Be Careful What You Ask For
Background
1. 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 (1 Sa 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.
6. the thing displeased Samuel when they said, Give us a king to judge us—Personal and family feelings might affect his views of this public movement. But his dissatisfaction arose principally from the proposed change being revolutionary in its character. Though it would not entirely subvert their theocratic government, the appointment of a visible monarch would necessarily tend to throw out of view their unseen King and Head. God intimated, through Samuel, that their request would, in anger, be granted, while at the same time he apprised them of some of the evils that would result from their choice.
8:1–9 This chapter marks the beginning of Israel’s transition to a monarchy. Because Samuel’s sons were not righteous like their father, Israel’s tribal leaders request that Samuel appoint a king. Their request, however, ultimately amounts to a rejection of God’s rule over the nation. Nevertheless, God permits Samuel to grant their request.
God Permits a King (8:1–22). The people requested a king because Samuel’s judgeship had begun to fail. He was old; and his sons, like Eli’s, were wicked men who perverted justice. Also the people wanted the benefits of a central authority like the other nations had. Although Samuel resisted, God graciously permitted Israel to have a king. Samuel warned the people of the troubles of kingship, but they persisted; so God granted their request.
Chapter 8
The evil government of Samuel’s sons
1–3
The Israelites ask for a king
4–9
The manner of a king
10–22
Verses 1–3
It does not appear that Samuel’s sons were so profane and vicious as Eli’s sons; but they were corrupt judges, they turned aside after lucre. Samuel took no bribes, but his sons did, and then they perverted judgment. What added to the grievance of the people was, that they were threatened by an invasion from Nahash, king of the Ammonites.
Verses 4–9
Samuel was displeased; he could patiently bear what reflected on himself, and his own family; but it displeased him when they said, Give us a king to judge us, because that reflected upon God. It drove him to his knees. When any thing disturbs us, it is our interest, as well as our duty, to show our trouble before God. Samuel is to tell them that they shall have a king. Not that God was pleased with their request, but as sometimes he opposes us from loving-kindness, so at other times he gratifies us in wrath; he did so here. God knows how to bring glory to himself, and serves his own wise purposes, even by men’s foolish counsels.
I. The Request for a King (8–10)
Jehovah God had been King of Israel and had cared for the nation since its beginning; but now the elders of the nation wanted a king to lead them. Their request was motivated by several factors: (l) Samuel’s sons were not godly and the elders feared that they would lead the nation astray when Samuel died; (2) the nation had been through a series of temporary leaders during the period of the Judges, and the elders wanted a more permanent ruler; and (3) Israel wanted to be like the other nations and have a king to honor. The powerful nations around Israel were a constant threat, and the elders felt that a king would give greater security. Samuel’s reaction to their request shows that he fully understood their unbelief and rebellion: they were rejecting Jehovah. In choosing Saul, the nation rejected the Father; much later in choosing Barabbas, they rejected the Son; and when they chose their own leaders instead of the witness of the Apostles, they rejected the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51).
Here is an illustration of God’s permissive will: He granted them their request, but He warned them of the cost. See Deut. 17:14–20 for Moses’ prophecy of this event. The nation listened to Samuel and then asked for a king just the same! They wanted to be like the other nations, even though God had called them to be separate from the nations. Chapter 9 explains how Saul was brought to Samuel and privately anointed for the kingship. Note his humility in 9:21, and also in 10:22 when he hesitated to stand before the people. God gave Saul three special signs to assure him (10:1–7). Samuel also instructed Saul to tarry at Gilgal and wait for him to come (10:8). Verse 8 should be translated, “When you go before me to Gilgal”—that is, at some future date when King Saul would have the army ready for battle. This event took place some years later; see chap. 13.
Saul had everything in his favor: (1) a strong body, 10:23; (2) a humble mind, 9:21; (3) a new heart, 10:9; (4) spiritual power, 10:10; (5) loyal friends, 10:26; and most of all, (6) the guidance and prayers of Samuel. Yet in spite of these advantages, he failed miserably. Why? Because he would not allow God to be the Lord of his life.
