← Back to sermon library

Okay, first Samuel, we'll just 
read chapter one, probably won't do any work in chapter one this 
evening, as is our custom when we start a new book, we typically 
use the first session for matters of introduction. So tonight, 
specifically, I want to look at the title author. and date 
of the book. Secondly, the movement to monarchy, 
because that's what's going on in the books of 1 and 2 Samuel. Thirdly, we'll look at the theological 
themes of the book. And then fourthly, I'll provide 
an outline via Dale Ralph Davis and another commentator named 
David Samora. Probably I'll be using these 
men the most. Davis is very popular and very 
readable. I'm sure I've mentioned it many 
times. If you can, get Davis's commentaries. on what are called 
the former prophets, and that's what we're studying. The former 
prophets are Joshua, Judges, 1st and 2nd Samuel, and 1st and 
2nd Kings. They're just paperbacks, two 
300-page paperbacks. As I said, very readable, Christian-focused 
publications. This other one I'm using is David 
Samura. It's a larger volume. He's a 
Japanese scholar, and it looks promising and to be a good one. 
Of course, you can't go wrong using John Gill. If you don't 
have Gill, sell your car and buy John Gill. Actually, you 
can get him free online. It's better to have the books, 
though, so sell your car and buy John Gill. Calvin didn't 
do it, didn't comment on 1 and 2 Samuel, so if he did, I would 
use him as well. Anyways, let's go ahead and look 
at chapter 1, beginning in verse 1. Now there was a certain man 
of Ranathame, Zophim, of the mountains of Ephraim. And his 
name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the 
son of Tohu, the son of Zuth, and Ephraimite. And he had two 
wives. The name of one was Hannah, and 
the name of the other, Penanah. Penanah had children, but Hannah 
had no children. This man went up from his city 
yearly to worship and sacrifice to the Lord of hosts in Shiloh. Also, the two sons of Eli, Hophni 
and Phinehas, the priests of the Lord, were there. And whenever 
the time came for Elkanah to make an offering, he would give 
portions to Penanah, his wife, and to all her sons and daughters. 
But to Hannah, he would give a double portion, for he loved 
Hannah, although the Lord had closed her womb. And her rival 
also provoked her severely to make her miserable, because the 
Lord had closed her womb. So it was, year by year, when 
she went up to the house of the Lord that she provoked her. Therefore, 
she wept and did not eat. Then Elkanah, her husband, said 
to her, Hannah, why do you weep? Why do you not eat? And why is 
your heart grieved? Am I not better to you than ten 
sons? So Hannah arose after they had 
finished eating and drinking in Shiloh. Now Eli, the priest, 
was sitting on the seat by the doorpost of the tabernacle of 
the Lord. And she was in bitterness of 
soul and prayed to the Lord and wept in anguish. And she made 
a vow and said, O Lord of hosts, if you will indeed look on the 
affliction of your maidservant and remember me, and not forget 
your maidservant, but will give your maidservant a male child, 
then I will give him to the Lord all the days of his life, and 
no razor shall come upon his head. And it happened, as she 
continued praying before the Lord, that Eli watched her mouth. Now Hannah spoke in her heart. 
Only her lips moved, but her voice was not heard. Therefore, 
Eli thought she was drunk. So Eli said to her, how long 
will you be drunk? Put your wine away from you. 
But Hannah answered and said, no, my Lord, I am a woman of 
sorrowful spirit. I have drunk neither wine nor 
intoxicating drink, but have poured out my soul before the 
Lord. Do not consider your maid servant a wicked woman, for out 
of the abundance of my complaint and grief, I have spoken until 
now. Then Eli answered and said, go in peace, and the God of Israel 
grant your petition which you have asked of him. And she said, 
let your maidservant find favor in your sight. So the woman went 
her way and ate, and her face was no longer sad. Then they 
rose early in the morning and worshiped before the Lord, and 
returned and came to their house at Ramah. And Elkanah knew Hannah, 
his wife, and the Lord remembered her. So it came to pass in the 
process of time that Hannah conceived and bore a son and called his 
name Samuel, saying, because I have asked for him from the 
Lord. Now the man Elkanah and all his house went up to offer 
to the Lord the yearly sacrifice and his vow. But Hannah did not 
go up, for she said to her husband, not until the child is weaned, 
then I will take him, that he may appear before the Lord and 
remain there forever. So Elkanah, her husband, said 
to her, do what seems best to you. Wait until you have weaned 
him. Only let the Lord establish his 
word. Then the woman stayed and nursed her son until she had 
weaned him. Now when she had weaned him, 
she took him up with her with three bowls, one ephah of flour, 
and a skin of wine, and brought him to the house of the Lord 
in Shiloh. And the child was young. Then they slaughtered 
a bull and brought the child to Eli. And she said, O my Lord, 
as your soul lives, my Lord, I am the woman who stood by you 
here praying to the Lord. For this child I prayed, and 
the Lord has granted me my petition which I asked of him. Therefore, 
I also have lent him to the Lord. As long as he lives, he shall 
be lent to the Lord. So they worship the Lord there. 
