Translation & Sermon by Nate Wilson for Christ The Redeemer Church, Manhattan, KS, 11 April 2021
17
So Samuel said, “Is
it not so that you were the head of the tribes of Israel when you
were small in your eyes? So Yahweh anointed you to reign over
Israel. 18 Then
Yahweh commissioned
you along the way and said to you, ‘Now devote to destruction
the sinners, the Amalekites,
and fight them until they are no more.’ 19
So
why didn’t you, Sir, give heed to the voice of Yahweh but
instead you swooped toward the booty and did evil in the eyes of
Yahweh?”
20 Then Saul said to Samuel, “What? I did
heed the voice of Yahweh! Indeed, I went in the way that Yahweh sent
me, and I brought Agag, King of Amalek and I devoted the Amalekites
to destruction! 21 The
people, however, took the first things from the booty of sheep and
oxen devoted to destruction in order to sacrifice to Yahweh your God
in Gilgal.”
22 Then Samuel said, “Is there
pleasure for Yahweh in whole-burnt-offerings and sacrifices, like
there is [in] your giving heed to the voice of Yahweh? Look, to give
heed is better than sacrifice; to be attentive [is better] than the
fat of rams! 23 For the sin of witchcraft is rebellion, and iniquity
and idols is pressure-to-compromise. Because you have rejected the
word of Yahweh, {Yahweh} has also rejected you from being king."
24
Then Saul said to Samuel, “I have sinned, for I overreached
Yahweh’s limit - and your words - in that I was afraid of the
people and gave heed to their voice.25 But now, please take away my
sin and come back with me so I can worship before Yahweh.”
26
Then Samuel said to Saul, “I will not go back with you,
because you have rejected the word of Yahweh, and Yahweh has
rejected you from being king over Israel.”
27 As Samuel
turned to go, Saul got a strong grip on a flap of his tunic, and it
ripped.
28 Then Samuel said to him, “Yahweh has ripped
the kingship of Israel from your {hand} and has given it to your
neighbor who is better than you, 29 (and, what’s more, Israel
shall be divided in two); He will not turn back and He will not
switch tactics, for He is not a man to switch tactics.”
30
Then {Saul} said, “I have sinned, {but} please honor me in
front of the elders of my people, and in front of Israel and come
back with me while I worship before your God.”
31 So
Samuel went back after Saul while {he} worshiped before Yahweh.
32
Then Samuel said, “Present to me Agag, King of Amalek.”
So Agag came to him trembling, but Agag said, “Surely
the bitterness of death has turned away.”
33 But Samuel
said, “As when women were bereaved by your sword, so your
mother will be bereaved among women.”
And Samuel
beheaded Agag before the face of Yahweh in Gilgal.
34 Then
Samuel went to Ramah, and Saul went up to his house at Gibeah {}. 35
And Samuel did not take it upon himself to see Saul until the day of
his death; Samuel did, however, mourn concerning Saul. And Yahweh
switched tactics since he had caused Saul to reign over Israel.
We return to the story where we left off last time, after King Saul’s military campaign against the Amalekites to the South, in which he left some Amalekites alive, including their king as well as much of their cattle, despite God’s command to kill them all. Samuel, the old judge of Israel, has inspected the evidence of Saul’s disobedience toward God and called Saul to account for it. Now, in v.23, Saul, the guilty party, confesses: “I have sinned, for I overreached Yahweh’s limit - and your words - in that I was afraid of the people and gave heed to their voice.” (NAW)
Now, a proper confession should include:
remorse over sin (“I’m sorry”),
admission of fault (“I was wrong”),
repentance (“I won’t do that again”),
request to be restored relationally (“Please forgive me”),
and an offer of restitution (“What can I do to make it right?”),
Notice, however, that Saul’s confession contains only an admission of guilt for having broken a rule, and even so, he shifts most of the blame onto his followers.
Saul doesn’t see it as a big deal to offend God. He expresses no remorse and makes no resolve to change his ways.
The facts that Saul went on to consult a witch, and to murder the priests of God, and to try to kill David (and other innocent parties) unjustly, and to keep idols in his house and support adultery (and other sins), bear out that Saul was not on a trajectory to really get right with God.
Puritan commentator Andrew Willet commented that Saul’s delay in confession, taken together with his minimizing and blame-shifting prove that, “He confesse[d] his sin rather for fear [of] loos[ing] the kingdom, then for grief that he had offended God.”
A hundred years later Matthew Henry agreed, calling it “thin shows of repentance… Saul is at length brought to put himself into the dress of the penitent; but it is too evident that he only acts the part of a penitent, and is not one indeed.” John Gill about a hundred years later called it a “pretended confession” and “hypocritical.” A hundred more years later, Keil & Delitzsch wrote, “the consciousness of his guilt did not go very deep.” Another hundred years later, David Tsumura noted in the New International Commentary on the Old Testament that, “a person who has lost contact with the word of God [will] not be able to perceive his own condition before God… Instead of being stricken with the awfulness of his sin… Saul is concerned with his relationship with the people… [but, as it says in Proverbs 29:25,] ‘The fear of [man] lays a snare; [only] the one who trusts in the Lord is secure.’”
Saul is oriented around man, not God. Note that in verse 30, Saul calls the people “my people,” as though they belong to him instead of to God, as though he sees God as butting in on his authority over the people.
I have seen that king of thing in myself. When in rebellion and confronted with the possibility of getting caught, I'm suddenly very interested in smoothing it out with God superficially and protecting my little kingdom. This isn't true repentance. It is self-preservation. It is simply wanting to have the "pleasures" of sin without catching the bad consequences. May we instead pursue TRUE repentance, where we accept God’s authority over us and repent and never turn back to that sin again.
Compare Saul’s confession to the famous confession of David later on in Psalm 511:
“Have mercy on me, O God… blot out my transgressions… cleanse me from my sin… Purify me… create in me a clean heart… Do not cast me away… deliver me from guilt.” There’s repeated begging to be restored relationally.
And there’s remorse over sin: “I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me… I have a broken spirit and a contrite heart.”
There’s admission of fault: “Against You, you only I have sinned and done what it evil in Your sight.”
There’s a resolution against repeating the sin: “I will be clean… a steadfast spirit within me… sustain me with a willing spirit,”
And there is appropriate restitution: “I’ll offer the kind of sacrifice you want… I will teach transgressors Your ways and convert sinners to you… My mouth will declare your praise.”
