Tag Archives: Amalekites

Commentary on 1 Samuel 30-31 (Death of Saul)

During the time covered in 1 Samuel 18-29, David built up a small army of 600 men from the outcasts of Israel, while Saul continued to hunt David down in order to kill him. When we finally get to chapters 30-31, David and Saul are both facing armed conflicts, but with separate enemies. The narrator places these conflicts one after another to contrast how different Saul and David, with respect to their relationships with God, truly are.

Chapter 30 opens with David and his army returning to their home base at the village of Ziklag (they had been away for some time). When they arrive, they discover that Israel’s ancient enemies, the Amalekites, have burnt down the village and taken everyone prisoner, including all of the wives and children of David’s army. David and his men are devastated at their loss, to the point that the men blame David and contemplate killing him for what has happened.

David, however, seeks God’s wisdom and asks the priest Abiathar to bring him the priestly ephod. He asks God whether he should pursue the Amalekites and God responds that he should. Note that David seeks God’s decision in the matter as prescribed by the Torah. David is consistently shown as obeying the commands of the Torah in contrast to Saul who seems to know nothing of the Torah.

David and 400 of his men pursue the Amalekites, without knowing exactly where they have gone. However, David happens across an Egyptian servant who was left behind by his Amalekite master because he was ill. He agrees to take David to the Amalekite camp if David will spare his life. The reader is meant to understand that finding the Egyptian is no accident. This is the hand of God ensuring David’s success in his mission.

David’s army finds the Amalekite camp where all the soldiers are intoxicated, celebrating their recent ill-gotten gains. His forces engage the Amalekites, who greatly outnumber him, and win decisively, with only 400 Amalekites escaping when the battle is over. Not only that, but all the women and children taken from Ziklag are rescued, along with all the possessions stolen by the Amalekites during their recent marauding campaign.

In stark contrast to David’s successful campaign, chapter 31 reveals the disaster that is Saul’s battle against the Philistines. Before we see what happens in chapter 31, let’s review chapter 28 briefly. Since Saul has no access to God (Samuel has died and God had rejected Saul’s reign as king years earlier), Saul instead seeks the guidance of a sorceress/medium, an activity which is clearly forbidden by the Torah. The medium summons the deceased Samuel who reminds Saul that God has rejected him and given the kingdom to David. She then ominously warns Saul that the Philistines will kill Saul and his sons the next day.

As we return to chapter 31, we learn that the Philistines have overtaken the Israelite army and pressed hard after Saul and his sons. Three of Saul’s sons are killed in battle, including Jonathan. Dale Ralph Davis, in 1 Samuel: Looking on the Heart, Focus on the Bible Commentary, writes:

Here then is Jonathan’s obituary. He remained a true friend to David and a faithful son of Saul. He surrendered his kingship to David (18:1–4); he sacrificed his life for Saul. In this hopeless fiasco Jonathan was nowhere else but in the place Yahweh had assigned to him—at the side of his father.

Saul is wounded by archers and asks his armor-bearer to kill him so that the Philistines will not have the opportunity to torture him. The armor-bearer refuses to kill him, so Saul commits suicide with his own sword. The armor-bearer then takes his own life. The results of this military defeat are disastrous for Israel. Several Israelite settlements near the Philistines are abandoned in haste because the army and their king has been defeated.

As if this isn’t bad enough, the Philistines remove the valuables from the bodies of Saul and his sons and then fasten their corpses on the wall of a city called Beth Shan. They also spread the word around their cities that Israel has been defeated. This defeat is profound. Here is how Dale Ralph Davis describes it:

Yahweh has been defeated. Saul’s armor is in the adversary’s temple; Yahweh could not protect his king. No question about how the media would construe it. If Yahweh’s king and people were trounced, so was their God. . . . The sadness of our text is due not merely to the fact that Israel is crushed. That is sad. But there is a deeper sadness in that Yahweh is mocked. Every true Israelite mourns over that. Worse than Israel’s defeat is Yahweh’s disgrace.