Amen. Well, just by way of a summary 
statement concerning the book as a whole, the purpose of the 
book, again, this is Samara, says the book of 1 Samuel is 
to highlight two major events. First, the establishment of the 
monarchy in Israel, that's chapters 8 to 12, and then the preparation 
of David to sit on the royal throne after Saul, and that's 
chapters 16 to 31. That's the primary emphasis in 
the book of Samuel. I've already mentioned the move 
to monarchy. Up to this point, there has been 
no king in Israel. In fact, that was one of the 
refrains in the time of the judges. Everyone did what was right in 
their own eyes. There was no king in Israel. 
Well, here now, We have a king instituted in Israel. First is 
Saul, and then David. Of course, David is the major 
player in terms of Israel's history. I'm not saying that Saul is insignificant 
in history, but it's the Davidic dynasty, or it's the Davidic 
house, that ultimately would be the line from which the Lord 
Jesus would come. So in many respects, 1 and 2 
Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings all have as sort of their central 
theme is the life and the ministry of David, king of Israel. So 
as I said, we'll look first at the title, the author, and the 
date. The title is obvious. It is the first book of Samuel. In the Hebrew Bible, 1 and 2 
Samuel initially were one book. It wasn't until the Hebrew was 
translated into the Greek that it was then put into two books. Now you need to understand that 
if you read Bible commentaries outside of Protestantism, or 
you're familiar with Bibles in the Roman Catholic tradition, 
the Septuagint, which is the Greek translation, of the Old 
Testament broke Samuel into two books. So you had 1st and 2nd 
Samuel, but together with 1st and 2nd Kings, they were called 
the Books of Kingdoms. So you had 1st and 2nd Kingdoms 
and 3rd and 4th Kingdoms. The Latin Vulgate did essentially 
the same thing, but instead of the Books of the Kingdoms, it 
was the Books of the Kings. So 1st and 2nd Kings and 3rd 
and 4th Kings. If you're reading, again, outside 
of Protestant literature, you happen to find yourself in a 
Roman Catholic Bible, do not immediately conclude that there's 
differences here. It's just a difference in terms 
of the names. So in the Septuagint, you had 
the four books of kingdoms. 1st Kingdom, 2nd Kingdom, 3rd 
Kingdom, and 4th Kingdom. In the Vulgate, you had 1st, 
2nd, 3rd, and 4th kings. They weren't called Samuel in 
those particular traditions. As far as the author, probably 
it wasn't Samuel. He could have written some of 
it, but of course Samuel dies in 1st Samuel Chapter 24. The 
Talmud, which is the Jewish sort of commentary on the Bible, ascribes 
the authorship to Samuel up to Chapter 24 when he died, and 
then Chapter 25 and following were ascribed to Nathan and Gad. If you look for just a moment 
at 1st Chronicles 29-29, this is why they argue in this particular 
way. 1 Chronicles 29 and verse 29. It says, now the acts of King 
David, first and last, indeed, they are written in the book 
of Samuel the seer, in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in 
the book of Gad the seer, with all his reign and his might and 
the events that happened to him, to Israel and to all the kingdoms 
of the land. So that's more than likely where 
the Talmud got the idea that it was Samuel, Nathan, and Gad 
in terms of the authors. Some have said that that's probably 
not a reference to what we call 1 and 2 Samuel. Be that as it 
may, it may be the case like the Book of Judges. We don't 
know specifically what human author penned it, though I don't 
think it's wrong to conclude that Samuel wrote some of it. 
but we know ultimately the Holy Spirit is responsible for giving 
us the books of 1st and 2nd Samuel, 1st and 2nd Kings. Samora said 
this with reference to the title. Nevertheless, the Hebrew title 
Samuel most likely refers to Samuel not as the author but 
as the key figure, the one who established the monarchy in Israel 
by anointing first Saul and then David. Many respects, Samuel 
is a king maker. Now, obviously, it's God who's 
sovereign that selects Saul and that selects David. But look 
at the place or the role that Samuel has. He's the one that 
anoints Saul, and he is the one that anoints David as well. So 
Murug continues, Samuel was the king maker in the history of 
Israel, thus it was reasonable to name the book after him." 