V 1–3: SINFUL SONS Samuel’s sons, Joel and Abijah, also are judges. Sadly, they do not follow God, but dishonestly accept bribes to pervert justice. V 4–5: SEEKING SOVEREIGN The people use the failure of Solomon’s sons as an opportunity to request from him a king to lead them. The surrounding nations have kings. V 6–18: SOLEMN STATEMENTS Samuel is displeased and takes their request in prayer to God, who tells him to warn them of the downside of having a king. God says that their request is a rejection of Him, not just of Samuel. Samuel faithfully passes on God’s words to the people.
8:2 Was Samuel’s firstborn son Joel or Vashni? According to the Hebrew text of 1 Ch 6:28 (KJV), Samuel’s oldest son was named Vashni. Both names probably refer to the same person, since 1 Ch 6:33 states that Joel was Samuel’s son. That second reference in 1 Ch 6 agrees with the current verse in 1 Sm. Calling a person by more than one name was common in the ancient Near East, corresponding somewhat to our culture’s tendency to give people nicknames. (On individuals and places in the Bible having more than one name, see note on Ex 3:1; 19:11.) It is also possible that the Hebrew text in 1 Ch 6:28 has been damaged, and the original reading lost.
8:5–7 In the law of Moses, God had spoken of a time when the Israelites would have an earthly king (Dt 17:14–20), even though the Lord was already their King (Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Jdg 8:23) and would remain so in Israel’s worship (e.g., Ps 47:2; 89:18; 95:3; 99:4; Is 33:22). The structure of Israel’s covenant was that of a king making a treaty with subordinates. The Lord made provision for the earthly office of king in Israel, but this was a concession to human weakness and not His ideal for the nation. The instructions of Dt 17 set limits on Israel’s kingship, and did not give it a blanket endorsement.
In this section of 1 Sm, the people were asking for the right to be “the same as all the other nations”—that is, like the pagans, who did not have the Lord as their King. They wanted to rely upon a strong military leader, and not on God and His leadership alone, for help in dealing with enemies. What was offensive to God, and to Samuel His spokesman, was the people’s yearning to look for help in another direction.
The text now skips to the latter years of Samuel’s life. Samuel’s sons have perverted the judicial system as Eli’s sons did the priesthood, and the people use the current corruption in Beer-sheba as an excuse to demand a human king. Behind their demand lay the continued Philistine threat, and their rejection of God’s kingship demonstrates an unwarranted lack of faith in God’s ability to prosper or even sustain them as a nation.
God sees his people’s rejection for what it is, but he resigns himself to giving them what they think they want. Before appointing a king, however, God through Samuel gives Israel a chance to change its national mind-set by spelling out the consequences of a centralized government for the individual Israelite: military draft, forced labor, taxation, and tyranny (all of which consequences came about under Solomon). In effect, the Israelites’ own human king will become their oppressor.
Despite the warning, the people insist on a king, and now they express the real reason behind their demand: they want to “be like all the nations.” The Israelites’ idea of a human king as judge and military leader contrasts sharply with the ideal God emphasizes in Deut. 17:14–20, yet he decides to grant their wish. The people still recognize God’s authority enough to demand that his prophet Samuel appoint a king over them rather than acting completely independently of God’s direction.
Ver. 1. And it came to pass, when Samuel was old, &c.] The common notion of the Jews is, that he lived but 52 years; when a man is not usually called an old man, unless the infirmities of old age came upon him sooner than they commonly do, through his indefatigable labours from his childhood, and the cares and burdens of government he had long bore; though some think he was about 60 years of age; and Abar-binel is of opinion that he was more than 70. It is a rule with the Jewsu, that a man is called an old man at 60, and a grey-headed man at 70: that he made his sons judges over Israel; under himself, not being able through old age to go the circuits he used; he sent them, and appointed them to hear and try causes in his room, or settled them in some particular places in the land, and, as it seems by what follows, at Beer-sheba; though whether that was under his direction, or was their own choice, is not certain.
