1 Samuel 11:1-11

Then Nahash the Ammonite came up.

The immediate consequences of a national rejection of God

In the opening verses of this chapter we see the result of disobedience. Instead of happiness for Israel; we fear that the invasion of which we now read, is but too prophetic of those awful retributions which Samuel declared should come upon their wilful rejection of the Divine Being. We take these words as illustrative of the consequences of a national rejection of God.

I. That when a nation rejects God it may very naturally expect to be troubled by enemies. There appears to have existed an old land quarrel between these two peoples, which had occasioned the battle just mentioned, and which at this time they strive to revenge and recoverse In the light of this history we gather that--

1. They were enemies of long standing. It was a deep seated hatred that time had almost rendered chronic. It is easy to settle the dispute of yesterday, but when years have passed they make the breach almost impassable. Thus God rendered dark the hops of Israel through enemies of the longest standing and the most dreaded.

(1) Would be bitter enemies.

(2) Would be despotic enemies.

2. They were enemies that had been previously defeated. They had been most severely routed by Jephthah. The relatives, friends, and companions of these warriors now threatening Israel with invasion were slain in that conflict. Truly, Israel had need to fear such a foe.

3. These enemies were most opportune in their attack upon Israel.

(1) As regards the place. It was near to their own country, and was also extremely weak.

(2) As regards the time of this threatened invasion. Israel was in a most unsettled condition. The people were in a transition state, just changing an old form of government for a new one, consequently were very much occupied with their own affairs. There were new arrangements to make adapted to the changed condition of things. All the strength, skill, and time that the nation could command was required to be expended upon itself, to give it permanency, and to give freedom from civil faction. Hence the Israelites were totally unprepared for woe, and especially with so powerful a foe.

II. That when a nation rejects God its degradation is certain to follow. Nahash assumes the weakness of the men of Jabesh-Gilead, and their consequent inability to defend themselves from his army. He therefore commences at once to propose the most painful and humiliating condition of peace. A condition indeed which would involve the whole nation in disgrace.

1. These people are about to degrade the noble achievements of their ancestors. And this is a true characteristic of a nation that has rejected God. When they have rejected Him, the next thing to do is to throw away all the sacred memories of the past, and to nullify their meaning.

2. These people are far more careful about their own comfort than the memories of their past history. They would a great deal rather undo the achievements of their ancestors than lose their own eyes.

3. These people were willing to degrade themselves by the breaking of a Divine Law. They wanted to make a covenant with the Ammonites, which bad been strictly forbidden by God. This is just what we might have expected. It is only natural that, after they had dethroned the Divine Being, they should infringe His law.

4. These people are degraded by doubting the bravery of their country. When citizens lose confidence in their defenders it is a sure sign that elements of weakness are mining the society prejudicial to its welfare. May we never lose faith in the heroism of our country!

III. These enemies and this degradation came immediately after the nation had rejected God in proclaiming the new king.

1. As a reminder. To make the Israelites very careful in their revolution, and to give them to feel that although they had got a king, he could not remove them from the touch, nor could he shelter them from the displeasure of God.

2. As a prognostication. That notwithstanding their rejoicing at the public recognition of the new king, the future history of the nation could not be altogether smooth and glad. It was the calm before the tempest, and the invasion by the Ammonites was the first peal of thunder announcing the nearing storm. Lessons--

(1) For a nation to reject God is for it, truly to forsake its best welfare--political, social, and moral.

(2) That a nation rejecting God is sure to meet with numerous difficulties.

(3) That a nation by rejecting God introduces into its history the true element of its ruin.

(4) This national destruction or sorrow may be delayed, but it is certain. (Joseph S. Exell, M. A.)