A daring nighttime mission by the Israelite soldiers of Jabesh Gilead reclaims the bodies of Saul and his sons, and they are cremated, except for their bones, which are buried.

How can we summarize the end of 1 Samuel? Robert Bergen, in 1, 2 Samuel, The New American Commentary, writes:

On the one hand, David was here fulfilling the mandate of the Torah regarding the Amalekites and receiving the resulting blessing of a restored family and the increase of possessions. On the other hand, at the very moment David was enjoying success and blessing, Saul was experiencing the full force of a Torah curse, including the loss of his family and possessions.

Both David and Saul were fighting traditional enemies of Israel in the events recorded in this section, and both men sought divine guidance in their respective undertakings. To the south, David consulted the only form of revelation sanctioned by the Torah before going forth to slaughter the Amalekites, who had temporarily dispossessed David and his men of their families and worldly goods during a lightning raid on Ziklag. To the north Saul sought insight from a medium, a revelatory means expressly forbidden by the Torah, before waging war against the Philistines. As a result of Saul’s sinful actions, the Lord used the Philistines as agents of divine judgment to bring down on Saul’s head the just punishment for his rejection of the Torah (cf. 1 Chr 10:13–14). When this pivotal series of events concludes, Saul and all his credible heirs to the throne are dead; David, on the other hand, is poised to become Israel’s king and to establish a dynasty as all of his heirs are restored to him.

Did Saul Kill All of the Amalekites?

In 1 Samuel 15:3, Samuel commands Saul, “Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.” As we read the rest of the chapter, Saul tells Samuel, after the battle, “I have carried out the LORD’s instructions” and “I completely destroyed the Amalekites.”

Samuel’s only disagreement with Saul is that Saul kept some of the livestock for himself, a clear violation of God’s command. Saul was not to have financial gain from this battle, which was intended to be an execution of divine justice against an exceedingly vicious group of people.  Samuel seems to agree that Saul totally destroyed everyone, “men and women, children and infants,” just as God commanded. But how should we understand this command to “put to death men and women, children and infants,” coupled with Saul’s claim that he did indeed kill every Amalekite?

Did Saul literally wipe out every living Amalekite or is this command hyperbolic in nature, referring to a decisive military victory? We know that other ancient near eastern cultures used the same kinds of descriptions of military victories, such as “totally destroying” the enemy, or killing “every man, woman, and child.” But these are figures of speech which literally mean “we won a decisive military victory against our enemy.” What about in this case?

The easiest way to decide whether Saul literally killed every living Amalekite is to see whether the Amalekites are ever mentioned in the biblical record again. When we do that, we see that the Amalekites lived on!

In 1 Sam 27:8, we see that David fights Amalekites, so at least some of them are alive and well. Paul Copan and Matt Flannagan write in Did God Really Command Genocide?: Coming to Terms with the Justice of God:

This text affirms not only that the Amalekites still existed, but the reference to Egypt and Shur states that they existed in the very same area where Saul ‘utterly destroyed’ every single one of them (15: 8, 20). What’s more, David took sheep and cattle as plunder. Clearly, in terms of what the narrative says, the Amalekites were not all destroyed— nor were all the animals finally destroyed in Gilgal in chapter 15. Instead, many people and livestock from the region had survived Saul’s attack.

In 1 Sam 30, the Amalekites show up again! This time they attack the Israelite settlement of Ziklag, burn it to the ground, and carry off everyone as prisoners. Copan and Flannagan write:

So even though Saul ‘utterly destroyed’ the Amalekites (15: 8, 20), the text makes clear that many Amalekites remained so that David would not only— once again!— fight against them so that ‘not a man of them escaped,’ but after this battle, four hundred Amalekites fled on camels (30: 17 NASB).

