AGENDA – DETERMINED TO HAVE A KING

OPENING PRAYER - Heavenly Father, we thank you for this opportunity to read and study Your Word. Please guide our thoughts and open our hearts to understand the truths You want to reveal. In Jesus' name, Amen.
AUDIBLE READ THE SCRIPTURE ALOUD – Determined to Have a King
POINT OF INTEREST - God agrees to give the people a king, but he tells Samuel to warn them about the consequences of that choice first. God gives the people every opportunity to choose differently, but they insist on having what they want: a king.
AUDIBLE READ THE SCRIPTURE ALOUD – ISRAEL'S REQUEST FOR A KING GRANTED
TRAIL CROSSING - Donkeys play an important role in a number of biblical stories. Check out Numbers 22:22-35 and Matthew 21:1-11 to learn more.
AUDIBLE READ THE SCRIPTURE ALOUD – SAUL PROPHESIES
AUDIBLE READ THE SCRIPTURE ALOUD – SAUL PROCLAIMED KING
SCENIC VIEW - One of the things that the people like about Saul is how "kingly" he looks. When God sends Samuel to select Saul's successor, God will caution Samuel to choose based not on looks but on the heart (1 Samuel 16:7).
YOU ARE HERE - A number of stories in the Bible feature leaders making promises to God before they think through the consequences. Compare this story to Judges 11. What might these passages teach us about the promises we make to God?
In Judges 11, Jephthah made a "rash vow" to sacrifice the first thing that came out of his house to meet him if God granted him victory. Tragically, it was his only daughter who met him. Other leaders faced similar dilemmas due to impulsive speech.
AUDIBLE READ THE SCRIPTURE ALOUD – SAUL'S CONTINUING WARS
AUDIBLE READ THE SCRIPTURE ALOUD – SAUL REJECTED AS KING
YOU ARE HERE - The Bible tells us that Samuel is angry, but it doesn't say at whom. 
In 1 Samuel 15:11, the Bible states that Samuel was angry (often translated as "grieved" or "displeased") when God told him He regretted making Saul king. While the text does not explicitly name the target of his anger, biblical scholars and commentators generally attribute it to one of three sources: 
1. Anger at Saul
Most interpretations suggest Samuel's anger was directed at Saul for his blatant disobedience and failure to live up to his potential as king. 
•	The Cause: Saul failed to carry out the specific command to "utterly destroy" the Amalekites, instead sparing their king and the best livestock.
•	The Disappointment: Samuel had personally anointed Saul and likely felt a "white heat of loyalty" to the kingship he helped establish, making Saul’s moral failure deeply frustrating. 
2. Anger at the Situation (Frustration)
Some scholars believe the anger was a general feeling of distress or grief over the "ugly situation" Saul's rebellion had created. 
•	A Slur on Office: Some commentators suggest Samuel felt the rejection of the king he anointed was a "slur on his prophetic office" or a threat to national stability.
•	A "Cry to God": The fact that Samuel "cried out to the Lord all night" suggests his anger was a form of deep intercessory prayer, potentially pleading with God to find an alternative to dethroning Saul. 
3. Was he angry at God?
While few scholars argue Samuel was "angry at God" in a rebellious sense, some note that his reaction shows a struggle with God's decree. 
•	Intercession: If Samuel was angry at the decision, it was likely expressed as a desperate desire for God to change His mind or show mercy to Saul, rather than an accusation of God being wrong.
•	Alignment with God: Others suggest Samuel's anger actually mirrored God's own regret, allowing the prophet to share in the divine grief over human sin. 
Ultimately, the text focuses on Samuel's prolonged mourning for Saul, which eventually required God to intervene and tell him to stop grieving and move on to anointing David.
 
Regardless, it is what Samuel does with his anger that is important; Samuel turns to God in the midst of his anger and cries out to God. 
What might this teach us about our anger?