I don't think that's a stretch. That is a good observation concerning 
this particular book. The first section deals primarily 
with Samuel the prophet, and then Saul the king, and then 
David the king. So we've the title, we've got 
the author, what about the date? As far as the date of composition, 
we don't know specifically. But the references in 1 Samuel 
specifically, and in 2 Samuel as well, to the divided kingdom 
would indicate that the author wrote after the division of the 
kingdom. The division of the kingdom occurred 
in 931. After the death of Solomon, under 
his son Rehoboam, there was a revolt by Jeroboam, and the kingdom 
split in two. You had the northern tribes of 
Israel, you had the southern tribes of Judah. That was the 
divided monarchy. That occurred in 931. If you 
look specifically at 1 Samuel 27, you'll see an indicator that 
the author is conscious of that split in the kingdom. So that 
would indicate to us that he wrote sometime after the split 
in the kingdom. Doesn't mean he wrote a long 
time after the split, he's still near to the events of the particular 
books 1st and 2nd Samuel. But notice in 1st Samuel 27.6, 
so Achish gave him Ziklag that day. Therefore, Ziklag has belonged 
to the kings of Judah to this day. You see, there's the specific 
reference to the kings of Judah. Well, those were only extant 
or only existent after 931, after the division of the kingdom. 
You see, that's how you can try and nail down the date of composition. 
Again, It doesn't put us at the actual date, but it hopefully 
gives us a bit of time frame. It's after 931, but it's not 
so far after 931 that the author isn't conscious and close to 
the actual occurrence of the events in the books. In terms of the dates covered. That's a bit easier to nail down. Other than the specific birth 
of Samuel, we have a target date we can pretty much estimate with 
reference to the birth of Samuel. He probably, at least by a couple 
of different reckonings, probably was born in 1105. David dies 
in 971. So that's the span that 1st and 
2nd Samuel occur in, between 1105 and the birth of Samuel 
and 971 and the death of David. So we see that this two books 
covers the span of about 135 years. And basically, if you're 
wanting this information, I think it's actually very helpful. I 
think it's good to have a timeline, at least somewhat. It's good 
to be able to hang your hat on certain pegs in Israel's history, 
because I think it helps you to approach particular books, 
like we discussed a few weeks ago in our studies in Voss's 
Biblical Theology. When you come to the prophets, 
It is absolutely crucial that you know when those prophets 
prophesied, you know to which kingdom they prophesied, whether 
to the north or to the south. It's good to know what king was 
sitting on the throne at the time of the prophecy. It's good to know what the political 
climate was. It's good to know what the religious 
climate was. It's good to know some of the 
background information, because if you just sort of parachute 
in to the prophet Isaiah and you don't know what's going on 
around the prophet Isaiah, you're not going to be able to interpret 
the prophecy correctly. So it's good to have some dates 
with reference to Israel's history, specifically as you read through 
the Old Testament so that you know how to interpret it accordingly. It's also good to know the dates 
in the New Testament. with a lot less time in the New 
Testament, so it's really quite simple compared to the Old Testament. But if you just get some of the 
major dates, 1405 was the exodus, and the 1300s is the conquest 
period of the judges, till around this particular time in the 10th 
century, Then we have the period of the kings. We have the northern 
tribes being carried off into exile, excuse me, in 722. You've got the southern tribes 
being carried off into exile in 586. Those are some basic 
crucial dates that you should keep in mind as you read through 
your Bible. But the life of Samuel, 1105 
to 1030, died in 1030. So 1105, 1030 is when Samuel 
lived. Saul reigned from 1051 to 1011. None of these dates are absolutely 
certain, give or take a year, at least with the reigns of Saul 
and David. But that is a specific time frame. So Saul was 1051 to 1011. And 
then David, as I said, 1011 to 971. Now, if you know that, then 
you certainly know when Solomon began his reign, right? I hope 
everybody would say 971. Yes, you'd be absolutely right. 
And then you just trace the biblical data to determine when Solomon 
died and when the kingdom split and all that sort of thing. So 
if you have a few key dates in the Old Testament, you should 
be able to do quite well in terms of, you know, other dates. The 
prophet Ezekiel, for instance, is very detailed in terms of 
the dates. The prophet Zechariah, I mean, 
we can nail down the day and the month and the year concerning 
his night visions. I mean, that's pretty cool. when 
you stop and think about it. I think it was October of whatever 
year he was in that he had these night visions. We can think back 
to that, and that's all helpful information. So that's the basics 
in terms of introduction. Title, author, and date. Notice, 
secondly, the movement to monarchy. The movement to monarchy. It's 
helpful to turn back for just a moment to Deuteronomy 17. Deuteronomy 
17. We mustn't ever disconnect the 
rest of the Old Testament from the Pentateuch. We mustn't forget 
about the books of Moses because they are foundational and central 
to Israel's both political and religious life. And Deuteronomy 
17 was the first statement concerning the monarchy or principles governing 
kings. So it's going to help us to just 
work through this particular section in Deuteronomy 17, 14 
and following. We'll just review what we studied 
when we were there probably a year or two ago now. But notice first 
the request by the people in verse 14. When you come to the 
land which the Lord your God is giving you, and possess it 
