TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers 1 Samuel 15:10–23. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
Saul is here called to account by Samuel concerning the execution of his commission against the Amalekites; and remarkable instances we are here furnished with of the strictness of the justice of God and the treachery and deceitfulness of the heart of man. We are here told,
I.What passed between God and Samuel, in secret, upon this occasion, Sa1 15:10, Sa1 15:11.
1.God determines Saul's rejection, and acquaints Samuel with it: It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king. Repentance in God is not, as it is in us, a change of his mind, but a change of his method or dispensation. He does not alter his will, but wills an alteration. The change was in Saul: He has turned back from following me; this construction God put upon the partiality of his obedience, and the prevalency of his covetousness. And hereby he did himself make God his enemy. God repented that he had given Saul the kingdom and the honour and power that belonged to it: but he never repented that he had given any man wisdom and grace, and his fear and love; these gifts and callings of God are without repentance.
2.Samuel laments and deprecates it. It grieved Samuel that Saul had forfeited God's favour, and that God had resolved to cast him off; and he cried unto the Lord all night, spent a whole night in interceding for him, that this decree might not go forth against him. When others were in their beds sleeping, he was upon his knees praying and wrestling with God. He did not thus deprecate his own exclusion from the government; nor was he secretly pleased, as many a one would have been, that Saul, who succeeded him, was so soon laid aside, but on the contrary prayed earnestly for his establishment, so far was he from desiring that woeful day. The rejection of sinners is the grief of good people; God delights not in their death, nor should we.
II.What passed between Samuel and Saul in public.
Samuel, being sent of God to him with these heavy tidings, went, as Ezekiel, in bitterness of soul, to meet him, perhaps according to an appointment when Saul went forth on this expedition, for Saul had come to Gilgal (Sa1 15:12), the place where he was made king (Sa1 11:15), and were now he would have been confirmed if he had approved himself well in the trial of his obedience. But Samuel was informed that Saul had set up a triumphal arch, or some monument of his victory, at Carmel, a city in the mountains of Judah, seeking his own honour more than the honour of God, for he set up this place (or hand, as the word is) for himself (he had more need to have been repenting of his sin and making his peace with God than boasting of his victory), and also that he had marched in great state to Gilgal, for this seems to be intimated in the manner of expression: He has gone about, and passed on, and gone down, with a great deal of pomp and parade. There Samuel gave him the meeting, and,
1.Saul makes his boast to Samuel of his obedience, because that was the thing by which he was now to signalize himself (Sa1 15:13): "Blessed be thou of the Lord, for thou sendest me upon a good errand, in which I have had great success, and I have performed the commandment of the Lord." It is very likely, if his conscience had now flown in his face at this time and charged him with disobedience, he would not have been so forward to proclaim his disobedience; for by this he hoped to prevent Samuel's reproving him. Thus sinners think, by justifying themselves, to escape being judged of the Lord; whereas the only way to do that is by judging ourselves. Those that boast most of their religion may be suspected of partiality and hypocrisy in it.
2.Samuel convicts him by a plain demonstration of his disobedience. "Hast thou performed the commandment of the Lord? What means then the bleating of the sheep?" Sa1 15:14. Saul would needs have it thought than God Almighty was wonderfully beholden to him for the good service he had done; but Samuel shows him that God was so far from being a debtor to him that he had just cause of action against him, and produces for evidence the bleating of the sheep, and the lowing of the oxen, which perhaps Saul appointed to bring up the rear of his triumph, but Samuel appears to them as witnesses against him. He needed not go far to disprove his professions. The noise the cattle made (like the rust of silver, Jam 5:3) would be a witness against him. Note, It is no new thing for the plausible professions and protestations of hypocrites to be contradicted and disproved by the most plain and undeniable evidence. Many boast of their obedience to the command of God; but what mean then their indulgence of the flesh, their love of the world, their passion and uncharitableness, and their neglect of holy duties, which witness against them?
3.Saul insists upon his own justification against this charge, Sa1 15:15. The fact he cannot deny; the sheep and oxen were brought from the Amalekites. But,
(1.)It was not his fault, for the people spared them; as if they durst have done it without the express orders of Saul, when they knew it was against the express orders of Samuel. Note, Those that are willing to justify themselves are commonly very forward to condemn others, and to lay the blame upon any rather than take it to themselves. Sin is a brat that nobody cares to have laid at his doors. It is the sorry subterfuge of an impenitent heart, that will not confess its guilt, to lay the blame on those that were tempters, or partners, or only followers in it.