What ways do you take sin too lightly and fail to fully confess it and make it right?
It is with this mindset that Saul then asks Samuel to fulfill the role of priest and patch things up with God for him like a good boy: v.25 “And now, please take away my sin and come back [to the altar] with me so I can worship before Yahweh.”
Now do you see why Samuel declined that request? “No, I’m not going to support your delusion that your rebellion against God is no big deal. I don’t think your heart is right with God, so I’m not going to offer sacrifices for you and pretend that everything’s o.k.!”
(It was only later when Saul asked Samuel to just be there in courtly fashion and not as a priest – to pay respects rather than to ask forgiveness, that Samuel agrees to stay through the worship service with Saul. Many Bible commentators2 add that Samuel probably agreed to stay on in order to personally see out justice on Agag.)
There are times when, as God’s messengers, you and I also need to firmly decline to act like rebellious sinners are o.k. with God when they pressure us to affirm their delusions.
Saul tried to grab Samuel’s tunic and force him to comply – a godless person who can’t rely on God to make things come out for good will use human force to try to get it.
Several years ago, I had a meeting with the Muslim Student Union president at our university as part of planning a evangelistic event. At one point in the conversation he said, “Well, when it all comes down to it, all religions are basically the same, right?” I knew if I said Yes, I’d make him happy, and I’d get the approvals I wanted for this evangelistic event, but I could not give him the answer he wanted in good conscience. I disagreed with him, and the event planning kinda fell apart.
Others of us have been pressured to affirm the lifestyle of friends who are practicing homosexuality or other kinds of adultery. People who have rejected God and who find their authority instead from human opinions put a super high value on getting you to affirm them, and you know if you disagree with them, they will get angry and lash out at you. But as ambassadors for Christ, we must uphold the standard of purity and fidelity that Christ modeled and taught.
Note, however, that Samuel did not dish out any insults. He stayed respectful and matter-of-fact with King Saul. He didn’t call Saul a dummy or an idiot. He just coolly said what God had told him, “...you have rejected the word of Yahweh, and Yahweh has rejected you… Yahweh has torn the kingdom from your hand and has given it to your neighbor...” It’s important that we pay proper respect to all persons (as we are commanded in 1 Peter 2:17) and not fall into the same patterns of insolent speech that the enemies of God use.
By the way, who is that “neighbor” to whom the kingship would be given? It’s David, as we’ll see in the next chapter. And, ironically, in chapter 24, we’ll see David rip off the same “flap” of Saul’s “tunic” that Saul ripped off of Samuel’s!
Samuel then adds an interesting theological discourse in v.29, but this is made more interesting by the fact that there are two different versions of it.
The oldest-known manuscripts - that is, the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls with partial support from the Vulgate - read, “Israel shall be divided in two; [Yahweh] will not turn back or be made sorry...”
But the Hebrew texts from around the time of the early renaissance read, “the Glory/Strength of Israel will not lie or change,” and most English versions go with that reading3. This would make it more clearly a quote of Baalam’s prophecy in Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man, that He should lie4, Nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?”
Both variants of this verse check out with the rest of Scripture. Israel did indeed split into two kingdoms, and God indeed does not lie. Both readings have been popular with believers for a thousand years, so I’m just going to accept both. This is not a contradiction, it is just two accurate statements.
But what about the part of verse 29 that says that God “does NOT repent/change his mind/have regrets like a man” when in verses 11 and 35 it says that God DID “regret/repent/change his mind that he had made Saul king”? They all use the same Hebrew verb Nacham in the Niphal stem, so there’s no getting around it:
“Yahweh said to Samuel [in v.11], ‘I have nacham’ed that I caused Saul to reign as king’
then Samuel said [in v.29], ‘Yahweh... does not nacham for He is not a man to nacham...’
[and then v.35] Yahweh nacham’ed that he caused Saul to reign over Israel.”
This certainly looks like a contradiction. The only explanations that I can offer without violating the basic logical law of non-contradiction are:
God said something contradictory and therefore at least one of the things God said is not true, making Him untrustworthy.
Samuel was dishonest and falsely reported God as making contradictory statements, making Samuel and the Bible untrustworthy.
Or the word nacham has more than one meaning such that it can be true for God to nacham in one sense but not nacham in another sense, both at the same time without there being a contradiction.
As for the first possible explanation, there are many scriptures, in addition to 1 Samuel 15:29 and Numbers 23:19, which state emphatically that God does NOT change or change His mind:
Psalm 102:26-28 “Even they will perish, but You endure; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing you will change them, and they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will not come to an end.”
Malachi 3:6 “I, Jehovah, change not; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.”
Hebrews 13:8 “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever”
James 1:17 “…the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow” (cf. Rom 1:23)
As for the second possibility, God’s word is self-consistent in its claim that all of it is “inspired” by God (2 Ti. 3:16) and that it is all “true” (2 Sa. 7:28; Rom. 3:4; Rev. 21:5; 22:6).
Therefore, I believe that the solution to this logical puzzle is the third one, that the word nacham has different meanings in different contexts.
Indeed, the phrase about God not nacham’ing is qualified - as not doing it “like men” do it5.
To quote again from the NICOT commentary, “God’s ‘repentance’ is… never comparable with the untruthfulness or occasional shortcomings of men.” When God nacham’ed, “the word… functions emotively, expressing God’s inner feeling,” but God not nacham’ing “is paired with the term ‘to [turn]deceive’ and is used relationally… the main point [being] that God will not reverse [t]his decision…”
In Jonah chapter 3, there is a similar situation where God tells the prophet to announce that Nineveh will be overthrown, and then the Ninevites repent, so God nacham’ed and didn’t overthrow the city after all: "The second time, the word of Yahweh to Jonah... said, 'Get up; go to Nineveh, the great city, and announce to her the proclamation which I say to you.' So Jonah got up, and he went to Nineveh... Then Jonah began to go into the city a walk of one day, and he called out and said continuously, 'Fourty days and Nineveh is overturned.' Well, the men of Nineveh believed God... And the word impacted the king of Nineveh, so he got up from his throne and had his robe taken off of him and put on sack-cloth, and he sat upon the ashes. Then he called a council and declared in Nineveh, from the decision of the king and his great men to say, 'The human and the animal, the herd and the flock should not taste anything. They should not eat; they should not even drink water. And with sack-cloths, the human and the animal should clothe themselves, and they should cry out to God with all their might, and each man should turn away from his evil way and from the violence which is in their hands...' Well, God saw their behavior, that they had turned away from their evil way. And God switched tactics over the evil which He had promised to do to them, so He did not do it." (NAW)
In both cases, the responses made by the people who heard the message of God, resulted in God nacham’ing; Nineveh’s repentant response to the prophecy of doom from Jonah resulted in God not punishing Nineveh, but Saul’s rebellious responses to the messages from Samuel resulted in God ending His blessings upon Saul.