and dwell in it and say, I will set a king over me like all the 
nations that are around me. In this context, that's not bad. In fact, what we find in Deuteronomy 
17 is a statement concerning the future kingdom. or the future 
monarchy. God is not anti-monarchy. God 
established the monarchy. It's not wrong for Israel to 
want a king. Probably what's going on in 1 
Samuel chapter 7 is that their motivation is wrong. The idea 
of having a monarchy is not bad, but the reason why one wants 
a monarchy, that's bad. 1 Samuel 8, remember when they 
tell Samuel, we want a king, just like the nations around 
us. And then Samuel is a bit perturbed by this. He's put off 
by this. And God tells Samuel, it's not 
you they've rejected, it's me that they have rejected. I think 
Davis kind of summarizes this difference or this idea that 
their desire was in the wrong direction. He said, their help 
now was not in the strong name of Yahweh, but in a new form 
of government. It is not monarchy, but trust 
in monarchy that is the villain. That's probably what's driving 
that statement in 1 Samuel 8, when God says, they've rejected 
me. They've rejected me in this desire for kings. It's not monarchy, 
but it's trust in it. It's finding our sufficiency 
in it. It's thinking that this form 
of government will alleviate all our problems and solve all 
our difficulties. Well, no government can ever 
do that. Our trust, our hope, our help is always in the strong 
name of God Most High. If he chooses to use a monarchy 
and it's a blessing, then good. But if not, then we still trust 
in the Lord. So back to Deuteronomy 17. So 
the fact that they would have a kingdom or a monarchy is not 
a bad thing. Notice the choice would be of 
the Lord. Verse 15, you shall surely set 
a king over you whom the Lord your God chooses. It wouldn't 
be a foreigner, it would be someone from within. One from among your 
brethren you shall set as king over you. You may not set a foreigner 
over you who is not your brother. Notice that it would be God that 
would select, it would be God that would choose, and it's interesting 
with reference to both Saul and David. Both men are selected 
by God. Saul in chapter 9, verse 16. David in chapter 16, verse 1. Both men are anointed by Samuel. uh... saul chapter ten verse 
one and david sat uh... chapter sixteen verse thirteen 
both men are endowed by the spirit or they are filled with the spirit 
for their work of ministry now we need to understand the ministry 
of the spirit in that context was primarily political we're 
not to understand that saul had the filling of the spirit in 
a redemptive salvific way and then god took the spirit from 
him and sent him off to hell. There is a bit of a difference, 
though some parallel, but there is a difference between the spirit 
coming upon Saul for his role as monarch in Israel, contra 
the spirit coming upon us, in Ephesians 1, 13 and 14 sort of 
language, the seal and guarantee. I mean, that's caused some people 
to wonder. When the spirit departed from Saul, some have concluded, 
well, the spirit must be able to depart from the people of 
God. No, it's a bit of a different story. When the Spirit seals 
and guarantees us, we are sealed and guaranteed to the very end, 
salvificly or redemptively or with reference to our eternal 
bliss in heaven. There was a sort of political 
emphasis there where the Spirit ruled over Saul in terms of his 
administration in Israel. So the Spirit comes upon Saul, 
10, 6 to 13, and of course the Spirit comes upon David in chapter 
16 and verse 13. And then both men are publicly 
affirmed after this happens. So they're selected, they're 
anointed, they're endowed by the Spirit, and then they both 
engage in victory. So after the Spirit comes upon 
Saul, what's the next scene? Saul saves Jabesh Gilead. Saul 
is responsible for killing Ammonites until the heat of the day. These 
were the two enemies of Israel during 1st and 2nd Samuel, Philistines 
and the Ammonites. Saul brings victory to the people 
of God by killing Ammonites. Well, what happens after the 
Spirit comes upon David in 1st Samuel 16? What is his public 
affirmation or vindication in chapter 17? Remember? He takes down Goliath. So there 
is that public confirmation or affirmation or vindication of 
his choice by God Most High. So back to the text in Deuteronomy. Notice in verses 16 to 17, there 
are specific instructions for the king. And certainly Israel's 
history would have been a lot different if every king obeyed 
verses 16 and 17. If every king would have done 
what every king was supposed to do, then things would have 
looked a lot better in Israel. Notice, verse 16, he shall not 
multiply horses for himself, nor cause the people to return 
to Egypt to multiply horses, for the Lord has said to you, 
you shall not return that way again. Neither shall he multiply 
wives for himself, lest his heart turn away, nor shall he greatly 
multiply silver and gold for himself." First, he shouldn't 
multiply weapons, horses. This idea of military power. 
Again, it's not wrong for a king to have a standing army, but 
it's wrong for a king to trust in that standing army. The Proverbs 
say the horse is prepared for battle, but victory is of Jehovah. When we trust in the means rather 
than God Most High, that is misplaced. When a king looks to the abundance 
of his weaponry or he looks to his military power, he's in a 
bad state. He needs to be trusting in God 
the Lord. He shall not multiply wives, 
probably hearkening back to Deuteronomy 7. What happens when a king multiplies 
wives? Yes, it's adulterous. Yes, it's 
wrong. Yes, there's a lack of self-control, 
but probably he's multiplying wives for political alliances, 
and that is bad. The king of Israel ought not 
to politicize with the nations around them via taking on additional 
wives. As well, he shall not multiply 
wealth, silver and gold, superiority. A certain measure of wealth would 
no doubt come to a king. I mean, the king is the king. He's going to have a nice palace. 