1. Anger Can Be a Form of Intercession
Rather than venting his anger at people, Samuel "cried out to the Lord all night". This suggests that when we are angry or distressed by a situation—even one ordained by God—the healthiest response is to take that "heat" directly to God in prayer. Samuel’s anger was not a barrier to his relationship with God, but the very fuel for his night-long intercession. 
2. Distinguishing Righteous Indignation from Personal Rage
Scholars often contrast Samuel’s anger with Saul’s:
•	Righteous Anger: Samuel’s anger (often translated as being "hot" or "displeased") was rooted in grief over sin and the perversion of God's purposes. It was an "appropriate intensity" toward injustice.
•	Sinful Anger: In contrast, Saul’s later anger toward David was fueled by jealousy and insecurity.
•	Lesson: We are encouraged to evaluate the "why" of our anger: Does it stem from a personal offense (unrighteous) or from a concern for truth and justice (righteous)? 
3. Grief and Anger Often Coexist
The Bible notes that Samuel both "mourned for Saul" and "was angry". This teaches that anger isn't always a sign of hatred; it can be a deep expression of love and disappointment for someone who has failed to live up to their potential. It shows that "what grieves God’s heart should also grieve our hearts". 
4. Anger Must Not Lead to Stagnation
Eventually, God asked Samuel, "How long will you mourn for Saul?". This indicates that while anger and grief are valid responses to failure or rejection, there is a time to move forward. 
•	Action over Emotion: Samuel’s anger did not prevent him from eventually obeying God's next command to anoint a new king. It teaches that while we may feel anger, it should not paralyze us or keep us from fulfilling our own duties. 
5. Sharing in the "Divine Regret"
Samuel’s anger allowed him to share in God’s own displeasure. It serves as a reminder that being "in tune" with God doesn't mean being emotionless; it means feeling the same weight and sorrow that God feels when people turn away from what is right

TRAIL CROSSING - Anointing with oil is a way of setting people and things apart as holy. Exodus 30 describes using anointing oil to consecrate the Levitical priests, the Tabernacle, and the holy objects. Both David and Saul are anointed with oil as a sign of their kingship. Read Luke 7:36-50 to hear another important story of anointing.
AUDIBLE READ THE SCRIPTURE ALOUD – DAVID PLAYS THE LYRE FOR SAUL
Scripture Citations - 1 SAMUEL 8:1, 3-22a | 9:1-2, 15-21 | 10:1-11, 17-24 | 13:8-15 | 14:24-35, 47-48 | 15:1-3, 10-31, 34-35 | 16:1, 6-23
QUESTIONS FOR YOU ARE HERE AND FOR THE JOURNEY – AUDIBLE: 
Double click to listen to audible questions & answers
QUESTIONS FOR THE JOURNEY – TEXT:
1.	Again and again, God gives Saul specific directions to follow, and each time, Saul fails to do precisely as God asks. 
What might we learn from Saul about the importance of listening closely to God? 
Saul's repeated failures to follow God's specific directions serve as a cautionary tale about the nature of true obedience and the spiritual dangers of self-reliance. 
The story teaches several key lessons about listening to and following God in 2025:
•	Partial Obedience is Disobedience: Saul often completed parts of God's commands—such as defeating the Amalekites—but ignored others, like sparing King Agag and the best livestock. This demonstrates that selective compliance is actually a form of rebellion, as it prioritizes human judgment over divine instruction.
•	Obedience Outweighs Ritual: When confronted, Saul tried to justify his disobedience by claiming he spared the animals for religious sacrifices. Samuel’s famous rebuke, "to obey is better than sacrifice," underscores that God values a surrendered heart and sincere listening more than outward religious performances or empty rituals.
•	The Danger of People-Pleasing: Saul admitted he failed to follow instructions because he "feared the people and listened to their voice" rather than God's. This warns that allowing the opinions or pressures of others to override God's clear word leads to the loss of divine authority and purpose.
•	Pride and Rationalization: Saul often shifted blame to others or rationalized his actions as "good intentions". These excuses reveal a lack of true repentance and a heart that places self-importance above God's sovereignty.
•	Listening Requires Action and Waiting: Saul’s first major failure occurred because he was impatient and offered a sacrifice himself instead of waiting for Samuel as instructed. Listening to God involves patience and trusting His timing, even when circumstances seem urgent.
•	Lasting Consequences: Selective obedience led to Saul losing his kingdom and his relationship with God. It serves as a reminder that today's "small" compromises can create tomorrow's spiritual crises and missed blessings

