TO BAN OR NOT TO BAN?
1 Samuel 15

In brief: The Lord had told Saul to destroy the Amalekites completely, wiping them out and all of their belongings. Instead he kept their king and some of the choicest animals under the pretext of using them for sacrifices on an Israelite altar.
Because Saul had not obeyed God fully, the Lord left him for the most part and began to make arrangements for his successor. Thus the quarterly focuses on the importance of obeying God.

This passage gives both Christians and their critics some serious problems. Why would God from His love demand the eradication of a people, men, women, and children? The first world almost unanimously opposes genocide. Isn't this the same thing? There are several answers:

The sovereignty of God. There are some things we are not supposed to know.

There used to be a common explanation I haven't heard much anymore. It was called progressive revelation. It explained much of the morality of the OT as a primitive, yet developing understanding as God deve;p[ed His people over time. Many interpreters would state that this was the people's understanding, not God's final will as revealed in Christ. This satisfied, probably still satisfies many people. Depending on your belief in inspiration, you have to insert in parentheses where it says God told them to do something “They believed that God told them...”

Another group of readers have no trouble seeing it as the judgment of God. The Amalekites had repeatedly attacked God's people, so complete destruction was their just punishment.

Here is the direction I prefer to go. Israel was to put Amalek “under the ban (harem).” You will recognze “harem” as the closed off section of a rich household where the king or other wealthy men kept their wives and mistresses. They were under the ban from other men and were dedicated to the king. When a town was placed under a ban, it was to be offered to a god as a complete sacrifice. That was what happened here.

But why? Israel was not nearly as individualistic as we are. You were a part of your family and tribe. Just as a teacher sent you off in a school bus and reminded you that you represented Podunk High, so a person was as much a part of his family and kindred as your hand is of your body. Further, since there was no police force, one family member stood up for another. If you lost a fight and the victor cut off your hand, your brother or close kin became responsible to find the enemey and do the same or worse to him. If Israel totally destroyed a nation, they didn't have to watch their back. No one was left to come after them. In this case, when they were going to a long-lasting war with the Philistines, they needed to be able to focus only on them as much as possible.

Some other notes to ponder on various verses:

Verse 10-11: The Lord tells Samuel He was disappointed in Saul because he had failed to carry out his instructions. This was the second blunder. Remember last week when Saul became impatient and usurped Samuel's place as priest. The rejection upsets Sam, and he lies awake all night fuming.

Next morning, the prophet goes looking for the king and finds he has gone first to Carmel and then to Gilgal. I have no idea what that was about. Carmel was on the coast, where one day Elijah would call down fire. Gilgal was across the Jordan valley north of Jericho. A long day's journey. The coastal visit was to dedicate a statue to himself. That may be more radical than we would think at first hand. Israel took the commandment to make no graven images seriously. They included both gods (idols) and people in that ban. Obviously Saul was feeding his ego and probably dishonoring the Lord by so doing.

Verse 14 – What is that bleating of sheep I hear? Your sins will find you out. And the world will notice if we claim to be Christians and they hear bleats from behind us!

Samuel and Saul go back and forth about God's rejecting the king. Apparently the rejection did not mean death or deposing on the spot, but rather Saul would not have a dynasty. A king from a different family would rule. Keep this in mind in coming chapters when Saul gets moody and fights David. At any rate, the Lord does not relent, but Samuel reluctantly continues to accompany the king.

Verse 32 – The prophet called for the enemy king, Agag, to be brought to him. He personally corrected Saul's error by pronouncing sentence, taking a sword, and executing the man.

Now – what lessons can you draw from the lesson?




TO BAN OR NOT TO BAN?
1 Samuel 15

In brief: The Lord had told Saul to destroy the Amalekites completely, wiping them out and all of their belongings. Instead he kept their king and some of the choicest animals under the pretext of using them for sacrifices on an Israelite altar.
Because Saul had not obeyed God fully, the Lord left him for the most part and began to make arrangements for his successor. Thus the quarterly focuses on the importance of obeying God.

This passage gives both Christians and their critics some serious problems. Why would God from His love demand the eradication of a people, men, women, and children? The first world almost unanimously opposes genocide. Isn't this the same thing? There are several answers:

The sovereignty of God. There are some things we are not supposed to know.

There used to be a common explanation I haven't heard much anymore. It was called progressive revelation. It explained much of the morality of the OT as a primitive, yet developing understanding as God deve;p[ed His people over time. Many interpreters would state that this was the people's understanding, not God's final will as revealed in Christ. This satisfied, probably still satisfies many people. Depending on your belief in inspiration, you have to insert in parentheses where it says God told them to do something “They believed that God told them...”

Another group of readers have no trouble seeing it as the judgment of God. The Amalekites had repeatedly attacked God's people, so complete destruction was their just punishment.

Here is the direction I prefer to go. Israel was to put Amalek “under the ban (harem).” You will recognze “harem” as the closed off section of a rich household where the king or other wealthy men kept their wives and mistresses. They were under the ban from other men and were dedicated to the king. When a town was placed under a ban, it was to be offered to a god as a complete sacrifice. That was what happened here.