He's going to have, you know, sort of the niceties that go 
along with being a king. You don't find in the Bible that, 
you know, save the Lord Jesus Christ, the King Christ, he is 
lowly and humble and he rides upon a donkey. But for the most 
part, the kings don't live in poverty. But again, he ought 
not to trust in that silver or gold. He ought not to put his 
confidence in the things that he has. Christopher Wright summarizes, 
clearly the issue is not merely if Israel should have a king 
or not, but what kind of king that should be. And when we get 
to 1 and 2 Samuel, we see a negative example in Saul. We see a positive 
example in David. But even in David, we don't see 
a perfect example. One of the functions of the kings 
in the time of the monarchy is typical. They point forward to 
the Lord Jesus. The wretched, miserable kings 
cause us to see our need for a king who reigns in righteousness 
and justice. The good kings point forward 
to the Lord Jesus, typical of that rule and that reign that 
will come. when the Lord's Christ comes to save his people from 
their sins. So what Wright says is true. 
Clearly the issue is not merely if Israel should have a king 
or not, but what kind of king that should be. What matters 
fundamentally for Deuteronomy is whether or not the whole covenant 
people of Israel will remain wholly loyal to Yahweh their 
God. The value of a king is assessed solely by the extent to which 
he will help or hinder that loyalty. It's not how the kings are measured. 
I mean, Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, set the benchmark for 
wickedness in Israel because he departed from the Lord. Then 
you get to the man Ahab and it says, you know, what Jeroboam 
did was basically chump change. You know, Ahab institutionalized 
wickedness on a scale that no other king had done before him. 
So each of these kings are held to the standard, not of the political 
agency surrounding Israel or the kingdoms of this world, but 
God's holy law, God's standard and God's word. And that's the 
measure of a great king. You read about Josiah, you read 
about the godly kings of Judah. What does it say? They were wholly 
inclined to follow the Lord. they did what God said. So a 
successful monarch in Israel was not the one who extended 
the land. The successful monarch was not 
the one who had peace with the surrounding nations. The successful 
monarch in Israel was the one who obeyed God the Lord. And 
interestingly, when they obeyed God the Lord, typically that's 
when their boundaries were extended. That's when they did have at 
least a peaceful coexistence, probably because they were the 
upper hand in terms of the nations around them. So back to right. A king who will not trust in 
God but in his own defenses, a king whose heart turns away 
because of many wives, a king whose great wealth leads to the 
snares of pride. Such a king will lead the people 
in the same disastrous directions. That is the reality of it, which 
is interesting. What was the problem in Judges, 
specifically in chapter 17 to 21, which we've argued is probably 
appendices, so that predated the institution of Othniel? Why did people do what was right 
in their own eyes? Because there was no king in 
Israel. Then we get to the monarchy and what happens? There is a 
king in Israel and what do the people do? They still do what 
is right in their own eyes. What's the answer? The Lord Jesus 
Christ. You see earthly judges, earthly 
kings are men at best. It is the Lord Christ that we 
wait for. I was quite encouraged in Roger's 
prayer, I don't mean to put you on the spot, But to speak of 
Christ as our champion, to speak of Christ as our hero, I think 
that is what is being set before the people throughout the Old 
Testament era. There's a hero coming. There's 
a champion coming. There's a deliverer coming. There's 
one who is antitypical of the judges, antitypical of the monarchy, 
the one in whom the righteousness of God dwells inherently. And he will come to vindicate 
his people. So in sum, the good king was 
to guard his heart against an attachment to weapons, women, 
and wealth. The three W's that'll sink a 
good king. Weapons, women, and wealth. Again, 
he can have weapons. He shouldn't trust in that. He 
can have a wife. He shouldn't let her lead his 
heart astray to other gods or to political alliance. And he 
can have wealth, but he must not trust in it. These were the 
means by which many a man entered into apostasy. Now, notice the 
primary orientation of the king. in verses 18 to 20. This is actually 
what I meant. If the monarchs in Israel would 
have taken heed to 18 to 20, things would have been a whole 
lot different. Notice his first priority. Also it shall be when 
he sits on the throne of his kingdom that he shall write for 
himself a copy of this law in a book from the one before the 
priests, the Levites. Before he appoints his cabinet, 
before he starts looking at policy, before he starts having coffee 
with the judges and the kings around Israel, the first order 
of business is to take out his own pen, to take out his own 
piece of paper, and to write the law himself. This is a good 
thing. Writing something at times helps 
to get it into our minds and our hearts. And this is what 
the king of Israel was supposed to do. Before, as I said, he 
appoints his cabinet, deals with his enemies, or determines his 
to-do list with reference to the kingdom itself, he shall 
write for himself a copy of this law in a book from the one before 
the priests, the Levites. Notice, he shall possess this 
law and it shall be with him, verse 19, and he shall read it 
all the days of his life. You know, sometimes I think we 
fool ourselves when we say, you know, I'm so busy, I don't have 
time to read the Bible. Well, the king of Israel was 
supposed to be a man who read the Bible often and frequently. That was part of his job. That 
was part of his role. That was what was the foundation 
to the throne that he sat upon. He was to possess it. He was 
to study it. It shall be with him and he shall 
read it all the days of his life that he may learn to fear the 
Lord as God and be careful to observe all the words of this 
law and these statutes. that his heart may not be lifted 
above his brethren, that he may not turn aside from the commandment 
to the right hand or to the left, and that he may prolong his days 
in his kingdom, he and his children, in the midst of Israel, so that 
his heart be not lifted up." What's another perennial problem 
with political leaders? They end up proud and arrogant, 
and they end up entitled. I mean, politicians today think 
they're entitled to summer homes. They think they're entitled to 
big salaries. They think they're entitled to 
women and to wealth and to weapons and all these things. Well, the 
law of God was to humble the monarch so that he would not 
have his heart be lifted up. The monarch ultimately is a servant 
of the people. He is the one that comes to serve 
and help the people and to be a shepherd to them. See, our 
experience with monarchy is just this top-down imposition of power. 
