusal to hear intercession for a sin is a mark of its unpardonable character, see Jeremiah’s reference, Jeremiah 15:15, and compare this with 1 John 5:16: "If any man see his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask, and God will give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death; not concerning this do I say that he should make request."

Other New Testament correspondences are shown in the words of our Lord: "He that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost committeth an eternal sin. It hath never forgiveness) neither in this world nor in the world to come." The declaration in Hebrews 10:26-29: "If we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment. . . . A man that hath set at naught Moses’ law dieth without compassion on the word of two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, think ye, shall he be judged worthy, (1) who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, (2) and counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing, and (3) hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?" You see there is sin against the Father, sin against the Son, and sin against the Holy Spirit; the first two pardonable, the last never, doing despite to the Holy Spirit, which is what Saul did, and hence the Spirit was permanently withdrawn from him.

We come now to the sad, eventful and last interview between Saul and Samuel. It is evident from this interview that Saul added brazen lying and hypocrisy to his rebellion. He first claims that he has fully obeyed Jehovah, even when the bleating sheep and lowing herds are within sight and sound to convict him. He then seeks to shift the blame and responsibility upon the people, and finally he attributes a pious motive to the sparing of the sheep and oxen – to sacrifice on God’s altar. Samuel’s tenderness of heart toward Saul is evinced in his heartbreaking grief when Jehovah announces that Saul is lost. He not only spends a whole night in earnest but fruitless prayer that God would forgive Saul, but even after he knows that the punishment denounced on Saul is irrevocable he still mourns for him; but although his prayers in behalf of Saul are denied, and though it is a bitter cross to announce to Saul God’s stern will, yet he strictly obeys, and in his interview with Saul shows more concern for God’s honor than for his own grief.

We come to our next great doctrine in Samuel’s reply to Saul as expressed in verse 1 Samuel 15:22: "Hath Jehovah as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of Jehovah? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." The doctrine here is not against the use of the God-appointed sacrifices, but it shows that mere external conformity with the law of types as embodied in sacrifices, and the observance of rituals without faith and the spirit of true worship, is as empty as a blasted nut. The doctrine does not undervalue the form of godliness, but it does show the superiority of the power of godliness. The truth lies, not in denying the need of the form, but in relying upon the form only. This doctrine magnifies the thing signified above the sign, and magnifies the spirit above the letter. The tendency of the priesthood – the types and the rituals – throughout the monarchy was a reliance upon mere empty ceremonies. It was the mission of the prophets to counteract this, as you will find by carefully reading the following passages: Psalms 40:6-8; Psalms 51:16-17; Isaiah 1:11-15; Jeremiah 7:22-23; Hosea 6:6; Micah 6:6-8. These passages should be carefully studied in their context, otherwise we will never understand the difference in the spirit of the prophetic teaching as contrasted with the letter of the priestly teaching.

From these prophetic declarations the radical critics have drawn the irrational and untenable conclusion that the testimony of the prophets shows that the Levitical part of the Mosaic law was a late addition, and particularly they stress the declaration in Jeremiah 7:22-23. It is easy to answer their criticism upon all the other passages cited, but not so easy to reply to the Jeremiah passage. You might well say with reference to that passage that it was literally fulfilled in the days of the wilderness wandering after Israel’s sin at Kadesh. For thirty-eight years, they being under excommunication, God did not require them to comply with the forms of his laws. They did not observe the requirements of the tabernacle worship; they did not circumcise their children, the thought in Jeremiah being that aliens without faith in the thing signified are not commanded to observe the form.

