5. God is the only true Judge of the actual demerits of a guilty nation. We cannot rightly estimate the intrinsic evil even of our own personal sins. "The Judge of all the earth" must decide what is appropriate punishment for national crime; for he only knows the degree of enmity in the minds of Sodomites and Amalekites. None but he can see the intricate bearings of their sin and of their continued existence as a people. He also knows best what blessed deterrent influence will arise to mankind from the conspicuous character of the judgment executed.
6. The means by which judgment is executed appear to be determined by conditions known to God. Judgment works inwardly through the conscience and the mental faculties in general. They bear the curse of the sin committed. It also works externally by the pressure against the sinner of the order of nature, which is in league with righteousness, and ultimately makes "the way of transgressors hard." Nations have not a very lively conscience. The force of Divine judgments usually comes from without. The instrumentality used is evidently connected with the actual presence of forces which, acting in a natural way under the preordained direction of the Omniscient, become "his arm." Doubtless there were physical conditions of earth and atmosphere which rendered destruction by a deluge both natural and yet conspicuously of God. The Sodomites were destroyed not by water, nor slow plague, nor famine, but by the natural combustible materials close at hand. The Amalekites were not left to die out by internal anarchy, or famine, or pestilence, but were given up to the action of that international hostility which was as real an element of destruction close at hand as was the volcanic force at Sodom. He who in his vast prevision, seeing the coexistence of the vices of antediluvians with certain fluvial conditions of a portion of the earth, and the coexistence of the sin of Sodom with certain volcanic conditions, used them for this purpose, may have also given full freedom to the play of national sentiment in the minds of Israel coexisting at that juncture with the fit time for the execution of a purpose to obliterate a guilty nation. Had pestilence or earthquake carried them off, it would have been God's act as truly as when the soldiers of Saul were the executioners of a decree. The employment of an executioner gives no right, but the reverse, to others to go and do the same.
7. The form of punishment on communities under the Old Testament dispensation is evidently suggestive of the danger of antagonism to Christ. The sin of Amalek was that of deliberate attempt to destroy the people of God (Exodus 17:8-16; Deuteronomy 25:17-19). That means to prevent the realisation of salvation in the "seed of Abraham." If Amalek knew, as is certainly possible, the lofty claims of Israel, the crime was most fearful. That in the mind of God and of Israel such was the nature of the sin is seen in the discrimination made in favour of the Kenites because they showed kindness to Israel (verse 6). It is at all events clear that God would have men learn that it was the sin of obstructing his purposes of mercy for mankind that was so obnoxious in his sight. The terrible national destruction which this sin brought on is a clear intimation of the "destruction from the presence of the Lord" which must come on the individuals who set themselves in antagonism to Christ and his purposes of mercy to the world. A more terrible sin than that cannot be conceived; a more terrible act of judgment cannot be imagined than that which will come when Christ shall say, "Depart from me, ye cursed" (Matthew 25:41). "It is a fearful thing," even under the gospel dispensation, "to fall into the hands of the living God" after a life of deliberate antagonism to the very Saviour he has sent to redeem us. Although, therefore, there may be much in the recorded "terrible acts" of God which weighs on our spirit and demands of us reverence and humility, still we are not without some gleams of light to sustain our faith both in the sacred records and the righteousness which never fails.
General lessons:—
1. We see how judgment does surely come, though for generations it seems to linger.
2. It becomes us to inquire whether we by any conduct of ours are impeding the march of God's people.
3. We see how God remembers, and causes his servants to remember, acts of kindness rendered to the weary on their way to the promised rest.
4. It is a painful duty to have to be executors of God's judgments; yet when men in national and domestic affairs are really called to it, let them subordinate personal sentiment to solemn duty.
5. In all our painful thoughts over the woes that come on the universe, involving the young and old, let us seek grace to "be still," and to wait for the passing away of the night and the coming of the light that shall turn weeping into joy; for it will come.
1 Samuel 15:8-11
The limits of patience.