Ver. 2. Now the name of his first-horn was Joel, &c.] In 1 Chron. 6:28. he is called Vashni; see the note there. This was not Joel the prophet, as some have thought, neither his parentage, nor his office, nor his times, will agree with this: and the name of his second Abiah; which two sons seem to be all he had: they were judges in Beer-sheba; in the utmost border of the land, to the south, as Ramah, where Samuel dwelt and judged, was more to the north; where they were placed by their father, for the greater convenience of the people of Israel that lived southward, to bring their causes to them, as those lived more northward might bring them to him: according to Josephus, they were placed by their father, the one in Beth-el, one of the places Samuel used to go to in his circuit and judge, and the other at Beer-sheba. But some, as Junius and others, think it should be rendered, unto Beer-sheba; and so takes in its opposite, Dan, which lay at the utmost border of the land northward; hence the phrase, from Dan to Beer-sheba; and that the one was settled at Dan for the sake of the northern part of the land, and the other at Beer-sheba, for the sake of the southern: or rather these sons of Samuel placed themselves at Beer-sheba; which was an ill-judged thing, to be both in one place, and which must give the people of Israel a great deal of trouble, and put them to a large expense to come from all quarters thither, to have their causes tried; but that is not the worst.
Ver. 3. And his sons walked not in his ways, &c.] 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.
Ver. 4. Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, &c.] At some place of rendezvous appointed; these were the heads of the tribes, and fathers of the houses and families of Israel, the principal persons of age and authority: and came to Samuel unto Ramah, the place of his nativity and abode, and where he now dwelt, and judged Israel; they went in a very respectable body with an address to him.
Ver. 5. And said unto him, behold, thou art old, &c.] See ver. 1. his age was no reproach to him, nor was it becoming them to upbraid him with it; nor was it a reason why he should be removed from his office, for it did not disqualify him for it; but rather, having gained by age experience, was more fit for it, though he might not be able to ride his circuits as formerly: and thy sons walk not in thy ways; whom he had made judges; this is a better reason than the former for what is after requested; and had they only besought them to remove him from their places, and rested content with that, it would have been well enough; but what they were solicitous for, and always had an inclination to, and now thought a proper opportunity offered of obtaining it, was what follows: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations; to rule over them as sole monarch; to go before them in battle as their general, as well as to administer justice to them, by hearing and trying causes as their judge; which only they mention to cover their views, and make their motion more acceptable to Samuel; what they were desirous of was to have a kingappearing in pomp and splendour, wearing a crown of gold, clothed in royal apparel, with a sceptre in his hand, dwelling in a stately palace, keeping a splendid court, and attended with a grand retinue, as the rest of the nations about them had had for a long time. The first kings we read of were in the times of Abraham, but after it became common for nations to have kings over them, and particularly the neighbours of Israel, as Edom, Moab, Ammon, &c. and Cicero says, all the ancient nations had their kings, to whom they were obedient: Israel had God for their King in a peculiar manner other nations had not, and stood in no need of any other; and happy it would have been for them if they had been content therewith, and not sought after another: however, they were so modest, and paid such deference to Samuel, as to desire him to make or appoint one for them.
Ver. 6. But the thing displeased Samuel, &c.] Not that they called him an old man, and suggested that he was incapacitated for his office, nor for observing the unbecoming walk of his sons, but for what fallows: when they said, give as a king to judge us; what displeased him was, that they were lor changing their form of government, not only to remove it from him, and his sons, but from the Lord himself, who was king over them; the ill consequences of which, many of them at least, he easily foresaw, and which gave him great uneasiness, both on account of the glory of God, and their own good; insomuch, as Josephus says, he could neither eat nor sleep, but watched all night, and spent it in prayer, as follows: and Samuel prayed unto the Lord; to know his mind and will, and what answer he should return unto them.
