When the feast held in honor of the victory was over, Samuel went to his dwelling-place at Ramah, and Saul returned to Gibeah. From that day forward they never met again.

This story reminds us at once of the account of Saul's impatience at Gilgal, and the sentence which it drew upon his head.1 The two stories have much in common. In both of them Saul's offence is disobedience to Samuel's command; in both his punishment is the fall of his dynasty, and both imply that Yahweh had already chosen his successor. The two cannot be reconciled, for the first does not speak of a provisional sentence, the execution of which might be averted by strict obedience. It speaks just as clearly as the second of an irrevocable decree of Yahweh. And in the second there is not the smallest reference to any previous announcement of Yahweh's displeasure.

The story we are now considering is no nearer the truth than the other. It was written centuries after the time of Saul, as we may see from the very fact of its putting into the mouth of Samuel such lofty thoughts as to the worship acceptable to Yahweh; for these ideas were first conceived and expressed by the great prophets of the eighth century before Christ, by such men, for instance, as Michah or Isaiah. The unhistorical character of the story is further evident from the impossible pretext given for the declaration of war against Amalek, from the exaggeration of the number of the warriors Saul is said to have had under his banner, and from the statement that Amalek was utterly destroyed, whereas we know that so soon as in David's time this people was again in a position to threaten Israel's safety.2 But, apart from these details, the main idea of the story is untrue. For, like the other account, this also makes a single definite trespass — and a very trivial one cause the ruin of Saul. It is impossible to believe that it was so really. To begin with, of course, we could not speak of Saul's being rejected by God upon such grounds; for Samuel's order to lay all Amalek under the ban is so repugnant to our feelings as Christians, that we should certainly never dream of ascribing it to God. But even if we

overlook the fact that the writer believes Saul to have been rejected by Yahweh, and take the narrative simply to mean that he was rejected by Samuel, it is still incredible. Surely Samuel cannot have required such absolute submission on the part of the king that he declared himself against him, and took 1 See p. 482. 2 1 Samuel xxvii. 8; 2 Samuel viii. 12.

steps to dethrone him on the strength of one trifling act of disobedience. At any rate, if it were so, it would be a specimen of the most unscrupulous ambition and the most culpable levity in all that concerned the interests of the people.

We cannot regard this story as anything but an attempt to answer a question that suggested itself to the thoughtful Israelites of a later age. It was this: "How was it that Saul's family did not remain upon the throne of Israel, but that David succeeded to it?" A faithful worshipper of Yahweh would never think of looking for natural causes, such as the recent establishment of the monarchy, the character of Saul, his Benjamite extraction, Samuel's personal qualities, the defeat and death of Saul, or the incapacity of his surviving son. All this was nothing. The only answer that could satisfy him was that Yahweh had rejected Saul, whence it followed that Saul had committed some sin. This idea was worked out by the writers of both the legends of the rejection of Saul. Their purpose probably was to exhort their contemporaries to stricter obedience. It would be good for them, they thought, to be told that Saul's sin consisted in disobeying the commands of the prophets.

But in all probability there lies a certain truth at the bottom of both these stories: the truth that Saul quarrelled with Samuel, and that the opposition of the prophets contributed in no small degree to the fall of his house. It is easy to see in what particulars Saul would find himself unable permanently to act with Samuel, and in this respect our story has preserved a very correct impression of the real state of things. Let us try to recall the circumstances under which Saul became king, and the policy he first adopted.

The tribes of Israel were divided amongst themselves and were oppressed by hosts of enemies when a great religious revival, partly stimulated by Samuel, took place among the worshippers of Yahweh. The prophets formed societies; the Nazarites constantly increased in numbers, and many a heart was fired by the thought that the people of Yahweh must never mingle their blood with that of the Canaanites, and that the sons of Israel must regard everything heathenish as impure. But the ferment caused by these zealots, with Samuel at their head, would have resulted in Israel's downfall; for now that the injured Canaanites made common cause with the foreign foe, Israel would have been too weak to resist. It was, therefore, a great gain for the Israelites to find a man like Saul, who would watch over their general interests, lead them to

battle, retain a number of their fighting men under arms and enforce general obedience. Saul's skill and courage saved

Israel from destruction.

But he too availed himself of the religious enthusiasm of the people, and, supported by the prophets, he summoned the tribes to battle in Yahweh's name. It was but natural, then, that in all respects he should adopt the principles of the zealots; for he was a thorough-going supporter of Samuel's policy, which, of course, he now put into action. The first legend of his rejection by Samuel is quite wrong in making him quarrel with the seer at the beginning of his reign; for he ruled entirely in his spirit for some time. He raised altars to Yahweh, and when he had made an oath to him he enforced it with such terrible severity as not to shrink from sacrificing his own life or that of his son to maintain its sanctity. He persecuted the ventriloquists and wizards to the very death. He would have no treaty of peace with the Canaanites; and in Gibeon and the neighborhood, as well as elsewhere, numbers of them fell beneath his hand, in honor of Yahweh.