(2.)It was with a good intention: "It was to sacrifice to the Lord thy God. He is thy God, and thou wilt not be against any thing that is done, as this is, for his honour." This was a false plea, for both Saul and the people designed their own profit in sparing the cattle. But, if it had been true, it would still have been frivolous, for God hates robbery for burnt-offering. God appointed these cattle to be sacrificed to him in the field, and therefore will give those no thanks that bring them to be sacrificed at his altar; for he will be served in his own way, and according to the rule he himself has prescribed. Nor will a good intention justify a bad action.
4.Samuel overrules, or rather overlooks, his plea, and proceeds, in God's name, to give judgment against him. He premises his authority. What he was about to say was what the Lord had said to him (Sa1 15:16), otherwise he would have been far from passing so severe a censure upon him. Those who complain that their ministers are too harsh with them should remember that, while they keep to the word of God, they are but messengers, and must say as they are bidden, and therefore be willing, as Saul himself here was, that they should say on. Samuel delivers his message faithfully.
(1.)He reminds Saul of the honour of God had done him in making him king (Sa1 15:17), when he was little in his own sight. God regarded the lowness of his state and rewarded the lowliness of his spirit. Note, Those that are advanced to honour and wealth ought often to remember their mean beginnings, that they may never think highly of themselves, but always study to do great things for the God that had advanced them.
(2.)He lays before him the plainness of the orders he was to execute (Sa1 15:18): The Lord sent thee on a journey; so easy was the service, and so certain the success, that it was rather to be called a journey than a war. The work was honourable, to destroy the sworn enemies of God and Israel; and had he denied himself, and set aside the consideration of his own profit so far as to have destroyed all that belonged to Amalek, he would have been no loser by it at last, nor have gone this warfare on his own charges. God would no doubt have made it up to him, so that he should have no need of spoil. And therefore,
(3.)He shows him how inexcusable he was in aiming to make a profit of this expedition, and to enrich himself by it (Sa1 15:19): "Wherefore then didst thou fly upon the spoil, and convert that to thy own use which was to have been destroyed for God's honour?" See what evil the love of money is the root of; but see what is the sinfulness of sin, and that in it which above any thing else makes it evil in the sight of the Lord. It is disobedience: Thou didst not obey the voice of the Lord.
5.Saul repeats his vindication of himself, as that which, in defiance of conviction, he resolved to abide by, Sa1 15:20, Sa1 15:21. He denies the charge (Sa1 15:20): "Yea, I have obeyed, I have done all I should do;" for he had done all which he thought he needed to do, so much wiser was he in his own eyes than God himself. God bade him kill all, and yet he puts in among the instances of his obedience that he brought Agag alive, which he thought was as good as if he had killed him. Thus carnal deceitful hearts think to excuse themselves from God's commandments with their own equivalents. He insists upon it that he has utterly destroyed the Amalekites themselves, which was the main thing intended; but, as to the spoil, he owns it should have been utterly destroyed; so that he knew his Lord's will, and was under no mistake about the command. But he thought that would be wilful waste; the cattle of the Midianites was taken for a prey in Moses's time (Num 31:32, etc.), and why not the cattle of the Amalekites now? Better it should be prey to the Israelites than to the fowls of the air and the wild beasts; and therefore he connived at the people's carrying it away. But it was their doing and not his; and, besides, it was for sacrifice to the Lord here at Gilgal, whither they were now bringing them. See what a hard thing it is to convince the children of disobedience of their sin and to strip them of their fig-leaves.
6.Samuel gives a full answer to his apology, since he did insist upon it, Sa1 15:22, Sa1 15:23. He appeals to his own conscience: Has the Lord as great delight in sacrifices as in obedience? Though Saul was not a man of any great acquaintance with religion, yet he could not but know this,
(1.)That nothing is so pleasing to God as obedience, no, not sacrifice and offering, and the fat of rams. See here what we should seek and aim at in all the exercises of religion, even acceptance with God, that he may delight in what we do. If God be well pleased with us and our services, we are happy, we have gained our point, but otherwise to what purpose is it? Isa 1:11. Now here we are plainly told that humble, sincere, and conscientious obedience to the will of God, is more pleasing and acceptable to him than all burnt-offerings and sacrifices. A careful conformity to moral precepts recommends us to God more than all ceremonial observances, Mic 6:6-8; Hos 6:6. Obedience is enjoyed by the eternal law of nature, but sacrifice only by a positive law. Obedience was the law of innocency, but sacrifice supposes sin come into the world, and is but a feeble attempt to take that away which obedience would have prevented. God is more glorified and self more denied by obedience than by sacrifice. It is much easier to bring a bullock or lamb to be burnt upon the altar than to bring every high thought into obedience to God and the will subject to his will. Obedience is the glory of angels (Psa 103:20), and it will be ours.