We see similarities between that and evangelism:
"[T]hrough one man [Adam] sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned... the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation..." (Romans 5:12&16, NKJV)
But “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” (1 Tim. 1:15, NKJV), so Jesus said to His followers, “Go into all the world and preach [this good news] to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” (Mar 16:15-16, NKJV)
There is a contingency to God’s promises, just as there was with the covenants He made with Israel in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, which carried blessings for obedient responsiveness to God and curses for rebellion against God. Such contingencies were still part of God’s dealings even when they were not stated explicitly. So God’s demotion of Saul is not a contradiction of His promises; God is actually honoring His covenant with Saul.
We don’t have time today to get into the theology of how a sovereign God who made plans from before the creation of the world (Eph. 1:4, 3:11) can yet make those plans in such a way that humans – thousands of years after God’s plan was laid – nevertheless receive consequences appropriate to their real-time decision and actions. But let me make a few definitive statements about what God nacham’ing cannot mean:
It does not mean that God’s ultimate plan changes. You’re not going to reach the pearly gates one day and hear, “Oh, I’ve decided to let followers of Buddha in instead of followers of Jesus. Sorry!”
It does not mean that morality and truth change.
Furthermore, God does not change His plans in response to what humans do. Whatever His nacham’ing means, it does not mean that He’s up in heaven, wringing His hands, saying, “Oh no! I was going to save Bobby, but look what he’s gone and done. That makes me so frustrated. Now I’m going to have to condemn him instead.”
And fourthly, it does not mean that God’s decree of death and hell as the punishment for sin is at cross-purposes with His merciful plan of salvation. The popular opinion that the God of the Old Testament was a God of judgment and wrath and the God of the New Testament is a God of love and mercy, and that somewhere in the intertestamental period He underwent a personality change, is a gross fallacy of generalization which ignores the tender mercies of God throughout the Old Testament in the lives of the patriarchs and in David’s Psalms and the pleadings of the prophets, and it ignores the prophecies – and outbreaks of – God’s judgment and wrath mentioned in almost every book of the New Testament (especially Revelation!).
I submit to you that a God who exercises just punishments and gracious mercies simultaneously throughout history is a God who is not changing but is remaining consistent. He is carrying out His plan made from the foundation of the world. It is just our limited human perspective that sometimes see Him bringing judgment and sometimes sees Him bringing mercy. I believe that nacham is the word for these tactical switches which we observe in God’s providence.
It would be like if you were to rent a sailboat with an experienced captain, and he told you at the beginning of the voyage that he was going from point A to point B against a headwind. Now, if you’ve ever had to tach against a headwind in a sailboat, you know that you don’t go straight from point A to point B, you go left of point B for a time, then you go right of point B for a time, and you hold your sail about 45 degrees away from the direction of the wind in order to move forward instead of backward. But to the people on the boat who are not familiar with sailing, all they know is that one minute the captain has them leaning over one edge of the boat while they sail in the wrong direction to point C, then duck under the boom and lean over the other edge of the boat while they sail to yet another point D, back and forth, back and forth; it’s like the captain can’t decide which way he wants to go, so they ignorantly decide he’s incompetent. But if you want to sail against the wind, that’s just the way it’s done. Now, you can find faults with this analogy, of course, because God can do more than one thing at the same time - and He isn’t limited by the weather, but I think it gives some perspective nonetheless.
As I have surveyed how this word nacham was used throughout the Old Testament, I’ve noticed an interesting pattern: Nacham is not so much about a change of mind as it is about restoring someone to a state of blessing - or removing them from a state of divine favor. To continue the sailing metaphor, it is when the captain changes tach in order to achieve his ultimate destination.
God had certain lessons He wanted to teach His people through Saul, but all the time, God had the plan to install the dynasty of David over Israel. God had no intention for Jesus to be born of a descendant of Saul. Saul was just a transition between the Judges and the Davidic kings. For the people of Israel on the ground, however, it felt like God was going one way with Saul, then going a different way with David, but from God’s perspective, the purposes God had for the Saul stage were accomplished, so God moved the sheets across the boat to catch the wind from the other side, carrying His people in the direction He had planned all along.
God’s Immutability (the fact that He does not mutate/change) follows from His other attributes:
The Perfect Holy One has no regrets - no sin to repent of,
There is nothing for the omniscient to learn, b/c He knows everything already!
No change of location for the omnipresent, b/c He is everywhere already!
God is always hating sin, always bringing justice, always turning evil to good and always showing redemptive mercy in a billion places on the earth simultaneously at any given point in time. If He is always doing these things, He is not changing when He does them. It is part of God’s eternal, unchanging nature to want to be asked to withhold judgment.
In 1 Samuel, God wanted His people to see that Saul was under God’s authority and that God should be respected as God, and that He would not tolerate unrepentant rebellion, and that not even a King could manipulate Him through blameshifting and gaslighting and control tactics and outward appearances into overlooking sin and showing mercy. So God tells Saul, “You’re not going to manipulate me into switching tactics to mercy like you manipulate other men.”
Do you understand that this is part of the Gospel? You can’t manipulate God into overlooking your faults through outward religious appearances or minimizing and blameshifting. God will never change His attitude of condemnation toward you unless/untill you acknowledge that God has the right to decide what is right and what is wrong and how to fix it, and that God has the right to control your life and tell you what to do and not to do, and that Jesus alone can make you right with Him.
Now can you see how this act of judgment on Saul glorified God? Saul dared to treat God like an equal that he could give-and-take and barter with and lead on his own terms, and God refused to accept such diminutive treatment.
It glorifies God when disobedience to Him is considered a big deal not to be lightly brushed over. He is truly great if He isn’t to be trifled with.
It glorifies God when we see that not even a king can manipulate God. God is on the side of truth and consistency and justice; and no man can influence Him to compromise; that’s the glory of God!
