1. Samuel 8:3 Kommentar

Things went so very well with Israel, in the chapter before, under Samuel's administration, that, methinks, it is a pity to find him so quickly, as we do in this chapter, old, and going off, and things working towards a revolution. But so it is; Israel's good days seldom continue long. We have here, I. Samuel decaying (Sa1 8:1). II. His sons degenerating (Sa1 8:2, Sa1 8:3). III. Israel discontented with the present government and anxious to see a change. For 1. They petition Samuel to set a king over them (Sa1 8:4, Sa1 8:5). 2. Samuel brings the matter to God (Sa1 8:6). 3. God directs him what answer to give them, by way of reproof (Sa1 8:7, Sa1 8:8), and by way of remonstrance, setting forth the consequences of a change of the government, and how uneasy they would soon be under it (Sa1 8:9-18). 4. They insist upon their petition (Sa1 8:19, Sa1 8:20). 5. Samuel promises them, from God, that they shall shortly be gratified (Sa1 8:21, Sa1 8:22). Thus hard is it for people to know when they are well off.

INTRODUCTION TO FIRST SAMUEL 8 This chapter relates, how that Samuel being old, and his sons behaving ill, the people desired to have a king set over them, Sa1 8:1, which case Samuel laid before the Lord, and he was directed by him to yield to the people's desire, but at the same time to set before them all the disadvantages and ill consequences that would arise from thence, which he did, Sa1 8:6, but they insisting upon it, nevertheless, he gave them reason to expect that their request would be granted, Sa1 8:19.

And his sons walked not in his ways,.... The meaning of which is not that they did not go the circuit he did, which is too low a sense of the words some Jewish writers give; but they did not walk in the fear of God, in the paths of religion and righteousness, truth and holiness; they neither served God, nor did justice to men, as Samuel had done: but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment; indulged to covetousness, sought to get riches at any rate, took bribes, which blind the eyes of judges; and so passed wrong judgment, and gave the cause to those that gave the largest gifts, right or wrong.

But possibly you flatter yourself that since the bishop who has made you a deacon is a holy man, his merits will atone for your transgressions. I have already told you that the father is not punished for the son or the son for the father. “The soul that sins shall itself die.” Samuel too had sons who forsook the fear of the Lord and “turned aside after lucre” and iniquity.

1. The deeds of holy men who came before are often the consolations of the elect who follow. For by a wonderful dispensation of divine counsel, they were raised to the citadel of the highest way of life in such a way that they might do mighty things for themselves and provide right governance for their subjects; yet sometimes so left to themselves that those things which they arranged with right intention would not turn out rightly according to God's providence — so that their weakness might become the strength of the elect who follow: because even though as men they can err in managing the affairs of the holy Church, those ecclesiastical arrangements themselves are not to be abandoned. For behold it is said: (1 Kings 8:1–3) And it came to pass when Samuel had grown old, he appointed his sons as judges over Israel. And the name of his firstborn son was Joel, and the name of the second was Abiah, judges in Beersheba. And his sons did not walk in his ways. 2. Behold, he who had been full of the spirit of prophecy did not know that those whom he was appointing as judges of Israel would afterward turn aside after greed, and accept bribes, and pervert judgment. What wonder, then, if those who do not receive the grace of prophecy can be deceived in arranging appointments—if those who have the spirit of prophecy do not have that same spirit for disposing all things? Who would doubt concerning so great a man that, if he had foreknown the future perversity of his sons, he certainly would not have advanced them to public honors? Those, therefore, who knowingly promote the reprobate can in no way flatter themselves with this example of the prophet, because it is done innocently only when no signs of subsequent iniquity were apparent in them at the time they were promoted. For this reason also, those who were appointed by Samuel as judges of Israel were fittingly called his sons when they were appointed, so that from this they might be believed not only to have been begotten from him according to the flesh, but also adorned with the splendors of his manner of life. For this reason also their names are carefully recorded, so that from the title of the name that form of virtue which was then in them might be recognized. The name of one, he says, was Joel, and of the other Abiah; they were judges in Beersheba. But also concerning those who are said to have turned aside to greed after receiving their office, it is clearly shown that before they attained the height of that same office, no signs of future depravity were seen in them. But behold, while we attend to the consolations of pastors, we perceive no small dangers for the Lord's flock. For the prophet's sons stood firm as subjects, but fell when placed at the height of authority—so that if, while we are placed under the care of superiors, an unceasing zeal for holy life or the confidence of a great manner of living smiles upon us, we should nevertheless hold the governing of others not in the appetite of desire but in the greatness of fear. But carnal people, while they attend only to visible things, do not deserve to know the spiritual manner of life of the saints. They look upon the eminence of the pastors of holy Church, but they do not know how to consider how unwillingly those pastors bear inwardly the distinction which they hold outwardly in the splendor of eminence, that they endure the loftiness of honor as the oppression of a great burden, that they flee with great desire what they pursue in outward ministry. For with the outstanding teacher as witness we have learned that the natural man does not perceive the things that are of the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2:14). Whence also, pursuing carnal things, he errs all the more madly to the degree that through the power of discernment he no longer penetrates any spiritual things. And some such people advance to so great an evil of madness that they do not fear to disturb even the very state of ecclesiastical eminence. Whence it also follows: (Verses 4, 5.) Therefore all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Ramah, and said to him: Behold, you have grown old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Appoint a king over us, to judge us as all the nations have.

