1 Samuel 10:17

And Samuel called the people together unto the LORD to Mizpeh;

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(17) Samuel called the people together.—“Samuel does all that further lies in his power to promote the great cause. He calls a national assembly to Mizpeh. Here the sacred lot, it is stated, fell, among all the tribes of Israel, upon Benjamin; and, in an ever narrowing circle, at length upon Saul, the son of Kish. If we consider the general use in those ages of the sacred lot, we shall find that, taking the whole account in this connection, it exhibits nothing but the great truth that for the full and auspicious acknowledgment of Saul as king, his mysterious interview with the seer did not alone suffice—publicly, in solemn national assembly, was it necessary for the Spirit of the Eternal to choose him out, and to make him known as the Eternal’s man.”—Ewald.

Mizpah (for so the name should be spelt) was chosen by Samuel for the solemn assembly of the tribes on the occasion of the electing their first king, on account of the glorious memories of his own victory, many years before, at that place. The words, “unto the Lord” probably signify that the mysterious Urim and Thummim, by which inquiry was used to be made of the Eternal, had been brought there by the high priest, or, on the supposition that the office was then vacant, by the priest who temporarily replaced him.

MacLaren's Expositions

1 Samuel

THE KING AFTER MAN’S HEART

1 Samuel 10:17 - 1 Samuel 10:27.

These verses fit on to 1 Samuel 8:1 - 1 Samuel 8:22, 1 Samuel 9:1 - 1 Samuel 10:16, being probably from another source, inserted here because the anointing of Saul, told in them, did occur between Samuel’s dismissal of the people and his summoning of the national assembly which is here related. That private anointing of Saul was the divine call to him individually; the text tells of his public designation to the nation. The two are perfectly consistent, and, indeed, the private anointing is presupposed in the incident recorded in this passage, of Saul’s hiding himself, for he could not have known the result that he would be ‘taken,’ unless he had had that previous intimation. The assembly at Mizpah was not convened in order to choose a king, but to accept God’s choice, which was then to be declared.

But before the choice was announced, a last appeal was made to the people, if, perchance, they might still be persuaded to forgo their rebellious desire. It is not, indeed, said that this final, all but hopeless attempt was made by Samuel at the divine command, and we are not told that he had any further revelation than that in 1 Samuel 8:7 - 1 Samuel 8:9. But, no doubt, he was speaking as Jehovah’s mouthpiece, and so we have here one more instance of that long-suffering divine patience and love which ‘hopeth all things,’ and lingers pleadingly round the alienated heart, seeking to woo it back to itself, and never ceasing to labour to avert the evil deed, till it is actually and irrevocably done. It may be said that God knew that the appeal was sure to fail, and therefore could not have made it. But is not that mysterious continuance of effort, foreknown to be futile, the very paradox of God’s love? Did not Jesus give the traitor the sop, as a last token of friendship, a last appeal to his heart? And does not God still in like manner deal with us all?

Observe how He seeks to win Israel back. It is not by threatenings, but by reminders of His great benefits. He will not drive men back to His service, like a slave-driver with brandished whip, but He wishes to draw them back by ‘the cords of love.’ It is service from hearts melted by thankfulness, and therefore overflowing in joyful, willing obedience and grateful acts, that He desires. ‘The mercies of God’ should lead to men offering themselves as ‘living sacrifices.’

The last appeal failed, and Samuel at once went on to give the people the desired bitter which they thought so sweet. Of course, it was by their representatives that the tribes presented themselves before God. The manner of making God’s choice known is not told, and speculations as to it are idle. Probably a simple yes or no, as each tribe, family or individual was ‘presented’ was the mode, but how it was conveyed is quite unknown. That is a small matter; more important is it to note that Saul was chosen simply because he was the very type of the national ideal of a hero-king. Both here and in 1 Samuel 9:2 his stature and bravery are the only qualities mentioned. What Israel wanted was a rough fighter, with physical strength, plenty of bone and muscle. About moral, intellectual or spiritual qualities they did not care, and they got the kind of king that they wanted,-the only kind that they could appreciate. The only way to teach them that one who was a head and shoulders taller than any of them was not thereby certified to be the ideal king, was to give them such a man, and let them see what good he would do them.

There is no surer index nor sharper test of national or individual character than the sort of ‘heroes’ they worship. Vox populi has not been very much refined since Saul’s day. Athletes and soldiers still captivate the crowd, and a mere prophet like Samuel has no chance beside the man of broad shoulders and well-developed biceps. And very often communities, especially democratic ones, get the ‘king’ they desire, the leader, statesman or the like, who comes near their ideal. The man whom they choose is the man whom, generally, they deserve. Israel had an excuse for its burst of ardour for a soldier, for it was in deadly danger from the Philistines. Is there as good an excuse for us in Britain, in our recent adoration of successful generals? Israel found out that its idol lacked higher gifts than thews and sinews, and experience taught them the falseness of their ideal.