It glorifies God when we see that His grand design has never changed, no matter how many different tactics we see Him employ. In a constantly-changing world, it is sure glorious to know that, rather than being surprised by all these changes, our God actually initiated all the changes we see!
And it glorifies God when we see that believers like David – and even Ninevites – who humble themselves before God and genuinely repent of their sin and become His followers are graciously blessed. A God who can both justly condemn to hell and lovingly extend eternal life in heaven is far more glorious than a god who can only do one but not the other.
Let me now comment, more briefly, on the other person in this chapter upon whom God executed justice for His glory - someone who, like Saul, hoped to get off easy. His name was Agag, the king of the Amalekites whom Saul had captured.
In v.32, Samuel calls for Agag to be presented to him, and the account says that Agag came מַעֲדַנֹּת [ma’adannot]. It’s a rare word in Hebrew, and there are three schools of thought among good Bible scholars as to its meaning:
The most ancient school of thought took the root to be the first three letters of the word מעד (“tremble”), that is the interpretation of the Aramaic Targums, the Greek Septuagint, and the Latin Vulgate. Modern English translations which carry on this interpretation are the NET Bible (“trembling”) and perhaps the NKJV, which rendered it as “cautiously.”6 The notes in the NET Bible say their translation “understands Agag to approach – not confidently but – in the stark realization that his death is imminent (‘Surely death is bitter!’).”
The second school of thought (including Aquila, Symmachus, Matthew Henry, and Driver) took the root to be the second, third, and fourth letters עדן meaning “soft/luxurious,” as it is in Psalm 29:17, thus the King James translated it as “delicately,” in the early 1600’s (which the Puritan Andrew Willett explained in his commentary as “apparelled and adorned as a king”7), and 21st century English versions like the NASB and ESV translated it as “cheerfully” (which the great 19th century commentators Keil & Delitzsch8 explained as “[in a] contented and joyous state of mind… because he thought that his life was to be granted to him”).
The third school of thought on this word follows the great medieval Hebrew scholar David Kimchi, and is supported by the two main modern Hebrew lexicons by Brown Driver and Briggs and by William Holliday. They explain that the last two letters of the root underwent a transposition (as they did in Job 38:31), so the root is actually – not anad but – עָנַד, which means "to bind around” (cf. Prov. 6:21) – thus the NIV and the American Jewish Version “in chains9.” In favor of this third interpretation, the ending of this Hebrew word is feminine plural, which matches the feminine plural noun “bonds” rather than the singular masculine man “trembling” or going “cheerfully.10”
But whether Agag was afraid of God’s justice (as he well should have been) - but not humble enough to beg God’s forgiveness and repent, or whether he glibly underestimated God’s justice, the Glory of God was demonstrated by the swift judgment brought by Samuel’s hand.
The authority for this act of justice was clearly in place.
God had promised through Moses in Exodus 17:14ff to punish the Amalakites for killing the weak and helpless Hebrews who were escaping from slavery in Egypt,
and then God had told Samuel and Saul that now was the time to fulfill that prophecy and wipe out the Amalekite tribe.
When Saul failed to obey this command from God, there was no question in Samuel’s mind as to what to do, so he did the right thing in the presence of the LORD. When God has made it clear what should be done, there should be no delaying obedience.
It’s interesting that Samuel states the justice of his action, not in terms of the Mosaic law, but in terms of the lex talionis of the covenant in Gen. 9:6 which had been made with Agag’s own distant ancestor Shem, “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed,” You murdered people with your sword, therefore you shall be put to death. Agag had no excuse.
The method of execution is unclear because no form of this word שסף appears anywhere else in the Hebrew Bible. The next-most similar word שסע, in its noun form, is only used of the cloven hooves of animals (Lev. 11:3,7,26; Deut. 14:6), so I suspect that שסף is not speaking of hacking into many pieces but rather of one (or two) clean cuts, which I’d expect to be most likely a beheading, but that is speculation on my part11.
The fact that Samuel, the old Judge of Israel, carried out this judicial act of civil government instead of Saul, was symbolic of Saul’s kingship being taken from him.
This civil duty of magistrates in putting to death murderers (and other criminals to whom like justice is due) is affirmed in the New Testament book of Romans chapter 13 verse 4 “[the ruler] does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.” (NKJV)
It glorifies God, not only to save individuals from eternal death but also to punish wicked persons for evil.
“[E]ven kings must account to the King of kings for the [innocent] blood they shed or cause to be shed...” ~M. Henry
Judgment shows to all the world how holy God is and how asinine rebellion against His majesty is.
And judgment also shows the riches of His glory to us, as it says in Rom. 9:22-23 “...God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and... [made] known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory...” (NKJV)
Jesus told us that His glory would be revealed in the future on that great judgment day when “[T]he Son of Man shall come in His glory and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit upon His throne of glory and all the nations will be gathered before Him, and He separates them from one another, just like a shepherd separates his sheep from his goats, and He will stand the sheep off to His right and the goats off to the left. Then the King will say to those off to His right, ‘Come here, you who have been blessed by my father! Start inheriting the kingdom prepared for y'all from the foundation of the world…’ Then he will speak also to those off to His left, ‘You who have been cursed, continue to conduct yourselves away from me into the eternal fire prepared for the Devil and his angels…’” (Mt. 25:31-34 & 41, NAW)
God will be glorified by slamming you forever in hell with the consequences of your rebellion against Him, or by slamming Jesus on the cross with the consequences of your sin and welcoming you into His presence in heaven to experience the exhilaration of both His justice and His love forever. God’s glory is demonstrated either way; which will it be for you?