But this could not last. In the first flush of excitement caused by the election of a king, while the impression made by his successful campaigns was still fresh, such a policy might be carried out. But Saul soon perceived that the path he was treading must inevitably lead the people to destruction in the end. He could not go through with these measures. The Israelites were too weak and his own throne was too insecure for this to be possible; and doubtless many of his subjects murmured against a policy which they had such good reason to regard as hazardous.

When the first excitement was over and the most pressing dangers averted, Saul, no longer surrounded by the incessant whirl and din of battle, began to consider his line of action more calmly, and to act with greater moderation. We may suppose that his heart, too, protested against the wholesale bloodshed involved in the strict maintenance of Yahweh's command to root out all heathens and sinners with fire and sword. A hint to this effect is still preserved in the story of his war with Amalek and his neglecting fully to enforce all the horrors of the ban.

But by this milder policy he came into collision with the zealots; for they knew no pity. They are fitly represented by the fierce, inexorable Samuel, who would not have the sucking child of an Amalekite spared, and hewed Agag into pieces with his own hand, at Yahweh's altar. These zealots

began to oppose the king from the very moment that his policy became milder, for they thought that he was kindling the wrath of Yahweh by his weakness, and so bringing ruin upon Israel. Away with him then!

But the great mass of the people by no means shared the views of the zealots and remained faithful to Saul. Nevertheless these circumstances were a source of strength to his enemies, and his own rashness gave them only too many opportunities of turning their advantages to account. But we shall return to this subject presently.

This story of Saul's rejection by Yahweh, then, has little value as history; at the most it does but indicate the line we must follow in order to gain a true idea of what occurred. But there are certain great religious truths expressed in it which make the whole scene rich and beautiful in many ways. It urges us to fulfil the commandments of God to the very uttermost, making no reservations. It teaches us that nothing can make up for disobedience to the will of God.

God does not command us to commit horrors in his name, to shed human blood, or to show our zeal for the truth by deeds of violence; but he commands us to be loving, helpful, strict in the performance of our duties, just, diligent, and self-denying. Though it is often man that makes these duties clear to us, yet we know by the echo which they wake in our hearts that they are the commands of God, and that, as such, they demand our unconditional obedience.

Alas! how often we find ourselves, like Saul, but half fulfilling the command, and then deceiving ourselves and others by saying, "I have done, as the Lord commanded me! Such words could only be true on the lips of one who had fallen short in no respect of fulfilling God's commands. Jesus gives striking utterance to the same truth in his parable of the unprofitable servant,' "1 in which he teaches us that the man who has done everything that he ought to do has after all only done just enough. Every instance of neglect of perfect obedience makes us guilty before God.

66

And these deficiencies cannot be made good by burnt offerings or by any other means. In all ages men have imagined that they could, and have tried to make up for their neglected duties by presents to the deity, or some other outward sign of honor, such as prayers, fasts, alms, going to church, sound doctrine, correct forms of worship, or a will in which some

1 Luke xvii. 7-10.

small part of their ill-earned wealth is bestowed upon charitable objects. It is all in vain. "Obedience is better than any sacrifice." This is the most precious truth preached to us by the mouth of Samuel. Let us strive never to forget it!

66

CHAPTER XXVII.

YAHWEH'S CHOSEN ONE AT THE COURT OF SAUL.

SA

1 SAMUEL XVI., XVIII. 5-13.

AMUEL never saw Saul again all his life; but he grieved for him deeply. Whereas Yahweh repented that he had made Saul king over Israel." Such are the final words of the prophetic narrative we have last considered. That which follows is closely connected with it, and breathes the same spirit. Some time after the events at Gilgal, Yahweh said to Samuel, "How long will you go on mourning over Saul, whom I have deemed unworthy to rule over Israel? Fill your horn with oil, for I will send you to Jesse, the Bethlehemite, one of whose sons I have chosen to be king." But the prophet hesitated to obey the command, and exclaimed, "How can I go to Bethlehem for such a purpose? If Saul should hear of it he would take my life." But Yahweh answered, "Take a young ox with you, and tell them at Bethlehem that you have come to make a sacrifice to me. Ask Jesse to the feast, and I will tell you what next to do. You have only to anoint as king him whom I show to you." Thus Samuel's objection was overruled, and he declared himself ready to obey. When the news of his approach reached Bethlehem, consternation seized the inhabitants; for Samuel's visits seldom boded good. He was the stern instrument of Yahweh's judgments; and corpses hanging on the gibbet, or buried under great heaps of stones raised to perpetuate their shame, fields smitten by the ban and condemned to lie untilled, or dwellings cursed and levelled with the groundsuch were, too often, the monuments that kept the memory of Samuel's visits fresh. Had any one at Bethlehem been guilty of a crime or folly that called for fire and sword to expiate it? Who could tell? Samuel was so stern in judgment! The elders of the city went trembling to meet him,

--