The relic of Jabesh-Gilead

Primitive though the state of society was in those days in Israel, we are hardly prepared to find Saul following the herd in the field after his election as king of Israel. We are compelled to conclude that the opposition to him was far from contemptible in number and in influence, and that he found it expedient in the meantime to make no demonstration of royalty, but continue his old way of life. Human life was of so little value in those Eastern countries, and the crime of destroying it was so little thought of, that if Saul had in any way provoked hostility, he would have been almost certain to fall by some assassin’s hand. It was therefore wise of him to continue for a time his old way of living, and wait for some opportunity which should arise providentially, to vindicate his title to the sceptre of Israel. Apparently he bad not to wait long--according to Josephus, only a month. The opportunity arose in a somewhat out-of-the-way part of the country, where disturbance had been brewing previous to his election (1 Samuel 12:12). Very probably the Ammonites had never forgotten the humiliation inflicted on them by Jepthah, when he smote them “from Aroer, even till thou come to Minnith, even twenty cities, and till thou come to the plain of the vineyards, with a very great slaughter.” Naturally the Ammonites would be desirous both to avenge these defeats and to regain their cities, or at least to get other cities in lieu of what they had lost. The history of the Israelites in time of danger commonly presents one or other of two extremes: either pusillanimous submission, or daring defiance to the hostile power. In this case it was pusillanimous submission, as indeed it commonly was when the people followed the motions of their own hearts, and were not electrified into opposition by some great hero, full of faith in God. But it was not mere cowardice they displayed in offering to become the servants of the Ammonites; there was impiety in it likewise. For of their relation to God they made no account whateverse By covenant with their fathers, ratified from generation to generation, they were God’s servants, and they had no right voluntarily to transfer to another master the allegiance which was due to God alone. And it was not a case of necessity. Instead of humbling themselves before God and confessing the sins that had brought them into trouble, they put God altogether aside, and basely offered to become the servants of the Ammonites. How often do men virtually say to the devil, “Make a covenant with us, and we will serve thee”! Men and women, with strong proclivities to sin, may for a time resist, but they get tired of the battle; they long for an easier life, and they say in their hearts, “We will resist no longer; we will become your servants.” They are willing to make peace with the Ammonites, because they are wearied of fighting. “Anything for a quiet life!” They surrender to the enemy, they are willing to serve sin, because they will not surrender the ease and the pleasures of sin. But sin is a bad master; his wages are terrible to think of. The terms which Nahash offered to the men of Jabesh-Gilead combined insult to injury. “On this condition will I make a covenant with thee: that I, may thrust out all your right eyes, and lay it for a reproach unto all Israel.” “The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.” But Nahash was comparatively merciful. He was willing to let the men of Jabesh off with the loss of one eye only. But as if to compensate for this forbearance, be declared that he would regard the transaction as a reproach upon all Israel. “All the people lifted up their voices and wept.” It was just the way in which their forefathers had acted at the Red Sea; and again, it was the way in which they spent that night in the wilderness after the spies brought back their report of the land. But, as in the two earlier cases, there was a man of faith to roll back the wave of panic. As we are thinking how well Saul has acted on this occasion, we perceive that an old friend has come on the scene who helps us materially to understand the situation. Yes, he is all the better of Samuel’s guidance and prayers. The good old prophet has no jealousy of the man who took his place at the bead of the nation. But knowing well the fickleness of the people, he is anxious to turn the occasion to account for confirming their feelings and their sins. Seeing how the king has acknowledged God as the Author of the victory, he desires to strike while the iron is hot. “Come,” he says, “let us go to Gilgal, and renew the kingdom there.” (W. G. Blaikie, D. D.)

Practical royalty

1. It is often true in life that circumstances drive us to make approaches which are not congenial. Men are driven by stress of health or poverty, or some form of perplexity not easily to be named in words, to offer to nut themselves into relations with people whom under other circumstances they would never treat with. Such facts in life we are bound to recognise. And it would betoken a poor quality of nature on our part to associate with such recognitions too severe a moral condemnation. Our common proverb is to the effect that “adversity has strange bedfellows.” The men of Jabesh-Gilead, therefore, must be regarded as persons who are under oppressive circumstances, and who are willing to make the best of conditions which are very galling and humiliating.