|
LXX |
Brenton |
DRB |
KJV |
NAW |
MT |
22 |
καὶ εἶπεν Σαμουηλ εἰ θελητὸν τῷ κυρίῳ ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ θυσίαι ὡς τὸ ἀκοῦσαι φωνῆς κυρίου ἰδοὺ ἀκοὴ ὑπὲρ θυσίαν ἀγαθὴ [καὶ] ἡ ἐπακρόασις ὑπὲρ στέαρ κριῶν |
And
Samuel said, Does the Lord take pleasure in whole-burnt-offerings
and sacrifices, as in hearing
the |
And Samuel said: Doth the Lord desire holocausts and victims, [and not rather] that the voice of the Lord should be obeyed? For obedience is better than sacrifice[s]: and to hearken rather than [to offer] the fat of rams. |
And Samuel said, Hath the Lord [as great] delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearkenB than the fat of rams. |
Then Samuel said, “Is there pleasure for Yahweh in whole-burnt-offerings and sacrifices, like there is [in] your giving heed to the voice of Yahweh? Look, to give heed is better than sacrifice; to be attentive [is better] than the fat of rams! |
וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁמוּאֵל, הַחֵפֶץ לַיהוָה בְּעֹלוֹת וּזְבָחִים, כִּשְׁמֹעַ, בְּקוֹל יְהוָה: הִנֵּה שְׁמֹעַ מִזֶּבַח טוֹב, לְהַקְשִׁיב מֵחֵלֶב אֵילִים. |
23 |
ὅτι ἁμαρτία οἰώνισμάC ἐστιν ὀδύνηνD καὶ πόνουςE X θεραφινF ἐπάγουσινG ὅτι ἐξουδένωσας τὸ ῥῆμα κυρίου καὶ ἐξουδενώσει σε [κύριος] μὴ εἶναι βασιλέα [ἐπὶ Ισραηλ] |
For sin is as divination; idols X bring on pain and grief. Because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, the [Lord] also shall reject thee from being king [over Israel]. |
Because it is like the sin of witchcraft, to rebel: and like the crime of idolatry, to refuse to obey. Forasmuch therefore as thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, the [Lord] hath also rejected thee from being king. |
For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornnessH is as iniquityI and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, he hath also rejected thee from being king. |
For the sin of witchcraft is rebellion, and iniquity and idols is pressure to compromise. Because you have rejected the word of Yahweh, {Yahweh} has also rejected you from being king. |
כִּי חַטַּאת-קֶסֶםJ מֶרִי, וְאָוֶן וּתְרָפִים הַפְצַרK: יַעַן, מָאַסְתָּ אֶת-דְּבַר יְהוָה, וַיִּמְאָסְךָL, מִמֶּלֶךְ. {ס} |
24 |
καὶ
εἶπεν Σαουλ
πρὸς Σαμουηλ
ἡμάρτηκα ὅτι
παρέβην τὸν |
And
Saul said to Samuel, I have sinned, in that I have transgressed
the |
And Saul said to Samuel: I have sinned because I have transgressed the commandment of the Lord, and thy words, X fearing the people, and obeying their voice. |
And Saul said unto Samuel, I have sinned: for I have transgressedM the commandment of the Lord, and thy words: because I feared the people, and obeyed their voice. |
Then Saul said to Samuel, “I have sinned, for I overreached Yahweh’s limit - and your words - in that I was afraid of the people and gave heed to their voice. |
וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל אֶל- שְׁמוּאֵל חָטָאתִי, כִּי-עָבַרְתִּי אֶת-פִּי- יְהוָה וְאֶת- דְּבָרֶיךָ: כִּי יָרֵאתִי אֶת-הָעָם, וָאֶשְׁמַע בְּקוֹלָם. |
25 |
καὶ νῦν ἆρον δὴN τὸ ἁμάρτημά μου καὶ ἀνάστρεψον μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ καὶ προσκυνήσω κυρίῳ [τῷ θεῷ σου]O |
And now remove, I pray thee, my sin, and turn back with me, and I will worship the Lord [thy God]. |
But now bear, I beseech thee, my sin, and return with me, that I may adore X the Lord. |
Now therefore, I prayP [thee], pardonQ my sin, and turn again with me, that I may worship XR the Lord. |
But now, please take away my sin and come back with me so I can worship before Yahweh.” |
וְעַתָּה, שָׂאS נָא אֶת- חַטָּאתִי; וְשׁוּב עִמִּי, וְאֶשְׁתַּחֲוֶה לַיהוָה. |
26 |
καὶ εἶπεν Σαμουηλ πρὸς Σαουλ οὐκ ἀναστρέφω μετὰ σοῦ ὅτι ἐξουδένωσαςT τὸ ῥῆμα κυρίου καὶ ἐξουδενώσειU σε κύριος τοῦ μὴ εἶναι βασιλέα ἐπὶ τὸν Ισραηλ |
And Samuel said to Saul, I will not turn back with thee, for thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord will reject thee from being king over Israel. |
And Samuel said to Saul: I will not return with thee, because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord hath rejected thee from being king over Israel. |
And Samuel said unto Saul, I will not return with thee: for thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord hath rejected thee from being king over Israel. |
Then Samuel said to Saul, “I will not go back with you, because you have rejected the word of Yahweh, and Yahweh has rejected you from being king over Israel.” |
וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁמוּאֵל אֶל- שָׁאוּל, לֹא אָשׁוּב עִמָּךְ: כִּי מָאַסְתָּה, אֶת-דְּבַר יְהוָה, וַיִּמְאָסְךָ יְהוָה, מִהְיוֹת מֶלֶךְ עַל-יִשְׂרָאֵל. {ס} |
27 |
καὶ ἀπέστρεψεν Σαμουηλ [τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ τοῦ] ἀπελθεῗν καὶ ἐκράτησεν [Σαουλ] τοῦ πτερυγίουV τῆς διπλοΐδοςW αὐτοῦ καὶ διέρρηξεν [αὐτό] |
And Samuel turned [his face] to depart, and Saul caught hold of the skirt of his garment, and tore [it]. |
And Samuel turned about to go away: but he laid hold upon the skirt of his mantle, and it rent. |
And as Samuel turned about to go away, he laid holdX upon the skirtY of his mantleZ, and it rent. |
As Samuel turned to go, Saul got a strong grip on a flap of his tunic, and it ripped. |
וַיִּסֹּב שְׁמוּאֵל, לָלֶכֶת; וַיַּחֲזֵקAA בִּכְנַף-מְעִילוֹAB, וַיִּקָּרַעAC. {ס} |
28 |
καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτὸν Σαμουηλ διέρρηξεν κύριος τὴν βασιλείαν ADΙσραηλ ἐκ [χειρός] σου σήμερον καὶ δώσει αὐτὴν τῷ πλησίονAE σου τῷ ἀγαθῷ ὑπὲρ σέ |
And Samuel said to him, The Lord has rent [thy] kingdom [from] Israel out of thy[hand] this day, and will give it to thy neighbour who is better than thou. |
And Samuel said to him: The Lord hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to thy neighbour who is better than thee. |
And Samuel said unto him, The Lord hath rentAF the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that is better than thou. |
Then Samuel said to him, “Yahweh has ripped the kingship of Israel from your {hand} and has given it to your neighbor who is better than you, |
וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו, שְׁמוּאֵל, קָרַע יְהוָה אֶת- מַמְלְכוּת יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵעָלֶיךָ, הַיּוֹםAG; וּנְתָנָהּ, לְרֵעֲךָ הַטּוֹב מִמֶּךָּ. {ס} |
29 |
Καὶ X διαιρεθήσεται Ισραηλ [εἰς δύο] καὶ οὐκ ἀποστρέψει οὐδὲ μετανοήσειAH ὅτι οὐχ [ὡς] ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν τοῦ μετανοῆσαιAI αὐτός |
And
X
Israel shall
be
divided
[to
two |
But
the triumpher |
And also the StrengthAJ of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repentAK. |
(and, what’s more, Israel shall be divided in two); He will not turn back and He will not switch tactics, for He is not a man to switch tactics.” |
וְגַם נֵצַחAL יִשְׂרָאֵל, לֹא יְשַׁקֵּרAM וְלֹא יִנָּחֵם: כִּי לֹא אָדָם הוּא, לְהִנָּחֵם. |
30 |
καὶ εἶπεν [Σαουλ] ἡμάρτηκα ἀλλὰ δόξασόνAN με δὴ ἐνώπιον πρεσβυτέρων Ισραηλ καὶ ἐνώπιον λαοῦ μου καὶ ἀνάστρεψον μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ καὶ προσκυνήσω τῷ κυρίῳ θεῷ σου |
And Saul said, I have sinned; yet honour me, I pray thee, before the elders of Israel, and before my people; and turn back with me, and I will worship X the Lord thy God. |
Then he said: I have sinned: [yet] honour me now X before the ancients of my people, and before Israel, and return with me, that I may adore X the Lord thy God. |
Then he said, I have sinned: [yet] honour me now, I pray thee, before the elders of my people, and before Israel, and turn again with me, that I may worship XAO the Lord thy God. |
Then {Saul} said, “I have sinned, {but} please honor me in front of the elders of my people, and in front of Israel and come back with me while I worship before your God.” |
וַיֹּאמֶרAP חָטָאתִי--עַתָּהAQ כַּבְּדֵנִי נָא נֶגֶד זִקְנֵי-עַמִּי, וְנֶגֶד יִשְׂרָאֵל; ARוְשׁוּב עִמִּי, וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוֵיתִי לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ. |
31 |
καὶ ἀνέστρεψεν Σαμουηλ ὀπίσω Σαουλ καὶ προσεκύνησεν X τῷ κυρίῳ |
So Samuel turned back after Saul, and he worshipped the Lord. |
So Samuel turned again after Saul: and Saul adored the Lord. |
So Samuel turned again after Saul; and Saul worshipped the Lord. |
So Samuel went back after Saul while {he} worshiped before Yahweh. |
וַיָּשָׁב שְׁמוּאֵל, אַחֲרֵי שָׁאוּל; וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ שָׁאוּלAS, לַיהוָה. ס |
32 |
καὶ
εἶπεν Σαμουηλ
προσαγάγετέ
μοι τὸν Αγαγ
βασιλέα Αμαληκ
καὶ προσῆλθεν
πρὸς αὐτὸν Αγαγ
τρέμωνAT
καὶ εἶπεν Αγαγ
|
And
Samuel said, Bring me Agag the king of Amalec: and Agag came to
him trembling; and Agag said |
And
Samuel said: Bring hitherto me Agag the king of Amalec. And Agag
|
Then said Samuel, Bring ye hither to me Agag the king of the Amalekites. And Agag came unto him delicatelyAU. And Agag said, Surely the bitterness of death is past. |
Then Samuel said, “Present to me Agag, King of Amalec.” So Agag came to him trembling, but Agag said, “Surely the bitterness of death has turned away.” |
וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁמוּאֵל, הַגִּישׁוּ אֵלַי אֶת-אֲגַג מֶלֶךְ עֲמָלֵק, וַיֵּלֶךְ אֵלָיו, אֲגַג מַעֲדַנֹּתAV; וַיֹּאמֶר אֲגָג, אָכֵן סָר מַר-הַמָּוֶת. ס |
33 |
καὶ εἶπεν Σαμουηλ [πρὸς Αγαγ] καθότι ἠτέκνωσεν γυναῗκας ἡ ῥομφαία σου οὕτως ἀτεκνωθήσεται ἐκ γυναικῶν ἡ μήτηρ σου καὶ ἔσφαξενAW Σαμουηλ [τὸν Αγαγ] ἐνώπιον κυρίου ἐν Γαλγαλ |
And Samuel said [to Agag], As thy sword has bereaved women of their children, so shall thy mother be made childless among women: and Samuel slew Agag before the Lord in Galgal. |
And
Samuel said: As thy sword hath made women childless, so shall
thy mother be childless among women. And Samuel hewed
|
And Samuel said, As thy sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless among women. And Samuel hewedAX Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal. |
But Samuel said, “As when women were bereaved by your sword, so your mother will be bereaved among women.” And Samuel beheaded Agag before the face of Yahweh in Gilgal. |
וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁמוּאֵל--כַּאֲשֶׁר שִׁכְּלָה נָשִׁים חַרְבֶּךָ, כֵּן-תִּשְׁכַּל מִנָּשִׁיםAY אִמֶּךָ; וַיְשַׁסֵּף שְׁמוּאֵל אֶת-אֲגָג לִפְנֵי יְהוָה, בַּגִּלְגָּל. {ס} |
34 |
καὶ ἀπῆλθεν Σαμουηλ εἰς Αρμαθαιμ καὶ Σαουλ ἀνέβη εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ εἰς ΓαβααAZ X. |
And Samuel departed to Armathaim, and Saul went up to his house at Gabaa X X. |
And Samuel departed to Ramatha: but Saul went up to his house in Gabaa X X. |
Then Samuel wentBA to Ramah; and Saul went up to his house to Gibeah of Saul. |
Then Samuel went to Ramah, and Saul went up to his house at Gibeah {}. |
וַיֵּלֶךְ שְׁמוּאֵל, הָרָמָתָה; וְשָׁאוּל עָלָה אֶל-בֵּיתוֹ, גִּבְעַת שָׁאוּלBB. |
35 |
καὶ οὐ προσέθετο Σαμουηλ ἔτι ἰδεῗν τὸν Σαουλ ἕως ἡμέρας θανάτου αὐτοῦ ὅτι ἐπένθει Σαμουηλ ἐπὶ Σαουλ καὶ κύριος μετεμελήθη ὅτι ἐβασίλευσεν τὸν Σαουλ ἐπὶ Ισραηλ |
And Samuel did not see Saul again till the day of his death, for Samuel mourned after Saul, and the Lord repented that he had made Saul king over Israel. |
And
Samuel saw Saul no more till the day of his death: nevertheless
Samuel mourned for Saul, because
the Lord repented
that he had made |
And Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death: neverthelessBC Samuel mournedBD for Saul: and the Lord repentedBE that he had made Saul king over Israel. |
And Samuel did not take it upon himself to see Saul until the day of his death; Samuel did, however, mourn concerning Saul. And Yahweh switched tactics since he had caused Saul to reign over Israel. |
וְלֹא-יָסַף שְׁמוּאֵל לִרְאוֹת אֶת-שָׁאוּל, עַד-יוֹם מוֹתוֹBF, כִּי- הִתְאַבֵּל שְׁמוּאֵל, אֶל-שָׁאוּל; וַיהוָה נִחָם, כִּי-הִמְלִיךְ אֶת- שָׁאוּל עַל-יִשְׂרָאֵל. פ |
1 quotes based off the NASB
2Willett, Henry, cf. Gill “he did not in order to worship with Saul... but rather the contrary; but that Saul might not be despised by the people, and his authority lessened, while he continued king; and that he might do what Saul had neglected to do, destroy Agag.” cf. K&D: “...not merely for the purpose of preserving the outward order until a new king should take his place, but also to carry out the ban upon Agag...”