Ver. 7. And the Lord said unto Samuel, &c.] He appeared to him in a vision or dream, and by an articulate voice delivered to him what follows: hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee; not as approving of what they said, but permitting and allowing what they asked, as a punishment of them for their disloyalty and ingratitude, and as resenting their ill behaviour to him; for it was in anger he assented to their request, Hos. 13:11. for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me that I should not reign over them; most interpreters supply the word only, as if the sense was, that they had not only rejected Samuel from judging them, but the Lord also from reigning over them; and which is spoken to comfort Samuel, and to alleviate the pressure on his mind for the ill treatment he had met with; for since they had served the Lord after this manner, it was no wonder he should be ill used, and might bear it with great patience: but I see no reason why the words may not be taken absolutely, that they had not rejected Samuel from all share in the government, at least from judging the people; for so he continued all the days of his life, even after they had a king over them; but they entirely rejected the sole and peculiar government of God over them.
Ver. 8. According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them out of Egypt, &c.] This was no new thing; all that they had done since they were wonderfully favoured of God, as to be brought out of Egyptian bondage, was all of a piece with this; one continued series of ingratitude, of rebellion against God, and against his servants, that he employed under him, as Moses, Aaron, &c. even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken, me, and served other gods; this is what this people were always addicted to, to cast off the worship and service of God, and go into idolatry: so do they also unto thee; acted the like ungrateful part to him for all the service he had done them, from his childhood to that time; wherefore, as the disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord, if such things as before observed were done to Jehovah himself, Samuel could not expect to meet with better treatment, or other than he had, see Matt. 10:24, 25.
Ver. 9. Now therefore hearken unto their voice, &c.] And appoint them a king as they desire: howbeit, yet protest solemnly unto them; not against the thing itself, which was permitted, but against the evil of their request, as to the unseasonable time, ill manner, and unjustifiable reason, in and for which it was made; the Lord would have Samuel lay before them their evil in requesting it, and the evils that would follow upon it to them, and faithfully represent them to them, that they might be left without excuse, and have none to blame but themselves when they should come upon them: and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them; or the right or judgment; not a legal right or form of government, but an assumed, arbitrary, and despotic power, such as the kings of the east exercised over their subjects, a king like whom the Israelites desired to have; namely, what unbounded liberties he would take with them, what slaves he would make of them, and what of their property he would take to himself at pleasure, as is after related. The word signifies, not a divine law, according to which the king should govern, but a custom, or a custom he would introduce, as the word is rendered, ch. 2:13 and is different from that in ch. 10:25.
Give us a king! (8:1–9)
Samuel has been faithfully judging Israel for many years. He has led the nation to victory over the Philistines and ushered in a time of peace. The elders of Israel are now concerned (vv. 1–5) because Samuel is getting old and will not be able to lead the nation much longer. His sons, whom he appointed to share the responsibility for judging the people, are not fit to replace him. They are, like the sons of Samuel’s mentor, Eli, corrupt and abuse their power by taking bribes (Deut. 16:19). What the elders of Israel ask, however, is not merely for a new judge, but for an entirely new system of government. During the era of the judges, Israel functioned as a tribal confederation and the Lord ruled his people, raising up leaders as needed to face a crisis (Judg. 2:16, 18; 3:10, 15; 6:12; 11:29). Now the people demand a powerful hereditary king who will lead the nation against her enemies (v. 20).
Samuel is displeased by their request. This is not the first time the nation has sought a king. Many years earlier the people sought to make Gideon their king, but he refused (Judg. 8:22–23). What is wrong is not their desire for a king, for God said that one day Israel would be ruled by a king (Gen. 49:10; Deut. 17:14–20). What is wrong is their motive for seeking a king. The Israelites want to be “like the other nations” (vv. 20, 5). But Israel was chosen by God to be different from the surrounding nations: “Thus you are to be holy to Me, for I the LORD am holy; and I have set you apart from the peoples to be Mine” (Lev. 20:26). God is to be their King and their glory. When the time came for them to have a king, this king would be different from the kings of the nations because he would serve under the Lord’s authority. Yet by the way the people of Israel are requesting a king, they are guilty of rejecting the Lord as their King (vv. 7–8). Whenever Israel has turned to the Lord, he has faithfully delivered them from their enemies (7:10). Now they are looking to an earthly monarch, rather than to the Lord for their security.