And while it is a top-down imposition of power, it is with servanthood. It is with a desire to shepherd 
and a desire to care for the people. It is modeled in the 
Lord Jesus Christ. He is a king that ultimately 
is a servant and a shepherd to his people. Again, Christopher 
Wright, with reference to the study of the law. As is so often 
the case, Deuteronomy mentions only what matters. In this case, 
it avoids the small print of an exhaustive job description 
for royalty and concentrates on the fundamental priority. 
The law is to permeate the king's behavior in every sphere, whether 
political, administrative, judicial, or military. And if he takes 
this seriously and he obeys these statutes, then he will prosper. This is what it says, that he 
may prolong his days in his kingdom, he and his children, in the midst 
of Israel. There will be success. There 
will be prosperity. There will be good things. It's 
not through political savvy. It's not through your ability 
to engage in good domestic and foreign policy. But it's in the 
degree by which or to which you obey the law of the Lord." And 
so this is the paradigm or the example or the pattern that the 
kings of Israel were to follow. So going back to 1 Samuel, the 
period of the judges I've already mentioned. The judges served 
in a kingship type of a role, as did Joshua. Joshua was a military 
leader. He was a general, if you will, 
but he served sort of as a king. He was the leader. He was the 
shepherd. He was the one that led Israel on the conquest. When we get to the time of the 
judges, everyone's doing what is right in their own eyes because 
there's no king in Israel. Ophiel and Ehud and Barak and 
Samson and Gideon and Jephthah, these men were kingly figures. They were not kings strictly 
identified, but that was their function or that was their role. And so we have this transition 
from this period of judges to this monarchy. In fact, Eli and 
Samuel functioned as judges as well. Eli was a priest, and Samuel 
was a prophet. But they both sort of functioned 
in that capacity, though not like a Samson or Gideon in terms 
of breaking the back of foreign oppressors. But nevertheless, 
they served in sort of this capacity in Israel at this particular 
time. So we've got a movement. from this judgeship or this movement 
from sort of a leader like Joshua into an official monarchy into 
an official kingdom. That's the point in 1st and 2nd 
Samuel. The first king, Saul, chapter 
9 verse 1 to chapter 15 verse 35. David is from 16-1 all the 
way through 2nd Samuel. Now of course they run side-by-side 
in the latter part of 1st Samuel, but they're not running side-by-side 
happily ever after. Saul wants to kill David. David's 
a man who's got to run for his life. It's interesting, all of 
the troubles start for David as soon as the Spirit of the 
Lord comes upon him in chapter 16. You'd think, oh, that the 
Spirit of the Lord came upon him, now he can go golfing. Now 
he can go put his feet up. Now he can enjoy his wealth and 
his women and his weapons. He can just do those things that 
kings do. No, as soon as the Spirit of 
the Lord comes upon David, his life is radically altered. Probably 
when he was out tending the sheep, he didn't have the sorts of problems 
that he did once he was anointed by Samuel and anointed by the 
Holy Spirit. And then, so we've got Saul, 
we've got David, and then I've already mentioned after David 
comes Solomon, after Solomon comes Rehoboam. During Rehoboam's 
reign, Jeroboam rebels against Rehoboam. That's the division 
of the kingdom beginning in 931. Then you've got the north and 
the south. You've got the kings in the north, 
and none of them are ever good. There's not one of them in the 
north that it ever says that they did good. There are a few 
in the south that did good. These were the ones, of course, 
in the house or in the line of David. The northern kingdom I've 
already alluded to ends in 722 BC. Assyria was the empire at 
that particular time. They come in and they decimate 
the northern tribes. Second Kings reports this, and 
then the Southern tribes fall to Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon 
in 586. And the end of 2 Kings indicates 
this as well. Several of the prophets also 
indicate it also. We've already alluded to the 
fact or mentioned the reality that the time when there were 
no kings in Israel meant idolatry and depravity. Judges 17 to 21. You remember those scenes? Judges 
17 and 18, there was idolatry with the tribe of Dan. and then 
19 to 21, you had the mess with the Benjamites. I mean, 19 to 
21 could make the crudest among us blush because it's so brutal 
and so horrific. And so what we have is no king 
on the throne of Israel, so idolatry and depravity run rampant. But 
when we get a king on the throne of Israel, if he's godless, then 
idolatry and depravity run rampant. So it's not just having a king 
that is the satisfying requirement, but it's having the right king. 