3Wycliffe and the NET Bible being exceptions which use a combination: “certis the ouercomere [Preeminent One] in Israel schal not spare, and he schal not be bowid bi repentaunce [go back on his word or change his mind].”
4יכזב – a synonym for יְשַׁקֵּר in the MT of 1 Sam 15
5“God... is... the unchangeable One, in whom Israel can trust, since He does not lie or deceive, or repent of His purposes. These words are spoken θεοπρεπῶς (theomorphically), whereas in 15:11 and other passages, which speak of God as repenting, the words are to be understood ἀνθρωποπαθῶς (anthropomorphically)...” ~Keil & Delitzsch
6BDB also cites P. de Lagarde and H.P. Smith.
7cf. Henry: “in a stately manner, to show that he was a king, and therefore to be treated with respect, or in a soft effeminate manner, as one never used to hardship”
8With which Lange and also Tsumura agreed in their commentaries.
9cf. McCarter “in bands/fetters”
10Gesenius, in his classic Hebrew grammar called it a “substantive adverb... describing an external state.”
11Other speculations include: “cleaved him as wood is cleaved” (Ben Gersom), “divided him into four parts” (Rashi), “may perhaps mean no more than ‘executed’ (Kirkpatrick)” (Goldman).
AMy
original chart includes the NASB and NIV, but their copyright
restrictions have forced me to remove them from the
publicly-available edition of this chart. I have included the ESV in
footnotes when it employs a word not already used by the KJV, NASB,
or NIV. (NAW is my translation.) When a translation adds words not
in the Hebrew text, but does not indicate it has done so by the use
of italics (or greyed-out text), I put the added words in [square
brackets]. When one version chooses a wording which is different
from all the other translations, I underline it. When a
version chooses a translation which, in my opinion, either departs
too far from the root meaning of the Hebrew word or departs too far
from the grammar form of the original text, I use strikeout.
And when a version omits a word which is in the original text, I
insert an X. (I also place an X at the end of a word if the original
word is plural but the English translation is singular.) I
occasionally use colors to help the reader see correlations between
the various editions and versions when there are more than two
different translations of a given word. The only known Dead Sea
Scroll containing any part of 1 Samuel 15 is 4Q51 Samuela,
which contains fragments of vs. 20-23 (highlighted in purple), and
which has been dated between 50-25 B.C. Where the DSS supports the
LXX with omissions or text not in the MT, I have highlighted
with yellow the LXX
and its translation into English, and where I have accepted that
into my NAW translation, I have marked it with {pointed brackets}.
BNASB = “pay attention,” NIV = “heed,” ESV = “listen”
C Aq & Sym. used synonym for consulting mediums = manteiaV
D Aq. = parapikrasmoV (“bitter revolt”), S. = proserizein (“present turmoil”)
E LXX = “toil,” Aq. = anwfeleV (“breach of obligation”), Sym. = anomia (“lawlessness”)
FLXX “Therafin” is a transliteration of the Hebrew word for “idols.” Aq. translated it morfwmatwn (“shapes”) and S. eidwlwn (“idols”)
GA. ekbibasmoV (“going astray?”), S. apeiqein (“unbelief”)
H NASB = “insubordination,” NIV = “arrogance,” ESV = “presumption”
I NASB = “false [religion],” NIV = “evil”
JCairo Geniza mss pointed these vowels as a participle rather than as a noun, but it doesn’t make a difference in meaning.
KThis word is used only half a dozen other times in the Hebrew OT (Gen. 19:3, 9; 33:11; Jdg. 19:7; 2 Ki. 2:17; 5:16), and every time it speaks of putting social pressure on someone to force them to make a compromise.
LSeveral Hebrew manuscripts and even Targums insert the word “LORD” here, like the LXX, but even without the insertion, it is clear that the subject is the LORD, so it makes no difference in meaning.
MNASB, NIV = “violated”
Ncf. Symmachus = “properly” axiw
OThe DSS does not support this extra phrase.
PNASB, ESV = “please”
QNIV = “I beg you, forgive”
RESV = “bow before”
SAndrew Willett: “ Some read, fer, porta, ‘beare my sin’ (Syriac, Latin, Vulgate)… others read, ‘remit’ (Chaldee), ‘forgive’ (Junius)... the best reading is, ‘take away.’”
Tcf. synonym from Theodotion “pushed aside” apwsw
Ucf. synonym from Symmachus: “cast away” apebaleto
Vcf. Symm. “corner” akrou
WLXX connotes a 2-piece outfit. A. endumatoV (clothing). S. peribolaiou (wrap/shawl). Q. imatiou (garment)
XNASB = “grasped,” NIV “caught hold,” ESV = “seized”
YNASB = “edge,” NIV = “hem”
ZNASB, NIV, ESV = “robe”
AADSS supports the LXX insertion of “Saul” [שאול] as the subject here. This pre-empts the Jewish rabbins who, by omitting this word in the MT, suggested that Samuel tore Saul’s tunic.