Indeed, most people profess that they walk difficult paths while they seek after sacred orders; but when they arrive at what they sought, they neglect to maintain the steadfastness of their promise. Hence the sons of Samuel are fittingly reported not to have walked in his ways, but to have accepted bribes and perverted judgment. For the ways of Samuel are so called because they are set forth by the office of a preacher. His sons, therefore, do not walk in the ways of their father when those who ambitiously attain to sacred orders abandon the arduous paths of religious life shown to them by their elders, and by their perverse intention are plunged ever deeper into the desire for earthly things. Hence they are openly declared, after avarice, to have turned aside, accepted bribes, and perverted judgment. For those who neglect to labor for heavenly things must necessarily be bound more tightly in the desire for earthly ones. To turn aside after avarice is to be wholly carried away in intention by ambition for earthly things. For there are some who seek earthly gains through avarice, yet do not turn aside after avarice, because although they desire temporal things, they avoid incurring guilt in their pursuit of them. Those, therefore, turn aside after avarice who, for the sake of the earthly things they ardently seek, have no fear whatsoever of incurring guilt. They consider their own soul to be of less worth than anything they can covet. Hence comes violent plunder, hence secret thefts arise: because those over whom the avaricious have power they oppress by violence, and upon those whose goods they cannot assault by force, they contrive to inflict theft. Often, too, those whom they cannot overpower by theft of hands, they ensnare by the falsehood of words. Hence the sons of Samuel, in an orderly progression, are marked out in the disordered confusion of avarice, when it is said: "They turned aside after avarice, accepted bribes, and perverted judgment." For those who perverted judgment in order to receive gifts did not seek the darkness of night to commit the theft of a coveted thing, but the darkness of reason. And it should be noted that the burning of avarice is the cause of accepting gifts, and the acceptance of gifts is the cause of perverting judgment: so that by the prophet's narration the depravity of this vice may be shown, not only how it advances in the hearts of the reprobate, but how it can be utterly uprooted from the minds of the saints. For if this perversity of judgment is born from the acceptance of gifts, he who does not accept gifts does not pervert judgment, and he easily rejects offered gifts who has thoroughly uprooted the root of avarice from his heart. But we gather this fault of the sons of Samuel more fully by seeing than by speaking. For if we look at the desolate places of the Churches, where the father grows old, the sons incur the mark of avarice, of accepted gifts, and of perverted judgment: because where the person of the ruler is dissolved through shameful gains, the hearts of the subject flock are easily scattered, so that they live wickedly in themselves and offer examples of depravity to others.

Samuel, grown old, makes his sons judges in Beer-sheba, Sa1 8:1, Sa1 8:2. They pervert judgment; and the people complain, and desire a king, Sa1 8:3-5. Samuel is displeased, and inquires of the Lord, Sa1 8:6. The Lord is also displeased; but directs Samuel to appoint them a king, and to show them solemnly the consequences of their choice, Sa1 8:7-9. Samuel does so; and shows them what they may expect from an absolute monarch, and how afflicted they should be under his administration, Sa1 8:10-18. The people refuse to recede from their demand; and Samuel lays the matter before the Lord, and dismisses them, Sa1 8:19-22.