Saul’s hiding among the piles of miscellaneous baggage, which the multitude of representatives had brought with them, is usually set down to his credit, as indicating an engaging modesty; but there is another and more probable explanation of it, less creditable to him. Was it not rather occasioned by his shrinking from the heavy task that God was laying on him? He was not being summoned to a secure throne, but to ‘go out before us, and fight our battles.’ He might well shrink, but if he had been God-fearing and God-obeying and God-trusting, he would have cried, ‘Here am I! send me,’ instead of skulking among the stuff. There was another Saul, who could say, ‘I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision.’ It had been better for the son of Kish if he had been like the young Pharisee from Tarsus. We too have divine calls in our lives, and alas! we too not seldom hide ourselves among the stuff, and try to avoid taking up some heavy duty, by absorbing our minds in material good. Few things have greater power of obscuring ‘the heavenly vision,’ and of rendering us unwilling to obey it, than the clinging to the things of this world, which are in their place as the traveller’s luggage needful on the road, but very much out of their place when they become a hiding-place for a man whom God is calling to service.

The ‘manner of the kingdom,’ which Samuel wrote and laid up before the Lord, was probably not the same as ‘the manner of the king’ {1 Samuel 8:9 - 1 Samuel 8:18}, but a kind of constitution, or solemn statement of the principles which were to govern the monarchy. The reading in 1 Samuel 10:26 should probably be ‘the men of valour,’ instead of ‘a band of men.’ They were brave men, ‘whose hearts God had touched.’ Now that Saul was chosen by God, loyalty to God was shown by loyalty to Saul. The sin of the people’s desire, and the drop from the high ideal of the theocracy, and the lack of lofty qualities in Saul, may all be admitted. But God has made him king, and that is enough. Henceforward, God’s servants will be Saul’s partisans. The malcontents were apparently but a small faction. They, perhaps, had had a candidate of their own, but, at all events, they criticised God’s appointed deliverer, and saw nothing in him to warrant the expectation that he would be able to do much for Israel. Disparaging criticism of God’s chosen instruments comes from distrust of God who chose them. To doubt the divinely sent Deliverer’s power to ‘save’ is to accuse God of not knowing our needs and of miscalculating the power of His supply of them. But not a few of us put that same question in various tones of incredulity, scorn or indifference. Sense makes many mistakes when it takes to trying to weigh Christ in its vulgar balances, and to settling whether He looks like a Saviour and a King.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

10:17-27 Samuel tells the people, Ye have this day rejected your God. So little fond was Saul now of that power, which soon after, when he possessed it, he could not think of parting with, that he hid himself. It is good to be conscious of our unworthiness and insufficiency for the services to which we are called; but men should not go into the contrary extreme, by refusing the employments to which the Lord and the church call them. The greater part of the people treated the matter with indifference. Saul modestly went home to his own house, but was attended by a band of men whose hearts God disposed to support his authority. If the heart bend at any time the right way, it is because He has touched it. One touch is enough when it is Divine. Others despised him. Thus differently are men affected to our exalted Redeemer. There is a remnant who submit to him, and follow him wherever he goes; they are those whose hearts God has touched, whom he has made willing. But there are others who despise him, who ask, How shall this man save us? They are offended in him, and they will be punished.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

From the order of the narrative, and the mention of Saul's servant, it looks as if Saul found his uncle at the high place. Perhaps some solemnity similar to that mentioned in 1 Samuel 9:19 was going on at this time, in which the prophets had been taking part.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

17-25. Samuel called the people together … at Mizpeh—a shaft-like hill near Hebron, five hundred feet in height. The national assemblies of the Israelites were held there. A day having been appointed for the election of a king, Samuel, after having charged the people with a rejection of God's institution and a superseding of it by one of their own, proceeded to the nomination of the new monarch. As it was of the utmost importance that the appointment should be under the divine direction and control, the determination was made by the miraculous lot, tribes, families, and individuals being successively passed until Saul was found. His concealment of himself must have been the result either of innate modesty, or a sudden nervous excitement under the circumstances. When dragged into view, he was seen to possess all those corporeal advantages which a rude people desiderate in their sovereigns; and the exhibition of which gained for the prince the favorable opinion of Samuel also. In the midst of the national enthusiasm, however, the prophet's deep piety and genuine patriotism took care to explain "the manner of the kingdom," that is, the royal rights and privileges, together with the limitations to which they were to be subjected; and in order that the constitution might be ratified with all due solemnity, the charter of this constitutional monarchy was recorded and laid up "before the Lord," that is, deposited in the custody of the priests, along with the most sacred archives of the nation.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

Unto the Lord; to appear before the Lord. So he speaks, either,

1. Because the ark was carried thither upon this occasion. Or,

2. Because God is present in all the assemblies of his people, whereof this was an eminent one: see 2 Chronicles 19:6 Psalm 82:1. Or,

3. Because they did in a manner erect a tribunal for God; and entreated, and consequently obtained, his presence there to supervise and direct the whole business by his sentence, which also he did, 1 Samuel 10:19, &c. See of this phrase Judges 11:11 20:1.