But why? Israel was not nearly as individualistic as we are. You were a part of your family and tribe. Just as a teacher sent you off in a school bus and reminded you that you represented Podunk High, so a person was as much a part of his family and kindred as your hand is of your body. Further, since there was no police force, one family member stood up for another. If you lost a fight and the victor cut off your hand, your brother or close kin became responsible to find the enemey and do the same or worse to him. If Israel totally destroyed a nation, they didn't have to watch their back. No one was left to come after them. In this case, when they were going to a long-lasting war with the Philistines, they needed to be able to focus only on them as much as possible.

Some other notes to ponder on various verses:

Verse 10-11: The Lord tells Samuel He was disappointed in Saul because he had failed to carry out his instructions. This was the second blunder. Remember last week when Saul became impatient and usurped Samuel's place as priest. The rejection upsets Sam, and he lies awake all night fuming.

Next morning, the prophet goes looking for the king and finds he has gone first to Carmel and then to Gilgal. I have no idea what that was about. Carmel was on the coast, where one day Elijah would call down fire. Gilgal was across the Jordan valley north of Jericho. A long day's journey. The coastal visit was to dedicate a statue to himself. That may be more radical than we would think at first hand. Israel took the commandment to make no graven images seriously. They included both gods (idols) and people in that ban. Obviously Saul was feeding his ego and probably dishonoring the Lord by so doing.

Verse 14 – What is that bleating of sheep I hear? Your sins will find you out. And the world will notice if we claim to be Christians and they hear bleats from behind us!

Samuel and Saul go back and forth about God's rejecting the king. Apparently the rejection did not mean death or deposing on the spot, but rather Saul would not have a dynasty. A king from a different family would rule. Keep this in mind in coming chapters when Saul gets moody and fights David. At any rate, the Lord does not relent, but Samuel reluctantly continues to accompany the king.

Verse 32 – The prophet called for the enemy king, Agag, to be brought to him. He personally corrected Saul's error by pronouncing sentence, taking a sword, and executing the man.

Now – what lessons can you draw from the lesson?




TO BAN OR NOT TO BAN?
1 Samuel 15

In brief: The Lord had told Saul to destroy the Amalekites completely, wiping them out and all of their belongings. Instead he kept their king and some of the choicest animals under the pretext of using them for sacrifices on an Israelite altar.
Because Saul had not obeyed God fully, the Lord left him for the most part and began to make arrangements for his successor. Thus the quarterly focuses on the importance of obeying God.

This passage gives both Christians and their critics some serious problems. Why would God from His love demand the eradication of a people, men, women, and children? The first world almost unanimously opposes genocide. Isn't this the same thing? There are several answers:

The sovereignty of God. There are some things we are not supposed to know.

There used to be a common explanation I haven't heard much anymore. It was called progressive revelation. It explained much of the morality of the OT as a primitive, yet developing understanding as God deve;p[ed His people over time. Many interpreters would state that this was the people's understanding, not God's final will as revealed in Christ. This satisfied, probably still satisfies many people. Depending on your belief in inspiration, you have to insert in parentheses where it says God told them to do something “They believed that God told them...”

Another group of readers have no trouble seeing it as the judgment of God. The Amalekites had repeatedly attacked God's people, so complete destruction was their just punishment.

Here is the direction I prefer to go. Israel was to put Amalek “under the ban (harem).” You will recognze “harem” as the closed off section of a rich household where the king or other wealthy men kept their wives and mistresses. They were under the ban from other men and were dedicated to the king. When a town was placed under a ban, it was to be offered to a god as a complete sacrifice. That was what happened here.

But why? Israel was not nearly as individualistic as we are. You were a part of your family and tribe. Just as a teacher sent you off in a school bus and reminded you that you represented Podunk High, so a person was as much a part of his family and kindred as your hand is of your body. Further, since there was no police force, one family member stood up for another. If you lost a fight and the victor cut off your hand, your brother or close kin became responsible to find the enemey and do the same or worse to him. If Israel totally destroyed a nation, they didn't have to watch their back. No one was left to come after them. In this case, when they were going to a long-lasting war with the Philistines, they needed to be able to focus only on them as much as possible.

Some other notes to ponder on various verses:

Verse 10-11: The Lord tells Samuel He was disappointed in Saul because he had failed to carry out his instructions. This was the second blunder. Remember last week when Saul became impatient and usurped Samuel's place as priest. The rejection upsets Sam, and he lies awake all night fuming.

Next morning, the prophet goes looking for the king and finds he has gone first to Carmel and then to Gilgal. I have no idea what that was about. Carmel was on the coast, where one day Elijah would call down fire. Gilgal was across the Jordan valley north of Jericho. A long day's journey. The coastal visit was to dedicate a statue to himself. That may be more radical than we would think at first hand. Israel took the commandment to make no graven images seriously. They included both gods (idols) and people in that ban. Obviously Saul was feeding his ego and probably dishonoring the Lord by so doing.

Verse 14 – What is that bleating of sheep I hear? Your sins will find you out. And the world will notice if we claim to be Christians and they hear bleats from behind us!

Samuel and Saul go back and forth about God's rejecting the king. Apparently the rejection did not mean death or deposing on the spot, but rather Saul would not have a dynasty. A king from a different family would rule. Keep this in mind in coming chapters when Saul gets moody and fights David. At any rate, the Lord does not relent, but Samuel reluctantly continues to accompany the king.

Verse 32 – The prophet called for the enemy king, Agag, to be brought to him. He personally corrected Saul's error by pronouncing sentence, taking a sword, and executing the man.

Now – what lessons can you draw from the lesson?