(2.)That nothing is so provoking to God as disobedience, setting up our wills in competition with his. This is here called rebellion and stubbornness, and is said to be as bad as witchcraft and idolatry, Sa1 15:23. It is as bad to set up other gods as to live in disobedience to the true God. Those that are governed by their own corrupt inclinations, in opposition to the command of God, do, in effect, consult the teraphim (as the word here is for idolatry) or the diviners. It was disobedience that made us all sinners (Rom 5:19), and this is the malignity of sin, that it is the transgression of the law, and consequently it is enmity to God, Rom 8:7. Saul was a king, but if he disobey the command of God, his royal dignity and power will not excuse him from the guilt of rebellion and stubbornness. It is not the rebellion of the people against their prince, but of a prince against God, that this text speaks of.
7.He reads his doom: in short, "Because thou has rejected the word of the Lord, hast despised it (so the Chaldee), hast made nothing of it (so the Septuagint), hast cast off the government of it, therefore he has rejected thee, despised and made nothing of thee, but cast thee off from being king. He that made thee king has determined to unmake thee again." Those are unfit and unworthy to rule over men who are not willing that God should rule over them.
Historical interpretation
Historical Reception
2 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
And when Saul was charged with negligence and a breach of the law, he did not benefit his cause by alleging his conduct on other matters. For a defense on one count will not operate to obtain an acquittal on another count. But if all things should be done according to law and justice, one must defend himself in those particulars wherein he is accused and must either disprove the past or else confess it with the promise that he will desist and do so no more. But if he is guilty of the crime and will not confess, but in order to conceal the truth speaks on other points instead of the one in question, he shows plainly that he has acted amiss and is conscious of his delinquency.
Finally, because he never had this eye of discretion, he who by God’s judgment first deserved to rule over the people of Israel was cast out of his kingdom like something dark out of a healthy body. Having been deceived by the darkness and error of this light, he decided that his own sacrifices were more acceptable to God than obedience to Samuel’s command, and in the very act by which he had hoped that he would propitiate the divine majesty he committed sin instead.
Continue studying 1 Samuel 15:21 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
1 Samuel 15:21 encapsulates a critical moment in King Saul's reign, exposing his and the people's profound failure to render complete obedience to God's explicit command concerning the Amalekites. This verse reveals their attempt to rationalize disobedience by presenting forbidden spoil as an offering for sacrifice, thereby highlighting a fundamental flaw in Saul's leadership and setting the stage for his divine rejection as king.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is deeply embedded within the narrative of God's absolute command to Saul concerning the Amalekites. Preceding it, God, through the prophet Samuel, had issued a clear and non-negotiable decree to Saul to "utterly destroy" (Hebrew: ḥerem) the Amalekites—men, women, children, and all their livestock—as a divine judgment for their historical hostility towards Israel, as detailed in 1 Samuel 15:1-3. While Saul initially gathered his army and achieved victory, he deliberately spared King Agag and "the best of the sheep and of the oxen, the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was good" (1 Samuel 15:9). Verse 21, spoken by Saul to Samuel, serves as Saul's attempt to justify this partial obedience, claiming the people took the spoil "to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God." This immediately precedes Samuel's powerful rebuke of Saul, culminating in the famous declaration that "to obey is better than sacrifice" (1 Samuel 15:22).
Historical & Cultural Context
The Amalekites were a long-standing, persistent, and particularly malicious enemy of Israel, having attacked them unprovoked shortly after the Exodus, striking the weak and vulnerable at the rear (Exodus 17:8-16). God had sworn to utterly blot out their memory (Deuteronomy 25:17-19). The command for ḥerem (utter destruction or devotion to God) was a specific form of holy war, where certain enemies and their possessions were consecrated to God through complete annihilation, preventing Israel from profiting from the spoils and acknowledging God's absolute sovereignty and judgment. This was not an act of human cruelty but a divine decree. The location, Gilgal, was highly significant, serving as Israel's first encampment after crossing the Jordan, where they renewed their covenant with God and observed the Passover (Joshua 5:9-10). This historical context adds a layer of profound irony, as a site of covenant faithfulness becomes the scene of flagrant disobedience.