His sons walked not in his ways - Their iniquity is pointed out in three words: 1. They turned aside after lucre; the original (בצע batsa) signifies to cut, clip, break off; and therefore Mr. Parkhurst thinks that it means nearly the same with our clipping of coin. It however expresses here the idea of avarice, of getting money by hook or by crook. The Targum says, "They looked after ממון דשקר mamon dishkar, the mammon of unrighteousness;" of which they did not make unto themselves friends but enemies; see the note on Mat 6:24. 2. They took bribes; שחד shochad, gifts or presents, to blind their eyes. 3. They perverted judgment - they turned judgment aside; they put it out of its regular path; they sold it to the highest bidder: thus the wicked rich man had his cause, and the poor man was oppressed and deprived of his right. This was the custom in our own country before Magna Charta was obtained; he that would speed in the king's court must bribe all the officers, and fee both the king and queen! I have found in our ancient records the most barefaced and shameful examples of this kind; but it was totally abolished, invito rege, by that provision in the above charter which states, Nulli vendemus, nulli negabimvs ant differemus rectum aut judicium; "To no man will we sell, to no man will we deny or defer, justice and right." It was customary in those inauspicious times, for judgment to be delayed in banco regis, in the king's court, as long as there was any hope that more money would be paid in order to bring it to issue. And there were cases, where the king did not like the party, in which he denied justice and judgment entirely! Magna Charta brought them to book, and brought the subject to his right. Of those times it might well be said, as Homer did, Iliad xvi., ver. 387. Οἱ βιῃ αγορη σκολιας κρινωσι θεμιστας, Εκ δε δικην ελασωσι, θεων οπιν ουκ αλεγοντες. "When guilty mortals break the eternal laws, Or judges, bribed, betray the righteous cause." "When the laws are perverted by force; when justice is expelled from her seat; when judges are swayed from the right, regardless of the vengeance of Heaven." Or, in other words, these were times in which the streams of justice were poisoned in their source, and judges neither feared God nor regarded man.

OCCASIONED BY THE ILL-GOVERNMENT OF SAMUEL'S SONS, THE ISRAELITES ASK A KING. (1Sa. 8:1-18) when Samuel was old--He was now about fifty-four years of age, having discharged the office of sole judge for twelve years. Unable, from growing infirmities, to prosecute his circuit journeys through the country, he at length confined his magisterial duties to Ramah and its neighborhood (Sa1 7:15), delegating to his sons as his deputies the administration of justice in the southern districts of Palestine, their provincial court being held at Beer-sheba. The young men, however, did not inherit the high qualities of their father. Having corrupted the fountains of justice for their own private aggrandizement, a deputation of the leading men in the country lodged a complaint against them in headquarters, accompanied with a formal demand for a change in the government. The limited and occasional authority of the judges, the disunion and jealousy of the tribes under the administration of those rulers, had been creating a desire for a united and permanent form of government; while the advanced age of Samuel, together with the risk of his death happening in the then unsettled state of the people, was the occasion of calling forth an expression of this desire now.