What might we learn about obedience? 
The story of King Saul provides a profound theological framework for understanding obedience, particularly as it relates to the heart versus outward performance.
1. Partial Obedience is Absolute Disobedience
Saul frequently carried out large portions of God’s commands while neglecting specific details. For instance, he defeated the Amalekites but spared their king and the best livestock. In biblical theology, this is not "mostly following" God; it is a rebellion that nullifies the entire act. To God, partial obedience reveals a heart that still trusts its own judgment over His. 
2. Obedience is Relational, Not Transactional
Saul attempted to use religious ritual—sacrificing the spared livestock—to compensate for his lack of following directions. Samuel's rebuke ("To obey is better than sacrifice") teaches that God desires a surrendered heart rather than religious lip service. 
•	The Trap of Ritual: Modern application suggests that attending church, giving, or serving cannot "make up" for persistent disobedience in other areas of life.
•	Love as Motivation: True obedience is an expression of love and trust (John 14:15), whereas Saul’s "obedience" was often self-seeking or driven by the fear of man. 
3. The Danger of Rationalization
Saul was a master of "spiritual spin." When confronted, he claimed he had obeyed and then blamed the people for the failures. 
•	Self-Deception: Saul likely believed his own excuses, illustrating how pride can blind us to our own rebellion.
•	Accountability: We learn that God holds individuals accountable for their own choices, regardless of the pressure from the "crowd" or the people they lead. 
4. Obedience in "Small" Matters Matters
Saul’s ultimate downfall began with seemingly small acts of impatience or selective compliance. 
•	Trajectory: Every small step of obedience or disobedience sets a trajectory for the next. Habitual compliance in minor instructions prepares the heart for greater assignments.
•	Preventative Power: Obedience is "preventative"; had Saul obeyed from the start, he would not have needed to offer a sacrifice to cover his sin. 
5. Obedience vs. Repentance (The David Contrast)
The Bible often contrasts Saul with David. Both sinned significantly, but their responses differed:
•	Saul: When confronted, he made excuses, shifted blame, and performed "religious motions" to save face.
•	David: When confronted, he immediately humbled himself and took full responsibility.
•	Lesson: While God expects wholehearted obedience, He offers grace for failures—provided the heart responds with genuine repentance rather than rationalization.
2.	Saul is possessed by the spirit of God when he is first chosen by Samuel, and the spirit causes him to praise and prophecy. At the end of Saul's story, the evil spirit that seizes him is also said to come from God. 
What do you make of this?
The contrast between Saul being "possessed" by God’s Spirit at the start of his reign and being seized by an "evil spirit from God" at the end is one of the most complex theological shifts in the Bible. Scholars and theologians offer several ways to understand this transition:
1. Translation: "Harmful" vs. "Morally Evil"
In the original Hebrew, the word translated as "evil" is raʿah. While this can mean moral wickedness, it often refers to adversity, calamity, or harm. Many modern translations use "harmful" or "distressing" spirit to clarify that the spirit's effect was to bring torment or judgment, not necessarily that its nature was morally wicked in the same way we think of demons today. 
2. Divine Sovereignty and Judgment
The text emphasizes that the spirit was "from the Lord" to highlight God's absolute sovereignty. 
•	A Judicial Act: Because Saul repeatedly rejected God's commands, God eventually "gave him up" to the consequences of his choices.
•	The Departure of Grace: The "evil spirit" only arrived after the "Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul". In this view, the torment was a direct result of God withdrawing His protective grace and presence, leaving Saul vulnerable to his own internal darkness and external spiritual affliction. 
3. Permission vs. Direct Causation
Many commentators reconcile God's goodness with this "evil spirit" by viewing it as divine permission. 
•	The "Job" Model: Just as God allowed Satan to afflict Job within specific boundaries, He may have permitted a harmful spirit to torment Saul as a form of discipline or judgment.
•	Ancient Perspective: Biblical writers often attributed both good and bad events directly to God to avoid "dualism" (the idea that a bad god is fighting a good god). Attributing the spirit to God asserted that even harmful forces are ultimately under His authority. 
4. Psychological and Symbolic Interpretations
Some scholars suggest the "spirit" may be an ancient way of describing what we would now call mental illness. 
•	Internal Torment: The "evil spirit" could represent Saul's own deteriorating mental state—manic depression, paranoia, or extreme guilt—resulting from his failure as a leader and his rejection by God.
•	Literary Contrast: The arrival of the spirit also serves a literary purpose: it creates the opportunity for David (the new anointed one) to enter the royal court as a musician to soothe the king, physically representing the transition of God's favor from Saul to David. 
What this teaches about God and humanity:
•	Spiritual Vulnerability: Saul’s story suggests that a life lived in persistent rebellion against God can leave a person spiritually "open" to harmful influences.
•	The Weight of Leadership: The Spirit came upon Saul to empower him for a holy office; when he defiled that office, the removal of that power was as physically and mentally devastating as its arrival was empowering.
3.	Do you find Saul to be a sympathetic character? Why or why not? 
Whether Saul is a sympathetic character is one of the most debated questions in biblical literature. Most readers find him to be a deeply tragic figure—one who is easy to pity but difficult to defend.