AB This is the same word “tunic” used in 2:19 of the priestly garb Samuel’s mom would make for him as a boy.
ACAlthough this part of the verse is obliterated in the DSS, there is room for a couple of extra words not in the MT. The extra word “it” at the end of the verse in the LXX would use only part of that space. The only other clue we have is Symmachus’ insertion of the extra word κρασπεδου (He grasped the corner of the “hem/tassle” of…). These aren’t substantial changes to the story, though.
AD Vaticanus inserts σου απο, which doesn’t make sense, but is the reason for the strange reading of Brenton, and is a literal translation of the MT, as differentiated from the DSS which doesn’t have the extra ablative prepositional prefix in the MT before “kingdom.”
AEAq., Symm. = etairw (“companion/friend”)
AF NASB, NIV = “torn”
AGIn a surprising turn, the DSS has a much more terse reading than the MT. Where the MT reads “from the kingdom of Israel from upon you today,” the DSS reads “kingdom of Israel [from you/r hand]” (the bracketed part being obliterated, but could support either the LXX reading or the MT reading).
AH2nd Century Hebrew-to-Greek translator Aquila rendered these two verbs yeusetai (“lie”)... metamelh- (“change intent”), which is closer to the Hebrew MT.
AI Aq. metamelhqhnai (“change intent”), Q. paraklhqhnai (“be exhorted”)
AJNASB, NIV, ESV = “the Glory” Arabic = “holy,” Syriac = “noble,” but the oldest-known manuscripts have a different reading.
AKNASB, NIV = “change mind,” ESV = “have regret,” NKJV = “relent” cf. v.35 where NASB, NIV, ESV, NKJV = “regret”
AL DSS is obliterated here, but LXX reads “ripped apart” as though it were rendering the word יחצה, and adds the phrase “in two.” There is too much space in the obliterated text of the DSS to support the reading of the MT without that extra phrase, so the DSS supports the LXX reading. The Vulgate supports the MT, however. Willet, commenting on the MT: “...netzach, is by the most here translated, victoria, fortitudo, victorie, strength... some referring it unto God, who gave Israel power and victorie over their enemies: some to the people, that God would not faile them, of their former strength. But seeing netzach signifieth also eternitie, as Psal. 49.20... ‘for ever’: that sense is more fit here: because it is more agreeable to the eternitie and constancie of God, not to lie or repent, then properly an effect of his power… it is better referred to both the infallible purpose of God in electing of David, as in the rejecting of Saul.”
AM DSS reads ישוב "turn back,” supporting the LXX and Vulgate instead of the MT.
AN 4th century Hebrew-to-Greek translator Symmachus rendered with the synonym for “honor” timhson
AO ESV more accurately translates “bow before” here and in the next verse
AP Although DSS is obliterated here, there is too much space between legible words to support the MT; there is just enough space to support the LXX reading which inserts “Saul.”
AQThe DSS reads ו instead of this word, thus it supports the LXX which reads with a conjunction rather than with νυν (which would be the proper translation of the word in the MT). The presence of this conjunction in other Hebrew manuscripts and in the Vulgate also lends support to the LXX reading. The NIV carries this DSS reading, but KJ and NASB, carry the MT reading. It doesn’t make any real difference in meaning, however.
ARThere is no conjunction here in the DSS. The DSS reading without the conjunction is preserved in the NIV, whereas the MT reading is preserved in the KJV and NASB, but, as you can see, it makes no difference in meaning.
ASThis word “Saul” is not in the DSS or the LXX of this verse, so it might not be original. It doesn’t make a difference in meaning, though.
ATAq. apo truferiaV (“delicately”), S. abroV (“bound?”)
AUNASB, ESV = “cheerfully,” NIV = “in chains,” NKJV = “cautiously”
AV G tremwn, taking the root to be dum (“tremble”), as did Targums, and Vulgate. Others took the root to be /du “soft/luxurious,” thus “pleasantly” (Geneva), “delicately” (KJV), “apparelled and adorned as a king” (Willett), and Aquila. Still others, most notably BDB & Holliday, have suggested that the last two letters be switched to make עָנַד "bound” – thus the NIV “in chains.”
AWAq. & S. = diespasen (“tear apart” – closer to the MT word’s meaning), Q. ebasanisen (“tortured”). The range of translations is understandable of this hapex legomenon (שסף).
AX NASB= “cut,” ESV = “hacked.” No form of this word is used anywhere else in the Hebrew Bible.
AY “מִנָּשִׁים is to be understood as a comparative: more childless than (other) women, i.e., the most childless of women, namely, because her son was the king.” ~K&D
AZ Aq. eiV ton bounon (“the hill”)
BANIV follows LXX Vulgate with “departed/left” instead of the MT “went,” but the meaning is not significantly different.
BB“of Saul” is not to be found in the oldest manuscripts – Vaticanus or Vulgate or other LXX, nor apparently in Aquila, Symmachus, etc. Unfortunately, there is no extant manuscript of this verse among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
BCNASB, NIV = “though,” ESV = “but”
BDESV = “grieved over”
BENASB, NIV, ESV = “regretted”
BFThere
is only one more encounter between Samuel and Saul, initiated by
Saul, not Samuel, and that is in chapter 19, and it is not a
friendly one. Possibly Samuel could have died later that day; the
next mention of Samuel is in chapter 25, where it is merely said
that he was dead.
“How it is said [that] Samuel came no
more to see Saul untill the day of his death, seeing he saw him
againe afterward, chap. 19.22? Some expound it thus, that Samuel
came not to Saul, any more, though Saul came where Samuel was
(Genevens), but it is rather understood of the ende and manner of
Samuel’s comming, then of the act of comming and going: that
Samuel came not to visit and see Saul, as he had used to do before
time, to consult with him about the affaires of the kingdome... and
to give him direction from God… The meaning therefore is,
that Samuel had no conference with Saul, as before, to give him
instruction and direction… Samuel
did not pray for the restoring of the kingdom to Saul… he
lamented
the hardness
of Saul’s impenitent heart, going
on in his sin without remorse”
~Willett