And David is the man after God's own heart. Now, David wasn't 
a perfect king. David certainly had his trials 
and his difficulties and his issues. But by and large, the 
scriptures can declare that David was a man after God's own heart. 
So when we compare and we look at the period of the monarchy 
and prior to that, the period when there was no monarchy, I 
think we can conclude reasonably two things about Israel. One, 
they were rebellious. And two, their God was nevertheless 
faithful. I mean, if the history of the 
Old Testament teaches us anything, it ought to teach us that. Israel 
rebelled consistently and continuously, and God was consistently and 
continuously faithful to his people. You know, when you meet 
people in the world, or you meet other Christians that perhaps 
aren't as in tune with the Old Testament as they ought to be, 
they have this idea that the God of the Old Testament is this 
wrathful, vengeful, angry, mean, and vicious God. Nothing could 
be further from the truth. I mean, the fact that God bears 
long with these people several hundred years before bringing 
judgment to bear upon them, one must ask themselves, if they 
were God, how long would they have borne up with Israel? How long would you have continued 
to see your people reject and rebel and not bring judgment 
upon that? The history of Israel evidences 
the rebellion of Israel and the faithfulness of our covenant 
God over and over and over again. And then thirdly, the theological 
themes. Interestingly, if you turn to 
1 Samuel 2 for just a moment, 1 Samuel 2, Hannah's prayer sets 
forth several of the themes that the book certainly picks up. 
Hannah's prayer is akin to Mary's prayer when Mary finds out she 
is pregnant with the Christ. Hannah prayed and said, and then 
she goes into this beautiful description, first, concerning 
God's sovereignty. God's sovereignty or his kingship. That is certainly a theme in 
the books of 1st and 2nd Samuel. Yes, there's a monarchy, but 
that monarchy is subject to the God of Israel, the God of heaven 
and earth. This monarchy is not an end in 
and of itself. This monarchy finds its place 
under the rule and authority of God. That's why the monarch 
in Israel must heed the prophet. When Samuel comes to Saul, and 
Samuel indicts Saul for not listening and not receiving the word of 
God, but rather rejecting it, and instead of killing Agag and 
healing him to pieces like he was supposed to do, rather Saul 
spared him. What does Samuel say to Saul? He doesn't say, well, you are 
the monarch, do whatever it is you want. No, rebellion is as 
the sin of witchcraft. The monarch in Israel had to 
listen to the prophet of God, which indicated something. It 
indicated, yes, the prophet should be listened to, but the idea 
was is that God rules the monarchy, and the prophet needs to be heeded. 
And when the prophet comes and the king receives, blessings 
typically flow. When the prophet comes and the 
king refuses or rejects, then curses typically flow. And so 
God is Lord, God is sovereign, God is exalted in these books 
of 1st and 2nd Samuel. As well, it's interesting, the 
providence of God in these books. We saw that in the book of Ruth. 
We didn't see miracles. We didn't see grand displays 
of God's sovereign might and power. We saw God the Extraordinary 
One working through the ordinary lives of Ruth, Boaz, and Naomi. Consider some of the situations 
that go on. in 1st Samuel and the way things 
happen. Saul's out looking for donkeys 
when he finds out he's going to be a king. David goes to take 
food to his brothers when he sees Goliath on the field of 
battle that begins his ultimate ascension to the throne. This 
very beginning chapter, Hannah's hardship, brings forth Samuel, 
the prophet, the king maker, in these books of 1st and 2nd 
Samuel. David, in 2nd Samuel 7, wants 
to build a house for God. I mean, that's an ordinary sort 
of a request. I mean, it's an extraordinary 
thing, building a house for God, but David's sitting, musing in 
his house, a panel, and he says, wait a minute, I'm dwelling in 
this beautiful place, and God's living in a tent. I want to build 
the Lord a house. And so what happens? God says, 
you're not going to build me a house, I'm going to build you 
a house. What does he do? He promises 
a dynasty from David. This is the first statement concerning 
the Davidic kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ in 2 Samuel 7. So 
what we find is a lot of ordinary and a lot of normal, but God 
behind the scenes is working out extraordinary and abnormal 
sorts of things. Providence is conspicuous throughout 
this book. As well, and I've just alluded 
to this, the sovereign will of God. It is God's will, it is 
God's word, it is God's rule that reigns supreme. And the 
kings of Israel must submit. If they submit, they will prosper. 