II. The Monarchy of Saul from His Election Till His Ultimate Rejection - 1 Samuel 8-15 The earthly monarchy in Israel was established in the time of Samuel, and through his mediation. At the pressing desire of the people, Samuel installed the Benjaminite Saul as king, according to the command of God. The reign of Saul may be divided into two essentially different periods: viz., (1) the establishment and vigorous development of his regal supremacy (1 Samuel 8-15); (2) the decline and gradual overthrow of his monarchy (1 Samuel 16-31). The establishment of the monarchy is introduced by the negotiations of the elders of Israel with Samuel concerning the appointment of a king (1 Samuel 8). This is followed by (1) the account of the anointing of Saul as king (1 Samuel 9:1-10:16), of his election by lot, and of his victory over the Ammonites and the confirmation of his monarchy at Gilgal (1 Samuel 10:17-11:15), together with Samuel's final address to the nation (1 Samuel 12); (2) the history of Saul's reign, of which only his earliest victories over the Philistines are given at all elaborately (1 Samuel 13:1-14:46), his other wars and family history being disposed of very summarily (Sa1 14:47-52); (3) the account of his disobedience to the command of God in the war against the Amalekites, and the rejection on the part of God with which Samuel threatened him in consequence (1 Samuel 15). The brevity with which the history of his actual reign is treated, in contrast with the elaborate account of his election and confirmation as king, may be accounted for from the significance and importance of Saul's monarchy in relation to the kingdom of God in Israel. The people of Israel traced the cause of the oppression and distress, from which they had suffered more and more in the time of the judges, to the defects of their own political constitution. They wished to have a king, like all the heathen nations, to conduct their wars and conquer their enemies. Now, although the desire to be ruled by a king, which had existed in the nation even from the time of Gideon, was not in itself at variance with the appointment of Israel as a kingdom of God, yet the motive which led the people to desire it was both wrong and hostile to God, since the source of all the evils and misfortunes from which Israel suffered was to be found in the apostasy of the nation from its God, and its coquetting with the gods of the heathen. Consequently their self-willed obstinacy in demanding a king, notwithstanding the warnings of Samuel, was an actual rejection of the sovereignty of Jehovah, since He had always manifested himself to His people as their king by delivering them out of the power of their foes, as soon as they returned to Him with simple penitence of heart. Samuel pointed this out to the elders of Israel, when they laid their petition before him that he would choose them a king. But Jehovah fulfilled their desires. He directed Samuel to appoint them a king, who possessed all the qualifications that were necessary to secure for the nation what it looked for from a king, and who therefore might have established the monarchy in Israel as foreseen and foretold by Jehovah, if he had not presumed upon his own power, but had submitted humbly to the will of God as made known to him by the prophet. Saul, who was chosen from Benjamin, the smallest but yet the most warlike of all the tribes, a man in the full vigour of youth, and surpassing all the rest of the people in beauty of form as well as bodily strength, not only possessed "warlike bravery and talent, unbroken courage that could overcome opposition of every kind, a stedfast desire for the well-being of the nation in the face of its many and mighty foes, and zeal and pertinacity in the execution of his plans" (Ewald), but also a pious heart, and an earnest zeal for the maintenance of the provisions of the law, and the promotion of the religious life of the nation. He would not commence the conflict with the Philistines until sacrifice had been offered (Sa1 13:9.); in the midst of the hot pursuit of the foe he opposed the sin committed by the people in eating flesh with the blood (Sa1 14:32-33); he banished the wizards and necromancers out of the land (Sa1 28:3, Sa1 28:9); and in general he appears to have kept a strict watch over the observance of the Mosaic law in his kingdom. But the consciousness of his own power, coupled with the energy of his character, led his astray into an incautious disregard of the commands of God; his zeal in the prosecution of his plans hurried him on to reckless and violent measures; and success in his undertakings heightened his ambition into a haughty rebellion against the Lord, the God-king of Israel. These errors come out very conspicuously in the three great events of his reign which are the most circumstantially described. When Saul was preparing for war against the Philistines, and Samuel did not appear at once on the day appointed, he presumptuously disregarded the prohibition of the prophet, and offered the sacrifice himself without waiting for Samuel to arrive (Sa1 13:7.). In the engagement with the Philistines, he attempted to force on the annihilation of the foe by pronouncing the ban upon any one in his army who should eat bread before the evening, or till he had avenged himself upon his foes. Consequently, he not only diminished the strength of the people, so that the overthrow of the enemy was not great, but he also prepared humiliation for himself, inasmuch as he was not able to carry out his vow (Sa1 14:24.). But he sinned still more grievously in the war with the Amalekites, when he violated the express command of the Lord by only executing the ban upon that nation as far as he himself thought well, and thus by such utterly unpardonable conduct altogether renounced the obedience which he owed to the Lord his God (1 Samuel 15). All these acts of transgression manifest an attempt to secure the unconditional gratification of his own self-will, and a growing disregard of the government of Jehovah in Israel; and the consequence of the whole was simply this, that Saul not only failed to accomplish that deliverance of the nation out of the power of its foes which the Israelites had anticipated from their king, and was unable to inflict any lasting humiliation upon the Philistines, but that he undermined the stability of his monarchy, and brought about his own rejection on the part of God. From all this we may see very clearly, that the reason why the occurrences connected with the election of Saul as king as fully described on the one hand, and on the other only such incidents connected with his enterprises after he began to reign as served to bring out the faults and crimes of his monarchy, was, that Israel might learn from this, that royalty itself could never secure the salvation it expected, unless the occupant of the throne submitted altogether to the will of the Lord. Of the other acts of Saul, the wars with the different nations round about are only briefly mentioned, but with this remark, that he displayed his strength and gained the victory in whatever direction he turned (Sa1 14:47), simply because this statement was sufficient to bring out the brighter side of his reign, inasmuch as this clearly showed that it might have been a source of blessing to the people of God, if the king had only studied how to govern his people in the power and according to the will of Jehovah. If we examine the history of Saul's reign from this point of view, all the different points connected with it exhibit the greatest harmony. Modern critics, however, have discovered irreconcilable contradictions in the history, simply because, instead of studying it for the purpose of fathoming the plan and purpose which lie at the foundation, they have entered upon the inquiry with a twofold assumption: viz., (1) that the government of Jehovah over Israel was only a subjective idea of the Israelitish nation, without any objective reality; and (2) that the human monarchy was irreconcilably opposed to the government of God. Governed by these axioms, which are derived not from the Scriptures, but from the philosophical views of modern times, the critics have found it impossible to explain the different accounts in any other way than by the purely external hypothesis, that the history contained in this book has been compiled from two different sources, in one of which the establishment of the earthly monarchy was treated as a violation of the supremacy of God, whilst the other took a more favourable view. From the first source, 1 Samuel 8, Sa1 10:17-27, Sa1 10:11-12, and Sa1 10:15 are said to have been derived; and 1 Samuel 9-10:17, Sa1 10:13, and Sa1 10:14 from the second.