The facts are—
1. Saul, in disobedience to the command of God, spares Agag and the best of the spoil.
2. God declares to Samuel that he can endure with Saul as king no longer.
3. Samuel, in his grief, cries unto God all night. It is never said that God changes his purpose absolutely. Where promises are given conditional on conduct they are revoked when conduct fails. We cannot ascribe human feelings to God; yet it is only by the analogy of human feelings that we can know anything of the mind of God. The setting aside from kingly office of Saul was an act of the Divine mind conformable with the original purpose of making him king, since the condition of permanence had not been fulfilled. Saul had been borne with so long; now he is to be borne with no longer. Patience yields to judgment.
I. THERE IS A LIMIT TO DIVINE PATIENCE. Patience bears relation to wrongdoing, or the sufferance of ill. In God it relates to the restraint he puts on himself in the presence of that which merits his displeasure. That there is such a limit to Divine patience is clear.
1. The language of Scripture indicates it. The heart of God is represented as being under pressure of a moral force which can scarcely be resisted. "How shall I give thee up, Ephraim?" (Hosea 11:8). The retrospect of the past brings into view the overpowering considerations which withheld good and allowed calamity to come. "He should have fed them with the finest of the wheat" (Psalms 81:16). "O that my people had hearkened unto me!" (ibid. 1 Samuel 15:13). The persistence of men in sin, despite all counsel and mercy, raises the question of the length of time during which the hand of justice can be stayed. "How long shall I bear with this evil congregation?" (Numbers 14:27). A reference to love, tenderness, and care is set in sad contrast with the doom which the ingratitude so long endured is about to bring (Matthew 23:37, Matthew 23:38).
2. Recorded facts illustrate it. The vices of the antediluvians were long endured, and it was after the Spirit had striven long with men, and they had refused the warnings of Noah, that patience yielded to the execution of judgment (1 Peter 3:20). The repeated warnings given to Pharaoh reveal a patience which terminated in the overthrow in the Red Sea. Patience was "grieved" with the perverse generation in the wilderness, but grief gave place to a "wrath" which barred their entrance into rest (Hebrews 3:9-12). God endured long with some of the seven Churches in Asia, but at last judgment came, and the candlesticks were removed from their place.
3. The close of the Christian dispensation in a day of judgment is the most awful illustration of the limit to God's patience. The plain teaching of that great event is that here men have time to repent and obtain through Christ all that will qualify for a perfect life—that for the term of our earthly life God bears with our sins and provocations, and proves by thousands of favours that he "is slow to anger;" but that the end of all this must come, and judgment on the whole life ensue. His long suffering is great. But "it is appointed to men once to die, and after this the judgment" (Hebrews 9:27).
II. THE GROUND OF THE LIMIT OF GOD'S PATIENCE. The yielding of patience to judgment in the case of Saul was on the occasion of his clear and deliberate breach of the command (1 Samuel 15:1-3, 1 Samuel 15:8, 1 Samuel 15:9), and this too after other opportunities of obedience had been abused. But the question arises how it is that a certain degree or persistence in wrong is the occasion of the cessation of patience. There is a vague impression in some minds that because God is perfectly tender and loving his patience need and ought never to fail. This kind of thinking springs from very defective views of the character of God and of his relation to a moral order. It may not be possible for us to give a perfect rationale of Divine procedure; but there is perhaps light enough to indicate the wisdom and goodness of even a limit to God's patience.
1. The privileges of responsible beings imply a probation for their use. The primary notion of a responsible being is one blessed with privilege, and able to use or abuse it at will But men are constituted so as to derive much wisdom from experience, and hence failure in the use of privilege, in a few instances, may possibly create an experience that will constrain to a more careful observance of duty when newly imposed. Life is full of helps to obedience as well as of hindrances. But as time is required for the development of responsibility, so it is obvious that the possession of privilege involves a limit to the period for use or abuse. Government without a reckoning would be no government. Everlasting patience is inconsistent with responsibility attendant on privilege.