We come to another great doctrine drawn from Saul’s confession, "I have sinned." The doctrine is that a mere confession, in words is not a proof of grace in the heart. In Saul’s case, evidently his confession was extorted by remorse or the fear of the consequences made manifest by Samuel. Indeed, he trembled at the appalling doom pronounced upon him, but he never repented of his sin. Spurgeon illustrates this great doctrine by preaching a famous sermon entitled, "A Sermon from Seven Texts." There were indeed seven texts, but every one of them had the same words, "I have sinned," only these words came from seven different men, and he shows that Saul says, "I have sinned," it does not mean what it means when the prodigal says, "I have sinned." The author, when he was a pastor, was so much interested by this sermon of Spurgeon’s that he called the attention of his congregation to it and found three other texts. "I have sinned" spoken by three other men, making ten in all, and called his sermon "A Sermon from Ten Texts."

Finally we need to explain the apparent discrepancy between what God says of himself, "It repenteth me," in 1 Samuel 15:11, and what Samuel says of God in 1 Samuel 15:29: "God is not a man that he should repent." The explanation is that "repent" in the first case does not mean the same as "repent" in the second case.

Whenever repentance is attributed to God, it does not mean that he has changed his mind, but that a sinner’s change of conduct has necessitated a change in God’s attitude toward the sinner.

The thought is fully illustrated thus in Genesis 6:5 in these words: "And Jehovah saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually, and it repented Jehovah that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart, and Jehovah said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the ground."

Here the repentance attributed to God expresses his genuine grief at the corruption of the most of the human race, and that this caused a change in his attitude toward so many of the race as were thus hopelessly and incorrigibly corrupted. It does not mean absolutely the whole race, for the context shows that Noah was an exception, and that God did not repent concerning Noah, but continued the race in him.

We say, in common parlance, "The sun rises and sets." We do not mean by this that the sun revolves around the earth, but in common speech, based on appearance, we simply mean that the earth revolving on its own axis, changes its face to the sun, with the result of alternating day and night. I have stressed the great-doctrines of this section because preachers and Christian workers will be continually confronted with weak, sickly, and sentimental views of the character of God of the demerit of sin and of the eternity of punishment. This public opinion will press upon you to confine your preaching to the infinite compassion and mercy of God. You should, indeed, in the fullest terms, magnify God’s pity, his tenderness, his mercy, his long-suffering, his forgiving of sins, but you should also stress that when this mercy is despised, when it is disregarded until the heart becomes past feeling, then come hell and eternal punishment.

QUESTIONS

1. What is the nature of the matters in this discussion, and of the doctrines involved?

2. What is the sickly sentimentalism even now prevalent concerning these doctrines? Cite a special case.

3. What four scriptures might well serve as an introduction to this discussion?

4. What is the first great doctrine cited in this discussion?

5. Recite briefly the story of the Canaanites and of the Amalekites, and show the fitness of applying the doctrine to them.

6. What is the second great doctrine cited?

7. What are the special instances of its application?

8. What is the third great doctrine cited as arising from the provision to save the Kenites from the doom of Amalek?

9. Cite the several illustrations of this doctrine given.

10. Recite Saul’s commission against Amalek, and his execution of it.

11. Contrast Saul’s view of his performance with God’s view of it.

12. What is the fourth great doctrine, developed in Jehovah’s interview with Samuel?

13. Give the analysis of Saul’s sin, showing its unpardonable character, giving Old Testament proofs and New Testament correspondences therewith.

14. Show that Samuel’s great tenderness of heart toward Saul did not weaken his fidelity to God.

15. Show how Saul, in his last interview with Samuel, added brazen lying and hypocrisy to his rebellion.

16. What is the fifth doctrine found in Samuel’s reply to Saul, 1 Samuel 15:22?

17. What other prophets enforced the doctrine, and how does the New Testament endorse the prophets?

18. What irrational conclusions have the critics drawn from these prophetical utterances, and what the answer to them, especially on Jeremiah 7:22-23?

19. What is the sixth doctrine, drawn from Saul’s confession, "I have sinned"?

20. How did Spurgeon illustrate this doctrine in a famous sermon?

21. Explain the apparent discrepancy between what God says of himself, "It repenteth me," and what Samuel says of God, "God is not a man that he should repent."