Key Themes
The central theme highlighted by this verse is the stark contrast between partial obedience and complete obedience. Saul's actions demonstrate that selective adherence to God's commands is, in God's eyes, outright disobedience. This incident also powerfully illustrates the human tendency towards rationalization and self-deception, where sin is justified under the guise of piety or good intentions. Saul and the people claimed a religious motive ("to sacrifice unto the LORD"), yet their actions directly violated God's explicit instructions. Furthermore, this passage sets the stage for the profound theological truth that God prioritizes obedience over ritual sacrifice, a principle articulated by Samuel in the subsequent verses and echoed throughout the prophetic tradition, such as in Hosea 6:6. Finally, the verse underscores the serious consequences of disobedience, as Saul's failure here directly leads to his rejection as king by God (1 Samuel 15:23).
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This term refers to the plunder, booty, or captured goods taken in war. In the context of ḥerem (utter destruction), any shâlâl was forbidden to be taken for personal gain or even religious use by the Israelites. The fact that the people "took of the spoil" indicates a direct violation of the divine command, as this booty was specifically designated for destruction.
This is a crucial theological term denoting something consecrated to God, often for destruction. It implies a complete separation from common use and a dedication to God, typically through total annihilation. For the Amalekites, this meant their very existence and possessions were under divine judgment and were not to be plundered or repurposed by Israel. The phrase emphasizes the absolute and non-negotiable nature of God's command.
A general term for slaughtering an animal, typically in the context of an offering or sacrifice to God. Here, it is presented as the reason for keeping the spoil, an attempt to cloak an act of disobedience in religious piety. This highlights the human tendency to use religious acts to justify or cover up sin, believing that a good intention can sanctify a disobedient act.
Verse Breakdown
"But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen"
This clause immediately highlights the active participation of the general populace, not just King Saul, in the act of disobedience. It specifies the nature of the forbidden plunder—livestock—which was explicitly included in the ḥerem command. This detail underscores the widespread nature of the transgression and indicates a collective failure to uphold God's decree.
"the chief of the things which should have been utterly destroyed"
This phrase emphasizes the deliberate and selective nature of their disobedience. They did not merely take some spoil, but specifically "the chief" or the best of the livestock. This demonstrates a clear disregard for the absolute nature of the ḥerem command, which demanded the destruction of all things, especially the most valuable. The repetition of "utterly destroyed" serves as a stark reminder of the violated divine decree, underscoring the severity of their rebellion.
"to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God in Gilgal"
This final clause reveals the stated, yet ultimately false, motivation behind their actions. They claimed a pious intention—to offer sacrifices to God. However, this purported act of worship was founded on an act of direct disobedience, exposing a profound misunderstanding or deliberate manipulation of God's will. The mention of "Gilgal" is deeply ironic, as this was a significant site of covenant renewal and faithful worship for Israel, now becoming the scene of their covenant breaking. The possessive "thy God" (spoken by Saul to Samuel, referring to God) subtly hints at a distancing from God, as if God is Samuel's God, or a God to be appeased, rather than the God to be wholly obeyed.
Literary Devices
The verse employs several powerful literary devices. Irony is profoundly prominent, particularly with the mention of "Gilgal," a sacred site of covenant renewal and faithfulness, becoming the intended location for a sacrifice born of disobedience. The very act of taking "the chief of the things" for "sacrifice unto the LORD" is also deeply ironic, as it perverts an act of worship into an act of rebellion, attempting to sanctify what God had explicitly cursed. The passage also utilizes contrast, setting the divine command for "utter destruction" against the human action of taking "the chief of the things." This sharp juxtaposition highlights the chasm between God's absolute will and Saul's compromised obedience. Furthermore, the verse acts as foreshadowing, hinting at the severe consequences that will befall Saul due to his failure, ultimately leading to his rejection as king and the transfer of the kingdom to another.