2. In a moral order, where beings are closely interrelated, breach of duty affects others. Saul's conduct could not end in himself. He, as fount of authority and influence, would damage his people by every act of disobedience to the Divine command. The repeated sins of men are so many attacks on the common welfare of the universe. God "desireth not the death of a sinner," but that he should "turn and live;" but he is the Guardian of right, of good, of peace, and of all that enters into the true welfare of the entire universe, and hence there is a love most deep and a wisdom unsearchable in not allowing the wilful sinner any longer to be exempt from the restraints which judgment imposes.
3. Repeated acts of disobedience reveal to God a state of mind which will not benefit by further favours. Every act of sin brings man lower in the moral scale. But while mercy and gentleness afford the sinner every possible chance to recover what is lost, it is possible for the habit of sin to gain such power over the entire man that to the eye of the Eternal his last chance of improving additional opportunities is clean gone. Samuel's distress at the abandonment of Saul (1 Samuel 15:11) was natural, and if his cry all night Was intercession, it was only what might be expected of a good man who knows only in part. The intercession of Moses (Numbers 14:15-23) was for pardon, and was partially successful. Samuel's would appear to have been for pardon in the form of Saul's continuance in the kingly office with the usual Divine sanctions. It is, however, obvious that the judgment of God was based on his perfect knowledge that the heart of Saul was too far gone to be trusted any further. It is an awful fact that a man may, by transgression, work himself into such a condition that all is lost on him, and will be lost. God, knowing this, may cease to be long suffering, and reject him as "nigh unto cursing" (Hebrews 6:6-8).
4. The holiness of God requires vindication. Every pang which followed Saul s earlier sins and every rebuke from Samuel was some vindication of the holiness of God. The private and subjective recognition by the sinner of an insulted holiness is not all that the government of God requires. He is a jealous God; he will be honoured in the eyes of all people. Continued long suffering followed by judgment renders holiness more conspicuous than when judgment forestalls long suffering.
General lessons:—
1. We should never forget that every day affords us new opportunities of keeping God's commands.
2. It will repay the effort if we endeavour to form an estimate of the privileges conferred on us in the past, and the extent to which we have drawn on the patience of God.
3. If we are deliberately disobedient in any office of trust, we may some day look for a grave judgment.
4. We are not always competent to see the wisdom of God's severity, and may possibly pray for what is not to be granted.
1 Samuel 15:12-23
The sin of rebellion.
The facts are—
1. Saul, having raised a monument in honour of his victory, meets Samuel with a pious salutation, as though all were well.
2. On being reminded of the presence of spoil, Saul explains by saying that it was spared for the worship of God in sacrifice.
3. Samuel, referring to the instructions received from God, presses home upon him the fact of his guilt in disobeying the Lord.
4. Saul, in response, maintains that substantially he has obeyed the voice of the Lord, but that the people spared the spoil for a religious purpose.
5. Samuel, therefore, urges the great truth that rigid obedience to God is the primary and essential duty, without which all else is sinful, and that rebellion is a sin as heinous as those which men admit to be most vile.
6. Samuel declares to Saul his rejection of God. The important interview between the disobedient king and the prophet of God brings out several great truths.
I. MAN'S PREFERENCE OF HIS OWN WILL TO THE CLEARLY DECLARED WILL OF GOD IS POSITIVE REBELLION AGAINST THE SUPREME AUTHORITY. Saul's sin was known to himself as a preference of his own course in dealing with the Amalekites. He thought it best to modify the command in its detailed execution. No doubt there were reasons which seemed to render such a course useful. It is clear that he did not realise all that it involved, though that was his own fault. To him as a king, whose word was supposed to be law to his subjects, there is something very appropriate in the prophet assuring him that this preference of his own will, however plausible the reasons for it, was not a simple weakness or fault, but nothing less than rebellion—a term of fearful significance under a properly constituted government. The preference was virtually a setting up a counter authority, impeaching the wisdom of God. Saul is not the only one to whom God has plainly declared his will. More or less he has spoken to all men (Romans 1:20). To those blessed with the revealed will as contained in the Scriptures he has given commandments as precise and emphatic as that to Saul to destroy the Amalekites. Every believer in Christianity knows as well as he knows anything that God commands him to repent of sin (Acts 17:30); to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation from the curse of sin (John 20:31; Acts 16:30, Acts 16:31; 1 John 5:10-13); to exterminate all evil—all Amalekites—from the soul (Romans 8:13; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; 1 Peter 1:16); and to submit heart, will, and intellect to the authority of Christ (Matthew 11:29; John 5:23; Acts 10:36; Philippians 2:10, Philippians 2:11). Now is it not a fact that men often prefer not to do this? They do not dispute in formal terms the authority of God, any more than did Saul; yet for reasons known to themselves they prefer not to repent of sin, not to commit themselves to Christ, not to cast out sinful desires, not to bow in all things to the yoke of the Saviour. It is possible that reasons may be forthcoming to, at least, show that there is no violent antagonism. But when carefully looked at it is nothing but the positive setting up of man's will as a better, more to be desired will than God's; it is positive rebellion of a subject against a king—a setting at nought of the supreme authority of the universe.