Do not trust in princes,
In mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.
His spirit departs, he returns to the earth;
In that very day his thoughts perish.
How blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob,
Whose hope is in the LORD his God.
(Ps. 146:3–5)
Whichever king they choose will one day die. Why would they want a dynasty or expect that their king’s sons will turn out any better than the sons of Eli or Samuel? They should have waited for the Lord’s timing to receive a king in his own way.
Though Samuel is grieved by the people’s request, the Lord instructs him to give the people the king they desire (vv. 7, 9). Samuel is also charged to warn the people of what will happen when they get their king. God will give them exactly the king they deserve, which should make them long for God’s King.
14. Seeking a King Like Other Nations
1 Samuel 8:1–9. The sin that Samuel, as a lad, rebuked in Eli, reappeared in his own family and undermined his influence. The names of Samuel’s sons are suggestive of his own piety—“Jehovah is God” and “Jehovah is my Father”;—but, alas, they failed to walk in his steps! It was a mistake to delegate authority to men whose character was corrupt, and this precipitated the desire of Israel for a king. They failed to value the glory and strength of their position as a theocracy,—a nation directly ruled by God,—and craved to be as other nations. This finally led to their undoing. Be not conformed to the world, or you will share in its condemnation as well as in its penalty, Hos. 13:9–11.
Samuel felt the rebuff keenly, but ultimately he took the one wise step of laying the whole matter before the Lord. It is a good example! When the heart is overwhelmed; when we are hemmed in by difficulty; when men rise up and breathe out cruelty against us, let us roll back our trouble on our Lord and Saviour, who has identified himself with our life. Tell him all, though your heart is almost too broken for utterance. “He will be very gracious unto thee at the voice of thy cry,” Isa. 30:19.
Samuel’s Influence Fades (1 Sam. 8:1–22)
The passage.—Israel’s political situation had stabilized for a time under Samuel’s influence, but her underlying problem had not been solved. No system had been devised to provide a steady supply of capable, honest officials for public service. As Samuel grew old, the problem again became acute. He had installed his sons Joel and Abijah as judges in Beersheba, but they soon proved to be corrupt. Filled with despair, the elders of Israel asked for a king.
A change in Israel’s form of government was no matter of little consequence. Every area of ancient life was affected. Under the judges, God had theoretically been Israel’s absolute ruler. He had worked through the personalities of the elders who functioned roughly as a representative democracy. Their decisions were assumed to represent a disclosure of the divine will. Although a judge certainly influenced the decisions of the elders, he was by no means an independent agent. He operated within the framework of authority which they established. This system embodied the values which grew out of Israel’s religious experience. The rights of the ordinary citizen were protected from arbitrary decisions resulting from the centralization of authority into one office.
Samuel rightfully recognized the inherent dangers in the proposed change in the form of Israel’s government. Her entire political, civil, and religious philosophy could be sacrificed in the process. He, therefore, carefully outlined the impact that a typical Oriental monarch would have on the lives of ordinary men (vv. 10–18). Political stability would be achieved at the expense of personal liberty. The people would not be diverted, however and the Lord allowed them to have a king.
Special points.—The anti-monarchic attitude of this passage is abundantly clear (see also chap. 12). Other biblical passages, however, are much more favorably inclined toward the kingship (the major portions of chaps. 9–11 and Judg. 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). In time God would make it clear that he would work with the new system just as he had with the old (12:14–15).
The elders of Israel approached Samuel at his home in Ramah (see 7:17), acknowledging him as the de facto leader of Israel. The failure of Samuel’s sons had given them the opportunity they needed to broach the issue of a central governing authority. Their desire for a king “like other nations” had very practical roots. Apparently, the elders saw that the people of Israel were scattered across the land and vulnerable to attack from the surrounding nations. Israel’s loose tribal federation often produced more strife and envy than unity, while Israel’s neighbors had standing armies and coherent foreign policies, often involving territorial expansion at Israel’s expense. The leaders of outlying tribes—those closest to the borders of hostile neighbors—would have been especially enamored with the idea of setting up a central government with the authority to conscript and equip a standing army to provide national defense.