Theological and Thematic Connections
The incident in 1 Samuel 15:21 serves as a profound theological statement on the nature of obedience and worship. It unequivocally declares that God values wholehearted obedience above ritualistic performance or outward displays of piety. The attempt to justify disobedience with a religious act reveals a dangerous human tendency to rationalize sin, believing that good intentions or religious activities can compensate for a lack of complete submission to God's revealed will. This passage underscores God's holiness and His demand for absolute loyalty, demonstrating that a compromised or selective obedience is, in His eyes, no obedience at all. It challenges believers to examine their own hearts for areas where they might be substituting religious activity for genuine, humble submission to God's every command.
Reflection and Application
1 Samuel 15:21 offers a timeless and sobering lesson for believers today. It compels us to critically examine our own lives, asking whether we are truly committed to wholehearted obedience to God, or if we, like Saul, are prone to partial obedience, rationalizing our shortcomings with seemingly good intentions or religious justifications. This verse reminds us that God desires a heart fully surrendered to His will, not merely outward religious performance. True worship flows from a place of humble submission, not from an attempt to manipulate or appease God with actions that contradict His explicit commands. We must be vigilant against the subtle temptation to prioritize our own desires, comfort, or perceived wisdom over the clear directives of Scripture. Our actions have consequences, and a pattern of selective obedience can lead to spiritual distance and a loss of God's blessing and favor in our lives, hindering our walk with Him and our effectiveness in His kingdom.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why was the command to utterly destroy the Amalekites so severe?
The command for ḥerem (utter destruction) against the Amalekites was not a random act of cruelty but a specific divine judgment rooted in their persistent and egregious hostility towards Israel. The Amalekites were the first nation to attack the Israelites after their Exodus from Egypt, striking the weary and vulnerable stragglers (Exodus 17:8-16). This unprovoked attack demonstrated a profound contempt for God and His people, and God swore to blot out their memory (Deuteronomy 25:17-19). The ḥerem command ensured that Israel would not profit from the spoils of a divinely condemned nation, preventing defilement and acknowledging God's absolute sovereignty over both judgment and victory. It was a unique, specific judgment on a uniquely wicked and persistent enemy of God's redemptive plan, serving as a solemn example of divine justice.
What is the significance of Gilgal in this narrative?
Gilgal held immense historical and spiritual significance for Israel. It was the first place they encamped after miraculously crossing the Jordan River into the Promised Land (Joshua 4:19). At Gilgal, the new generation of Israelite males was circumcised, the reproach of Egypt was rolled away, and they celebrated the first Passover in the land (Joshua 5:2-10). It was a place of covenant renewal, fresh beginnings, and faithful worship. For Saul to choose Gilgal as the site for a sacrifice born of disobedience underscores the profound irony and tragedy of his actions. It highlights how a place of covenant faithfulness became the setting for a blatant act of covenant breaking, emphasizing the depth of Saul's spiritual failure and his disregard for the very foundations of Israel's relationship with God.
Did the people truly believe they were doing right by sacrificing the spoil?
It's likely a complex mix of motivations. Saul's initial justification to Samuel was that the people "spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God" (1 Samuel 15:15). This suggests an attempt to cloak their covetousness or fear of Saul (who may have wanted to preserve the best for himself or a triumphal procession) in religious piety. While some among the people might have genuinely believed they were performing a good act by offering sacrifices, the fact that they took what God had explicitly commanded to be "utterly destroyed" indicates a fundamental misunderstanding or deliberate disregard of God's will. Samuel's subsequent rebuke ("to obey is better than sacrifice") clarifies that God saw through this facade, recognizing that their actions stemmed from disobedience, not true devotion. Their belief, if genuine, was misguided, prioritizing ritual over the clear command of God.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
The narrative of Saul's partial obedience in 1 Samuel 15:21, and his subsequent rejection, powerfully foreshadows the perfect obedience of Jesus Christ. Saul's failure to utterly destroy the spoil, driven by self-interest and a desire to appear pious, stands in stark contrast to the Son of God, who came not to do His own will, but the will of the Father who sent Him (John 6:38). Unlike Saul, who sought to offer a compromised sacrifice, Jesus is the ultimate and perfect sacrifice, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, offered in complete and unwavering obedience. His life was marked by radical submission, even to the point of death on a cross (Philippians 2:8). Where Saul failed to execute divine judgment completely, Christ perfectly fulfilled God's righteous judgment, bearing the ḥerem of sin upon Himself so that we might be set free from its curse (Galatians 3:13). His "food" was to do the will of Him who sent Him and to finish His work (John 4:34), establishing a kingdom built not on human spoils or partial obedience, but on the flawless righteousness achieved through His perfect submission (Romans 5:19).