II. MAN'S ESTIMATE OF THE SIN OF REBELLION IS IN STRIKING CONTRAST WITH GOD'S. Whether Saul was self-persuaded that he had not committed any sin (1 Samuel 15:13) is, as we shall yet see, doubtful. The probability is that he was conscious of uneasiness, but had no true conception of the enormity of his sin. His feeling was that he had no wish to disown the authority of God, that it was a mere matter of detail, that his general conduct was exemplary, and that he followed the inner light which seemed just then to indicate another way of ultimately and substantially carrying out the command. So do men tone down their sins and regard them as venial. The prophet's words reveal God's estimate of the sin of disobedience. It is the cardinal sin (1 Samuel 15:22, 1 Samuel 15:23). It cuts at the root of all authority. It is the assertion of a power and a wisdom over against the power and wisdom of the Eternal. It makes man a worshipper of himself rather than of God. It ignores the solemn truth that we "cannot serve two masters." It does dishonour to him whose commandments are holy, just, and good. It sows in the moral sphere seeds of evil, which, taking root, must widen the aberration of man from God. It claims for the desires and dim light of a sinful creature a higher value in the determination of actions than is to be attached to the purposes of the All-Perfect. To render its heinous character more clear, the prophet asserts that it renders useless and even wicked the most solemn acts of worship (1 Samuel 15:22; cf. Isaiah 1:11-15). No profession of religion; no self-denial in surrender of choice property; no conformity with venerable customs, or obedience in other particulars, will for a moment be accepted in lieu of full and implicit obedience to the clear commands which God lays on man both in relation to himself and mankind. God will have no reserve of our will. Again, to make it more impressive, the prophet assures Saul that this rebellion is in its evil nature equal to the sins which men are led by education and custom to regard as the most abominable and indefensible. "As the sin of witchcraft, as iniquity and idolatry." There are men still who shrink in horror at heathenism and vile arts. Are they prepared to believe that not to obey the clear command to repent, to believe on Christ, to become pure, and to submit in all things to the yoke of Christ, is as dreadful in the sight of God as being an idolater or a vile deceiver? It is this Divine estimate of sin which alone explains the." many stripes" with which they will be punished who, knowing the Lord's will with respect to these matters, nevertheless prefer their own. It will be more tolerable in the day of judgment for Sodom than for some of our day (Matthew 11:20-24).
III. MAN'S CONDITION AND CONDUCT AFTER DELIBERATE REBELLION IS A REVELATION OF ITS EVIL NATURE. All sin degrades and debases; it prevents clear vision of one's own condition and a true estimate of conduct. Sin is always self-apologetic. It enslaves its victims. The opinion of a morally fallen being on matters of high spiritual import must always be discounted. Men in internal opposition to God are not safe guides in dealing with the loftiest problems of human existence. This general effect of sin is more manifest when a man has, after enjoying great advantages, deliberately preferred his own will to the clear will of God. He then enters into darkness most dense, and the fountain of moral thought and feeling becomes more corrupt. We see this in Saul's subsequent conduct and perverse reasoning with Samuel (1 Samuel 15:20, 1 Samuel 15:21). Even when conscience began to he aroused by the impressive language of the prophet, he found a subtle evasion in that, as a king, he had done his part in placing Agag at the disposal of Samuel, but that the people were to blame in the matter of the spoil. Thus it is ever. Sin does not end in itself. It by its evil power induces self-complacency, creates ingenious excuses, prompts to observance of outward religious acts, throws blame on circumstances over which there is no control, and even emboldens the soul to argue with the messengers of God.