All human reason, then, pointed toward the clear logic of calling out a king. Danger lurked on every side. Samuel was already old and getting older. His sons had proven themselves to be unworthy of leading Israel as Samuel had. The establishment of a central government headed by a king had proven successful in surrounding nations—why not in Israel? Why not accept the fact that Israel’s premonarchic tribal federation had grown incapable of dealing with new political realities?
While this line of reasoning makes perfect sense to the modern reader, as it did to the delegation of elders, the text itself reveals no felt need for change. As far as the narrator is concerned, there is no need to challenge the traditional theocratic ideal that Israel should be ruled by Yahweh alone, with the prophets as his spokespersons and a faithful priesthood as the guardian of the law. Yahweh had proven himself quite capable of calling out charismatic judges to lead the people in times of national emergency. Had not Samuel proved to be an effective leader as prophet, priest, and judge? Had not God responded to Samuel’s prayer and delivered Israel from the Philistines in the battle of Mizpah (ch. 7)? The author sees the issue through Samuel’s eyes, and Samuel seems to have regarded the elders’ request as a personal rejection that disregarded the peaceful era of his judgeship.
Kyle McCarter argues effectively that the Deuteronomists present the call for a king as one more episode in humanity’s attempt to become more than it should be. The elders want a king so they can be “like the other nations.” They are not content with the life Yahweh has granted them, but yearn for change. In McCarter’s words, “They are motivated by a perverse and self-destructive urge to rise above themselves. As Adam and Eve in the Yahwistic primeval history desired to become ‘like gods’ (Gen 3:5), so their descendants desire to become ‘like the nations.’ … They seek a new status that in their impetuosity they regard as more glorious; but in the seeking they repudiate their only true glory.” Samuel’s response also echoes the story of Eden: he warns the people that life with a king—that is, life outside of God’s intended parameters—will be much harder than they think. The institution of kingship will become more of a curse than a blessing.
1. 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 neighbourhood (ch. 7:15–17), 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. He appointed them to this high and responsible office, not like Eli, from the fondness of doating partiality, but, from the careful training they had received under his direction, as well as from the paternal authority and the good example he had set them, he hoped and believed that they would prove faithful and impartial in the execution of their trust. The arrangement was a good one; and, considering the distance of Beer-sheba from Ramah, where Samuel still exercised the office of judge, it might have been expected to conduce to the convenience and comfort of the people. 3. his sons walked not in his ways. The question may arise in the mind of a reader, Why Samuel was not punished, as Eli, for the misconduct of his sons. But the answer is obvious. Not only was the offence of Samuel’s sons of a far less heinous criminality than the unblushing and daring profanity of Eli’s, but Samuel might not know, owing to the distance of Beer-sheba, anything of the delinquency of his sous; whereas Eli not only knew, but tolerated the iniquitous courses of his. The young men, however, did not inherit the high qualities of their father; and, they having, at their distant post of duty, where were temptation and opportunity for concealment, unawed by the presence of their father, 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.
4. Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together. This was evidently the general council or assembly of the nation, which is, ch. 5:7, 10, 19, 21, called “the people,” as represented by the elders as their heads (cf. ch. 10:17, 19; 11:14; 12:1). 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.
6. the thing displeased Samuel. Personal and family feelings might affect his views of this public movement. But his dissatisfaction arose principally from the proposed change being revolutionary in its character. Though it would not entirely subvert their theocratic government, the appointment of a visible monarch would necessarily tend to throw out of view their unseen King and Head. 7. they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. They could not by their requisition have rejected the Lord if he had not stood in the relation of a supreme political head to Israel; for they made no proposal of renouncing subjection to Him in any other respect. They did not desire a change in their worship, nor ask a new code of civil laws. Their demand was limited to an alteration in the executive form of government (see Jamieson’s ‘sacred History,’ i., p. 312). God intimated, through Samuel, that their request would, in anger, be granted, while at the same time he apprised them of some of the evils that would result from their choice.