It is said that ‘power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely!’ Surely the point is proved in the history of Saul, the first of Israel’s kings. Adopting for himself the powers of a supreme ruler he saw himself in a position to dominate the affairs of the nation according to his own whims and fancies. Slow to seek advice, and slower still to act upon it, he emerges as a man wilful enough to neglect even God’s interests in favour of his own.
This course was set early in his reign. Jonathan’s attack upon the Philistine garrison at Geba was loudly proclaimed throughout the land by Saul who personally claimed the victory, so gaining an enhanced reputation. The event, and the publicity, resulted in a Philistine backlash to which neither Saul nor the people of Israel could provide a response. Demoralized and weaponless, the people went into hiding. Their leader by his own misguided and impulsive actions had failed them, leaving the enemy in the ascendancy, 1 Sam. 13. 1-7.
It might have been hoped that such a fiasco would have a sobering effect upon Saul, and thereafter recommend a greater caution on his part. Instead, his impetuosity, and obstinacy, were immediately apparent in the wake of such disaster, for he sinned in usurping the role of Samuel, offering a burnt offering at Gilgal. Samuel’s delay required him to exercise patience in waiting – instead, with arrogance of spirit he disregarded God’s commandment, and added to his offence by trying to justify his behaviour, 1 Sam. 13. 8-12. Through Samuel, God immediately censured his actions, and judgment was pronounced upon him – his descendants would not follow him in ruling Israel, and already God had his successor in mind.
After such a series of set-backs, the passage of time did nothing to correct Saul’s downward progress, absorbed as he was with his own selfish interests. In flouting God’s clear directives concerning Amalek, 1 Sam. 15. 3, he caused dismay to the prophet Samuel, and incurred the wrath and judgment of the Lord. The Lord requires total obedience, and attaches no particular merit to what is performed in partial obedience. After all, partial obedience is better described as partial disobedience!