IV. ONE SERIOUS CONSEQUENCE OF REBELLION IS TO DISQUALIFY FOR SERVICE IN THE KINGDOM OF GOD. Apart from the personal effects of Saul's sin, the relative effect was to unfit him for performing the part to which he had been called in the service of God. He was rejected from being king (1 Samuel 15:23). God's sanction and blessing were henceforth to be withheld. He was to be king in name only. The life once promising good to Israel was to be unblest and fruitful in sorrows. This result follows from every preference of our own will. We cease to hold the position and exercise the influence of God-made kings (Revelation 1:4, Revelation 1:5) in so far as we fail in perfect execution of the will of the King of kings. It is possible for a man to proceed from step to step in deliberate rebellion till, both on account of his inward moral decay and his pernicious influence, God'sets him aside altogether. A pastor, a parent, a professed Christian may thus be practically disowned by Providence. However he may continue to labour in some lower departments, the higher spiritual service of God will cease to be his.
General lessons.—
1. It is very dangerous to begin to compare our wishes and plans, with. the clear will of God; every thought should at once be brought into subjection.
2. Sudden and unusual outbursts of pious zeal may be a sign of an uneasy conscience; steady growth is the proof of reality.
3. The folly of excuses for sin is seen by all except the sinner himself.
4. Sin, when we are exalted to privileges, is doubly base (1 Samuel 15:17).
5. We must never subordinate what we may call genera/ obedience for actual literal obedience to God's will (1 Samuel 15:20).
6. Participation of others in our sin is no palliation of ours (1 Samuel 15:21).
7. Property obtained by unholy means is not acceptable to God when laid on his altar for professedly religious purposes (1 Samuel 15:22).
8. Obedience in matters outside acts of worship is a condition of acceptable worship, but not the ground of our salvation.
9. Deceitfulness, depravity, and idolatry are the true and ruinous characteristics of every act of doing our own pleasure when professedly engaged in doing only the will of God (1 Samuel 15:23).
1 Samuel 15:24-31
Conviction of sin not repentance.
The facts are—
1. Saul, alleging fear of the people, admits his sin, and seeks Samuel's presence while he worships the Lord.
2. On Samuel refusing and turning away, Saul seizes and rends his garment, which circumstance is used as a sign that so the Lord had rent the kingdom from Saul and given it to another.
3. On being assured that God's purpose was irrevocable. Saul entreats, for the sake of his credit among the people that Samuel would join him in an act of worship, to which Samuel complies. The decisive language of the prophet, given in a tone which admitted of no mistake, aroused the slumbering conscience of Saul, and brought about his remarkable pleading for pity and help. We have here the case of a man guilty of a great sin, concerned for its forgiveness, but sternly assured that he shall not have it. The apparent severity of the prophet is not based on any arbitrary decree of God, nor on an unchangeableness in the "Strength of Israel" irrespective of human character and conduct, but upon God's knowledge of Saul's actual condition. The repentance which Saul thinks to be adequate, and which many men would recognise, is known by the Searcher of hearts not to be true repentance, but only a bare conviction of sin, attended with a consequent dread of the outward temporal consequences attached to it, as just indicated by Samuel. Bare conviction of sin is not true repentance. Consider -
I. ITS REAL NATURE. Conviction of sin is a matter only of an aroused conscience, brought about by the evidence of facts being set before the understanding and the presence of penalties consequent on the evidence. There was no resisting Samuel's argument. The common understanding saw that a human will in opposition to a Divine was necessarily sin, and the uneasiness of conscience thus naturally aroused was aggravated by the emphatic announcement of a great penalty—loss of the kingdom. The mental operation was that of a pure logical progression from admitted premises to an irresistible conclusion. Conscience does not disturb a man in working out a syllogism in formal logic or a demonstration in mathematics; but it does when the question reasoned on is the man's own conduct. This is the general nature of the conviction of sin which many experience. Here, observe, is an absence of all that fine spiritual discernment which sees in sin essential unholiness, and that corresponding feeling which loathes it because of what it is in the sight of God. There is no change in the spirit towards sin itself, no detestation of the self-preference which rose against the supreme will.