Amalekites continue to be mentioned in the Bible:

Even beyond this, the Amalekites continue to remain, and we come across another Amalekite in 2 Samuel 1: 8, a passage where one of them takes credit for killing Saul— presumably a tall task if Saul had ‘utterly destroyed all the people’ of Amalek. And in 1 Chronicles 4: 43, the nation of Amalek is still around during the reign of Hezekiah. And then in the book of Esther, we encounter a descendant of the Amalekite king, Agag— Haman ‘the Agagite’ (8: 3), also called ‘the son of Hammedatha the Agagite’ (3: 1)— who was determined to wipe out the Jewish people. Amalekites were around well after both Saul and David.

It seems clear that Saul did not totally destroy all of the Amalekites, men, women, and children. Yet Samuel, and presumably God, were satisfied that Saul obeyed God’s commands, except for keeping alive livestock and the king of Amalek. Therefore, it seems that we should take Saul’s claim that he “completely destroyed the Amalekites” as a hyperbolic statement that would literally mean, “I won the decisive military victory that God commanded me to win.”

Does God Take People’s Lives? – #9 Post of 2009

Post Author: Bill Pratt

Clearly, yes He does.  Many people express shock over the fact that God took human life in the great flood or that He commanded Israel to kill Canaanites.  There are many other instances in the Bible where God either directly or indirectly takes lives.  There is no getting around this fact.  It makes us uncomfortable to read these passages in the Bible and some of us try to avoid these passages altogether.

It’s not just an Old Testament issue either.  Anybody remember Ananias and Sapphira?  Have you ever read the book of Revelation?  No, we can’t escape the reality of God taking human life by fleeing to the New Testament.

So, as Christians, how do we deal with this fact?  Is it wrong for God to take life?  Do we have to cringe every time a critic of Christianity raises this issue?  No, we don’t.  If we truly understand who God is, then we shouldn’t be surprised by the fact that He takes people’s lives.

The Bible teaches two things about God that helps us understand why He takes human life.  First, He is ultimately just.  He hates sin and evil.  God is perfect in righteousness and goodness, so the existence of sin and evil repulses Him.  As the ultimate judge of the entire universe, He must punish sin.

If God did not punish sin, then what kind of God would He be?  A God who winked and nodded at sin would be like a deranged trial judge who lets every murderer, rapist, and child molester go free, regardless of their guilt.  Is that really the God you want?  Every single person yearns for justice, and if the ultimate Being never administered it, there would be no ultimate justice.  We’ve all sinned.  If God is going to judge sin, then all people come into His court.

Many people say that they want a God who doesn’t punish sin, who is a big, cuddly, teddy bear in heaven.  But what they really mean to say is that they don’t want a God who punishes their particular sin.  As soon as they are wronged, they immediately call for justice!  They think God should let them cheat on their taxes, but they are outraged if they are ever cheated out of money.  We all want justice, so don’t believe anybody who says they don’t.

Fine, so God has to punish sin, but why does He sometimes punish sin by ending lives?  Isn’t that murder?  Isn’t God breaking the sixth commandment?  “Thou shalt not murder.”  The truth is, God created all life, and therefore it is His right to also take life.  When you couple God’s right to take life with His justice, you start to see what is going on with those “difficult” Bible passages.  In each instance in the Bible, when God ends earthy lives, He is always punishing heinous sin.  He is meting out justice to those who are reveling in evil.  As Judge and Creator of life, He is doing what only He can do.

Here are a couple other things to remember.  First, God takes every person’s life because every person dies.  The only question is when, where, and how a person dies.  These things are in God’s hands, as they should be.

Second, when God takes life, He can bring it back.  In fact, the Bible promises that we will all be given resurrected bodies.  God can bring life back, but humans cannot.  Therefore, you cannot apply the command to not murder to God.

God is just, and He must punish sin.  God creates all life, and so it is His right to take it.  If you remember these two things, then you’ll understand how to deal with God’s command to kill the Amalekites, or the great flood, or Ananias and Sapphira.  In the end, if humans weren’t constantly producing evil, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation.  Let’s take a look in the mirror instead of criticizing God for cleaning up the mess we make.