If they reject, then they will suffer. Saul is a classic example 
of a bad king, a classic example of a king that let it get to 
his head. He didn't do what the Lord said. 
He disregarded the prophet of God. He took matters into his 
own hand, and it did not end well with him. David, conversely, 
is a man after God's own heart, and he does, albeit imperfectly, 
he does the will of the Lord. And then thirdly, as I've already 
mentioned as well, the typical role of the king. Everybody knows 
what a type and an anti-type is. A type is something in the 
Old Testament that points forward to something else. Samson is 
a type of our Lord Jesus Christ, at least in two ways. His own 
countrymen deliver him up. And he saves people through his 
death. Well, when we get to the New 
Testament, Jesus is the antitype. That means he fulfills that for 
which Samson lived. Samson points forward to the 
Lord Jesus, and the Lord Jesus certainly fulfills those things. 
Well, the same is true with the kingdom or the monarchy. It doesn't 
mean all the sins and all the idolatry and all the depravity 
of these kings of Israel are going to be modeled in our Lord 
Jesus Christ. Rather, it means that as the 
king rules in righteousness and he reigns with justice and he 
does his thing with equity, it points forward to the one who 
will come to do this completely and perfectly and do so forever 
and ever, world without end, amen. And then in terms of the 
outline, a broad outline at least for just 1 Samuel, 1 Samuel, 
Davis offers a threefold outline and I think the book does break 
down this way. Again, it's very broad but very 
helpful. Chapters 1 to 7, a prophet of 
God's grace. Samuel is the emphasis in chapters 
1 to 7. Secondly, a king in God's place. chapters 8 to 14. That's Saul. And then thirdly, 
A Man After God's Heart, chapters 15 to 31. So you've got Samuel, 
Saul, and David. You won't go wrong if you approach 
1 Samuel in that manner. Samuel, Saul, David. That's how the book flows. Samora gives a more detailed 
outline, but very similar. First is the story of Samuel, 
1 Samuel 1.1 to 7.17. He says embedded in there, however, 
is the story of the ark of God. That plays heavily in chapters 
four to six, the story of the Ark of God. Remember, they think 
that the Ark is like a big four-leaf clover, or they think that the 
Ark is like a holy horseshoe. They think that if we just take 
the Ark out into battle, well, then we'll get blessing. I mean, 
that's exactly what they do. Let's trot the Ark out into the 
field of battle with the Philistines, and its presence will ensure 
victory. God would rather suffer defeat 
for his people than to allow himself to be manipulated. That's 
the story in that story of the art. God will let the Ark be 
captured by the Philistines and taken to the very house of Dagon 
before he'll let his people actually think that we just need to trot 
this box out and we'll get blessing. That's how they treated the Ark 
of the Covenant of Yahweh. They treated it like a holy horseshoe 
or a holy four-leaf clover. So the story of Samuel, chapters 
1 to 7. The transition to monarchy, that's 
chapter 8, verses 1 to 22. The refrain there is, appoint 
us a king. So you see movement. You've got 
Samuel 1 to 7, transition, chapter 8, when the people demand a king. 
And then you've got, thirdly, the story of Saul, 1 Samuel 9.1 
to 1 Samuel 15.35. Fourthly, you've got the story 
of Saul and David, and that goes from 1 Samuel 16, 1 all the way 
to chapter 31 and verse 13. And then the book of 2 Samuel 
is the story of David. I mean, 2 Samuel is all about 
David, from chapter 1 all the way to chapter 20. And then the 
last few chapters are sort of epilogues, or appendices, or 
things that the reader needs to learn concerning this period 
and this era. So that's a broad outline, a 
threefold, and then a more detailed outline. We'll probably follow 
that detailed outline as we go through the book. God willing, 
starting chapter one next Wednesday night. So I'll close in prayer, 
and if anyone has any questions or comments, we can do that. 
Our Father, we thank you for your word and we thank you for 
this history that is not only facts related, but it's theology 
as well. It teaches us about God, it teaches 
us about the things that you are pleased with and the things 
that you reject. And we pray that you'd help us 
to see in this book the many lessons that we need to take 
hold of. Give us grace to be men and women after your own 
heart. Help us to be faithful to the Word of God as it's revealed 
to us in the Old and New Testaments. Give us grace, Father, to receive 
these things with thanksgiving. Give us grace to be students 
of your law. Father, as the king was to write 
this law and to study it daily, may we indeed study your Word 
daily. We ask that you would go with 
us now and watch over us. Be with our brothers and sisters 
in our local church. Bring us together on the Sabbath 
day that we may worship you. And we pray through Christ our 
Lord. Amen.