II. ITS MANIFESTATIONS. The manifestation of Saul's conviction of sin is a remarkable illustration of the enormous difference between bare conviction and true repentance. The force of evidence and pressure of penalty extorted the admission, "I have sinned:" yet, owing to the lack of the spirit of repentance, the mere generality of that admission was revealed by the immediate palliation, "I feared the people." Pardon, consisting in the removal of penalty, was the only pardon cared for, and even this was sought by a superstitious trust in the prayers of another. A zealous and prompt observance of some outward act of worship was thought to be a sure means of recovering lost favour. The slightest movement of Samuel indicative of the non-reversal of the penalty only excited a spasmodic dread, without the slightest trace of any changed sentiment towards sin itself. And when no hope of avoiding the penalty remains, the only thought is to break his fall before his elders, and so save some civil advantage. This analysis, expressed in terms suitable to our times, will be found to hold good of multitudes whose conviction of sin is unattended with the spirit of a true repentance. How different the conviction that accompanies true repentance! Then, "I have sinned" has a deep, unutterable meaning. Forgiveness is then not the mere release of life from suffering and loss, but a restoration of the soul to the joy of personal reconciliation with a holy Father. No thought of excuse is ever entertained, but "against thee, and thee only, have I sinned and done this evil," is the sincere confession of a broken and contrite heart. The soul is so filled with self-loathing, and so agonised in being far from God, that it thinks not of punishment and position among men, and can only go direct to God and plead, "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me." Contrast Simon Magus (Acts 8:24) and Felix (Acts 24:25; Psalms 51:1-19.; Luke 15:1-32.).
III. ITS CONSEQUENCES. Saul, though convinced of sin, was practically an unchanged man. He was, after his pleading with Samuel, and after Samuel's kindly act of consoling his poor blind heart by joining in worship, as fond of his own self-will as before. No spiritual change being wrought, no remission of penalty was ever possible. On his knowledge of what was Saul's radical evil—a heart out of all sympathy with God's holiness—and of its continuance, did God resolve to provide for Israel another king. The Strength of Israel is not dependent on existing arrangements or human beings for the maintenance of his authority and accomplishment of his purposes. Saul as a king was ruined. His defective conviction was of no avail. It should be urged on all that a mere admission of sin and effort to be free from its punishment are of no avail. Loss of all that is deemed precious must ensue. Only repentance of the heart will serve. This is sure to lead away from all false means of deliverance to him who is exalted to give remission of sins.
General lessons:—
1. A spirit of blended firmness and kindness should influence us in the discharge of unwelcome duties.
2. We should be careful not to encourage men in their self-delusions.
3. Respect for an office and consideration for social relations should enter into our treatment of offenders.
1 Samuel 15:32-35
Painful duties.
The facts are—
1. Samuel summons Agag into his presence and hews him in pieces.
2. Samuel departs from Saul, and though mourning for him, no longer holds any official connection with him. The effect of Saul's disobedience on the people would have been disastrous were the original command to be in any way evaded; and, therefore, though it was no part of the prophet's ordinary functions to act as executioner, Samuel so far deviated from his usual course, and put his feelings under restraint, as to slay the captive king. There could be no mistake of the imperativeness of the Divine command when the people saw Samuel perform on the body of the king an act symbolical of the utter destruction of the enemies of God. The act itself, as also the occasion of it, must have given pain to the prophet's mind. The subsequent suspension of relations with Saul was the natural result and formal expression of God's rejection of him. Any other line of conduct would be open to serious misinterpretation. Samuel naturally was grieved in thus setting his ban on one for whom he had taken such pains, and in whose successful career he himself was deeply interested. But duty is above personal feeling.
I. HUMAN IMPERFECTION GIVES OCCASION FOR THE DISCHARGE OF PAINFUL DUTIES. Samuel is not the only one who has had to discharge solemn duties with a sorrowful heart.