To Mizpeh; a city of Benjamin, Joshua 13:26, where all Israel had met before upon a public and solemn occasion, 1 Samuel 7:5.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

And Samuel called the people together unto the Lord at Mizpeh. Not that in Gilead, but in the tribe of Benjamin, where the people had been before convened on a certain occasion, 1 Samuel 7:5 and the people called together could not be every individual of the nation, but the heads and elders of the people, their representatives, and who were summoned by the orders of Samuel; perhaps by an herald making proclamation and cry of the same, as the word signifies; and these were gathered together to the Lord, to have the following affair transacted before him, and under his guidance and direction; the priest perhaps being here with the Urim and Thummim, as Kimchi thinks, and who also conjectures that the ark might be brought hither at this time, the symbol of the divine Presence; though wherever the church and people of God were gathered together in his name, in a solemn manner, there the Lord was.

Geneva Study Bible

And Samuel {g} called the people together unto the LORD to Mizpeh;

(g) Both to declare to them their fault in asking a king, and also to show God's sentence in it.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

17. Samuel called the people together] He convoked the national assembly or “congregation of Israel,” which had made the request for a king through its representative elders (1 Samuel 8:4). This body was composed of all Israelites of twenty years old and upwards (Numbers 1:3) who had not forfeited their privileges, together with foreigners admitted upon certain conditions. Its political functions were necessarily limited by the nature of the theocracy, and consisted rather in accepting the declared will of Jehovah than in originating measures of its own. Thus:

(1) The Law was solemnly accepted by it (Exodus 19:3-9; Exodus 24:3).

(2) Leaders and kings chosen by divine command were presented to it for approval, as on the present occasion, and in the case of Joshua (Numbers 27:18-23); David (2 Samuel 5:1); Solomon (1 Chronicles 29:22).

(3) In later times some of the kings appear to have been actually elected by it: e.g. Jeroboam (1 Kings 12:20); Joash (2 Kings 11:19); Josiah (2 Kings 21:24); Jehoahaz (2 Kings 23:30).

(4) It possessed a national judicial authority (Jdg 20:1).

(5) It claimed some voice in questions of alliance and peace and war (Joshua 9:15; Joshua 9:18).

unto the Lord to Mizpeh] See note on 1 Samuel 10:3; and for Mizpah see note on 1 Samuel 7:5.

17–27. The Public election of Saul as King

The thread of the narrative in ch. 8, which has been temporarily dropped in order to give an account of the circumstances by which Samuel was privately made acquainted with the man whom Jehovah had chosen to rule his people, is now resumed, and Saul’s public election by lot to the regal office described. Since the revelation to Samuel and the choice by lot were equally declarations of Jehovah’s will, there could be no contradiction between them: the latter publicly confirmed the former for the satisfaction of the people.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 17. - Samuel called the people together unto Jehovah to Mizpeh. For the reason why Mizpah (so the name should be spelt) was chosen as the place of meeting see 1 Samuel 7:15. Unto Jehovah. Because in some way the Divine presence there was indicated; possibly by the high priest having been summoned thither with the Urim and Thummim. 1 Samuel 10:17

Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

Saul's Election by Lot. - After Samuel had secretly anointed Saul king by the command of God, it was his duty to make provision for a recognition of the man whom God had chosen on the part of the people also. To this end he summoned the people to Mizpeh, and there instructed the tribes to choose a king by lot. As the result of the lot was regarded as a divine decision, not only was Saul to be accredited by this act in the sight of the whole nation as the king appointed by the Lord, but he himself was also to be more fully assured of the certainty of his own election on the part of God. -

(Note: Thenius follows De Wette, and adduces the incompatibility of 1 Samuel 8 and 1 Samuel 10:17-27 with 1 Samuel 9:1-10, 1 Samuel 9:16, as a proof that in 1 Samuel 10:17-27 we have a different account of the manner in which Saul became king from that given in 1 Samuel 9:1-10, 1 Samuel 9:16, and one which continues the account in 1 Samuel 8:22. "It is thoroughly inconceivable," he says, "that Samuel should have first of all anointed Saul king by the instigation of God, and then have caused the lot to be cast, as it were, for the sake of further confirmation; for in that case either the prophet would have tempted God, or he would have made Him chargeable before the nation with an unworthy act of jugglery." Such an argument as this could only be used by critics who deny not only the inspiration of the prophets, but all influence on the part of the living God upon the free action of men, and cannot therefore render the truth of the biblical history at all doubtful. Even Ewald sees no discrepancy here, and observes in his history (Gesch. iii. p. 32): "If we bear in mind the ordinary use made of the sacred lot at that time, we shall find that there is nothing but the simple truth in the whole course of the narrative. The secret meeting of the seer with Saul was not sufficient to secure a complete and satisfactory recognition of him as king; it was also necessary that the Spirit of Jehovah should single him out publicly in a solemn assembly of the nation, and point him out as the man of Jehovah.")

1 Samuel 10:17

העם is the nation in its heads and representatives. Samuel selected Mizpeh for this purpose, because it was there that he had once before obtained for the people, by prayer, a great victory over the Philistines (1 Samuel 7:5.).