2. No language is too severe to condemn the barbarous cruelty of Nahash; at the same time he only shows what we might be under circumstances of equal temptation and pressure. When we see how man can treat man, we are enabled to reason upwards, and to see how possible it is for man to treat God profanely and blasphemously. When man loves God he loves his neighbour also; but when man ceases to love his neighbour, and then passes from mere displeasure to positive and cruel hatred, it is easy for him to carry the spirit of hostility further and to include in its base action even all that is heavenly and Divine. The moment we can treat a man unjustly and cruelly we have disqualified ourselves for true prayer and real communion with Heaven. Let there be no mistake about this matter. We cannot give up our philanthropy and retain our Christianity.

3. Saul was engaged in his usual pursuits. The King of Israel was actually discharging offices with the herd in the field, attending to the wants of his cattle, and otherwise going about his business soberly and quietly. No intimation of unusual circumstances seems to have reached him. How unconscious we sometimes are of the circumstances which are nearest to us--unconscious, that is to say, of their real import and deepest meaning! When we think all is proceeding as usual we may be within touch of some occurrence that will determine all the remaining actions of our life The commonplace and the marvellous often lie closely together. The picture, then, is that of a great man attending to simple daily duties, and it will be a sad day for any people who imagine that simple daily duties are not worthy of the dignity even of the greatest man. Society has a right to expect great things from great men. No greater tribute could be paid to Saul than that; threatened and despairing men should appeal to him in the time of their agony. The men who shouted, “God save the king,” did not pay Saul so fine a tribute as the men who came to him in their extremity and asked for his sympathy and assistance. No sooner had Saul heard the condition proposed by the King of Ammon than he burned with anger. We can best describe a certain quality of anger by tracing it to the direct action of the Spirit of God. Truly, there is a holy indignation. The sublime enthusiasm of Saul kindled the faith of the people. A modern commentary, referring to this passage, has the following illustrative remarks:--“It was owing to some influence of a similar nature that, with scanty numbers, ill-armed, and ill-trained, the Swiss won for their land centuries of freedom on memorable fields like Laupen and Morat, though the proudest chivalry of Europe was arrayed against them. It was the same spirit which impelled the peace-loving traders of the marshes of Holland to rise as one man, and to drive out forever from their loved strip of Fenland the hitherto invincible armies of Spain. No oppressor, though backed by the wealth and power of an empire, has over been able to resist the smallest people in whose heart has burned the flame of the Divine fire of the fear of the Lord “All these circumstances would be of little or no concern to us if they did not point to a great spiritual reality. Tremendous foes besiege us on every side. What is our defence in such time of assault? It is the fear of the Lord, the Spirit of God, the Divine energy. God delights in humbling the boastful and vainglorious “He that exalteth himself shall be abased.” Presumption is always self-defeating; it is so in business, in war, in statesmanship, and in every act and department of rational life.

4. Notice that this was not entered upon without preparation. There was no rush or haste in the matter. Sometimes we proceed most swiftly when we seem to advance most slowly. There should be a time for gathering strength together, measuring the situation in all its dimensions, consulting Divine decrees, and putting the soul into right relations with God. After such preparation everything will go rapidly. Every stroke will be a victory.

5. A fit ending to a tragical process Gilgal was a sanctuary. After great doings on the field of battle we must return to the house of prayer, we must, indeed, return to the place where we began. We should enter upon no conflict until after we have been in the sanctuary, and having completed the conflict we should return to the altar. Enter upon nothing that cannot be sanctified at holy places and by holy names. There is nothing too insignificant to be associated with the most solemn acts of worship; or if we are conscious of such insignificance, we should not undertake the affairs which admit of its application. Learn the useful lesson that Saul did not thrust himself into prominence, and that even after he was appointed king of Israel he went about his usual avocations until there was something worthy of kingliness to be publicly done. Let us be rebuked in so far as we have supposed that we were released from duty until some great and critical occasion arose. Having obtained our literary prize, let us go home and take up the business of life in a quiet way. Do not think that anything which nature or society requires at us is below our dignity because we have achieved this or that popular success. (J. Parker, D. D.)