1. There are instances recorded in Scripture.
2. There are instances recurring, in modern life. On some is imposed the sorrowful duty of rebuking friends for disgraceful deeds, or of administering chastisements which cause more pain to the chastiser than to the chastised, or of enforcing with bleeding heart the rigorous rules of Church discipline upon persons once honoured and beloved. Samuel is but one of a host who have to assert Divine authority, moral order, and the interests of the community at the cost of much personal suffering.
II. SUCH DISCHARGE OF PAINFUL DUTIES IS AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE SUPREMACY OF RIGHTEOUSNESS. The emotional element is strong in life. Personal considerations have, wisely and usefully, great weight in regulating actions. But it was profound regard for right that enabled Samuel to rule every feeling of his nature and subordinate it to the ends of justice, and therefore of benevolence. The same is seen in every kindred instance. It is indicative of a healthful moral condition where regard for right is dominant. Love, tenderness, pity are useful, powerful elements in a moral character; but they cease to be strictly moral when they operate as mere feelings apart from the guidance and control of righteousness. This looking high above personal relations to the requirements of a universal equity is the sublimest form of conduct.
HOMILIES BY B. DALE
1 Samuel 15:1-9. (GIBEAH.)
A probationary commission.
1. The fidelity of Saul to the principle of his appointment, viz. obedience to the will of Jehovah, was once and again put to the test. He had been tried by inaction, delay, and distress, which became the occasion of his being tempted to distrust, and the use of his power for his own safety, in opposition to the word of God (1 Samuel 13:11). He had been tried by enterprise, encouragement, and the expectation of brilliant success, which became the occasion of his being tempted to presumption in entering rashly upon his own ways, and adopting "foolish and hurtful devices" for conquest and glory, independently of the counsel of God (1 Samuel 14:19, 1 Samuel 14:24). He must now be tried by victory, power, and prosperity. Having chastised his enemies on every side (1 Samuel 14:47), his assured success becomes the final test of his character and fitness to rule over Israel.
2. The temptations of Saul may he compared with those of others, and especially with the three temptations of Christ (Matthew 4:1-10; Luke 4:1-12), which are "an epitome of all the temptations, moral and spiritual, which the devil has contrived for man from the day of his first sin unto this very hour." The antecedents in both cases, the circumstances under which the temptations occurred, the principles to which they appealed, the inducements which they presented, the means afforded for their resistance, and their result, are all suggestive. Where the first king of Israel failed the last King of Israel prevailed, and whilst Saul was rejected, Jesus was perfected, and "crowned with glory and honour" (Luke 22:28, Luke 22:29; Hebrews 2:10, Hebrews 2:18).
3. The commission of Saul to execute judgment upon the Amalekites was brought to him by Samuel, whose authority as the prophet of the Lord he never called in question, however much he may have acted contrary to his directions. After Saul exhibited a determination to have his own way, Samuel seems to have exerted little influence over him. At the battle of Michmash the high priest Ahiah was his only spiritual counsellor. It became more and more evident that he wished to establish a "kingdom of this world," like the surrounding heathen kingdoms, in opposition to the design of God concerning Israel, which the prophet represented and sought to carry into effect; and it was inevitable that, with such contrary aims, a conflict should arise between them. "The great prophet's voice brings him a new commission from his God, and preludes it by a note of very special warning: 'The Lord sent me,' etc. This tone of adjuration surely tells all. It speaks the prophet's judgment of his character, of prayers and intercessions, of days of watching and nights of grief for one he loved so well, as he saw growing on that darkening countenance the deepening lines of willfulness. The prophet sees that it will be a crisis in that life history with which by God's own hand his own had been so strangely entwined? The commission was—
I. DIVINELY APPOINTED (1 Samuel 15:1).
1. When a communication enjoining the performance of any action comes unquestionably from God. it should be unhesitatingly obeyed. His authority is supreme, his power is infinite, and his commands are right and good. It does not follow that everything he directs men to do in one age is obligatory on all others in every age. But some things he has undoubtedly enjoined upon us all.