Here is the case for both perspectives:

Why Saul is Sympathetic (The Tragic Hero)
•	The Reluctant King: Saul didn't seek power; he was found hiding among the baggage when he was chosen. He started with genuine humility and a "new heart" given by God.
•	Impossible Pressure: He was the "guinea pig" for the Israelite monarchy. He had no predecessor to model himself after and was constantly caught between the demands of a fierce prophet (Samuel) and a fickle, fearful populace.
•	Mental Anguish: His later years are defined by what many modern readers recognize as symptoms of severe depression, paranoia, and a crumbling psyche. Seeing a once-towering hero reduced to a man tormented by a "distressing spirit" evokes deep empathy.
•	A "Human" Failure: Unlike David, who was "a man after God’s own heart," Saul feels like a man after our hearts. His sins—impatience, fear of what others think, and trying to rationalize his mistakes—are common human flaws.
Why Saul is Unsympathetic (The Warning)
•	Chronic Blame-Shifting: Saul rarely took responsibility. When he sinned, he blamed his soldiers or claimed he was "doing it for God." This lack of accountability can make him frustrating to the reader.
•	Murderous Jealousy: His obsession with David turned into a literal "witch hunt." He attempted to kill his own son (Jonathan) and ordered the massacre of 85 priests and their families simply because they had helped David.
•	Choosing Darkness: At the end of his life, when God remained silent, Saul turned to a medium (the Witch of Endor)—the very practice he had previously outlawed. This is seen as a final, willful rejection of God’s authority.
The Theological "Middle Ground"
Many see Saul as a mirror. He is sympathetic because we see our own insecurities and "partial obedience" in him. However, he serves as a warning that those same "relatable" flaws, when left unsubmitted to God, can grow into a destructive force that ruins a life and a legacy.
In 2025, many scholars point to Saul as a study in spiritual and emotional intelligence. His tragedy wasn't just that he failed, but that he lacked the humility to repent and the emotional health to celebrate the success of those (like David) who followed him.

4.	Samuel grieves deeply over Saul's failure as a leader. Samuel had hoped Saul would be more than merely a successful ruler but rather that he would help lead the people closer to God. 
When have you been disappointed in one of your spiritual or civic leaders in whom you had put a tremendous amount of hope and trust? 
Requires personal input
5.	In spite of his grief, Samuel remains faithful to God and is willing to try again with the leadership of David. 
When have you moved through grief and disappointment to choose to trust and follow another leader? 
Requires personal input
6.	The stories of Israel's kings raise questions about the relationship between human authority and divine authority. 
How do you see the relationship of those two things? 
The stories of Israel's kings, beginning with Saul, depict the relationship between human and divine authority as one of delegated stewardship rather than absolute power. In this framework, human authority is valid only when it remains subordinate to divine law.

The following principles define this relationship in the biblical narrative:
1. Limited vs. Absolute Monarchy
Unlike the surrounding nations where kings were often viewed as divine or absolute, Israel’s monarchy was intended to be a theocratic monarchy. 
•	Derivative Power: The king did not own the nation; he was a "lesser agent" or "vicar" ruling on behalf of God, the true King.
•	Constitutional Constraints: According to Deuteronomy 17, a king was forbidden from accumulating excessive wealth, wives, or military horses. He was required to write his own copy of the Law and read it daily to ensure he remained humble and obedient. 
2. The Role of the Prophet as Check and Balance
In Israel, the king did not have the final word. The prophets served as the voice of divine authority, holding kings accountable to God’s covenant. 
•	Confrontation: When Saul or David disobeyed, prophets like Samuel or Nathan confronted them. This shows that in the biblical view, no human leader is beyond reproach or spiritual accountability.
•	The Superior Word: The "Word of the Lord" was the ultimate authority. When a king’s decree conflicted with God's command, the king lost his legitimacy. 
3. The Rejection of Theocracy
The transition from judges to kings in 1 Samuel 8 is described as a rejection of God's direct rule. 
•	Human Desire: Israel wanted a king "like all the nations" for political stability and military might.
•	Divine Warning: Samuel warned that human kings would eventually become oppressive, taking the people's sons, daughters, and land for their own service—a natural consequence of human authority losing its focus on divine service. 
4. Human Authority as a Test of Character
The relationship between these two authorities is often a test of the leader's heart.
•	Saul: Represented a king who prioritized human approval and personal insecurity over divine instruction.
•	David: Though he failed, he is seen as "a man after God's own heart" because he recognized God's ultimate authority and practiced deep repentance when he fell short. 
5. Modern Implications
These stories suggest that human authority is a "delegated and temporary governance" subject to a higher moral and divine standard. In contemporary thought, this has influenced concepts of accountability and the idea that "all men are created equal," as seen in historical rejections of the "divine right of kings" in favor of rule by law.

When have you needed to balance obedience to God with obedience to earthly leaders? 
Requires personal input

NEXT STEPS 
•	From the story of Samuel and Saul, we learn about the importance of spiritual leadership, even as we hear about the flawed humanity of our leaders. Take a moment to think about some of the important spiritual leaders in your life. Write or call one of those leaders and thank him or her for bringing you closer to God. 
Requires personal action
•	Samuel speaks up when Saul's political leadership is not in line with God's commands. 
How might you be called to speak to your political leaders in a way informed by your faith? 
In 2025, taking an active role in speaking to political leadership—informed by faith in the manner of Samuel—involves balancing moral conviction with a commitment to the common good. Based on the biblical model and contemporary guidance for 2025, you might be called to engage in the following ways:
•	View Politics Through the Lens of Faith: Treat everything as sacred, ensuring your faith informs your views on social issues like poverty, justice, and mercy rather than "checking it at the door".
•	Speak Truth to Power with Moral Courage: Like Samuel, you may be called to confront those in important positions when their actions are unjust or prioritize expediency over moral righteousness. This includes speaking out against systems of oppression and for the marginalized, such as the hungry or outcast.
•	Prioritize Values over Partisanship: In a divided political landscape, focus on candidates and policies that align with core convictions rather than strictly following party lines.
•	Model Civil Discourse: Communicate respectfully by "speaking the truth in love". Avoid a hyper-critical spirit and instead approach conversations with empathy and humility, treating leaders and those with different views as individuals God loves.
•	Practice Faithful Citizenship through Action: Engagement in 2025 can include attending town hall meetings, participating in nonviolent resistance or public demonstrations, and joining local faith-based advocacy groups.
•	Intercede through Prayer: Commit to praying for leaders, asking for them to have the wisdom to judge righteously and the courage to follow God's Word.
•	Hold Leaders to High Standards of Integrity: Remind leaders that what is morally wrong cannot be politically right and hold them accountable for half-truths or selective obedience.
Draft a letter to one of your senators or representatives addressing an issue you are passionate about, writing not only as a citizen but also as a Christian.  
Requires personal action
CLOSING PRAYER - Lord, thank you for this time of study and for Your Word. As we leave, please help us to carry the truths we've learned into our daily lives and to live out Your teachings. May we continue to grow in faith and reflect Your love to others. Amen.