Outline of Chapter 12:

       vv.    1–5        Samuel Calls Upon the People to Witness His Faithfulness

       vv.    6–11      Samuel Reminds Israel of God’s Faithfulness to Them in the Past

       vv.   12–15      Samuel Gives the People of Israel Their Alternatives

       vv.   16–19      Samuel Calls For a Great Thunderstorm and God Provides One Frightening the People

       vv.   20–25      Samuel Instructs the People as to His Responsibilities and Their Responsibilities

Charts and Maps:

       Introduction    The Scope and Sequence of the Life of Samuel

       v.      9           The Book of the Judges—Domestic Issues (Judges 17–21)

       v.      9           The Book of the Judges—Foreign Relations (Judges 3–16)

       v.     10           Israel Under Discipline: Compare and Contrast

       v.     11           The Oppressors and the Deliverers of Israel

       v.     13           Did God Choose Saul or Did the People Choose Saul?

       v.     14           What the Problem is in v. 14 with the Hypothetical Particle

       v.     14           Six Interpretations of the Conditional of 1Samuel 12:14

       v.     15           The Protasis and the Apodosis

       v.     17           God’s Judgments of Severe Weather

       v.     21           The Results of Hate Crime Legislation

       v.     24           The Responsibilities of God, Samuel and the People

       v.     25           Warnings from Spiritual Atlas’s

       v.     25           A Summary of 1Samuel 12

I ntroduction: 1Sam. 12 is simply a continuation of 1Sam. 11:14–15. Samuel has directed Israel to go to Gilgal to celebrate their victory over Nahash, king of the Ammonites, to thank God for what He has done, and to publically recognize Saul as king over all Israel. This is Samuel’s convocation speech. He will interact with the people and with God. Interestingly enough, Saul will be mentioned, but he will not speak, except for one word at the end of v. 5 (although, this is not what your Bible will say).

As I work through the exegesis of this chapter, two of my sources seem to be pretty much the antithesis of one another. J. Vernon McGee is down-home Southern; he speaks in a language that almost anyone understands; he rarely appears to get technical; and his homespun approach is even belied by his writing style (I think, actually, that his books are transcripts from his radio programs). On the opposite side of the fence, we have Keil and Delitzsch, whose vocabulary is extensive, difficult and sometimes abstruse. Their knowledge of languages is an integral part of their teaching, and rarely do they every put anything into layman’s terms. However, their writings are in almost full accord when it comes to theological matters. Furthermore, their approach is complementary rather than antagonistic. Therefore, I will quote from both commentaries extensively. God uses all kinds of men, with all kinds of backgrounds, with many different approaches. The reason that I bring this up is so that you recognize that God can and will use you. It does not matter what your personality is like; it does not matter what your background is. God can use anyone; however, two things: (1) you must be filled with the Holy Spirit (and I don’t mean in some Pentecostal, holy roller, speaking in tongues kind of way); and (2) you must know the Word of God. These are key to being successful in the Christian way of life.

You will recall how I have pointed out that Jewish thought tends to be more topical than chronological. These chapters are a perfect example of this. We have a consistent, chronological thread which runs through these chapters 11–13, but each chapter is more of a topical exposition which stands on its own. In 1Sam. 11, we have the attack of Nahash upon eastern Israel, their cry for help, and the response of Saul. Saul leads Israel in victory and is publically acclaimed as king over Israel. In 1Sam. 12, we have Samuel’s address to the people at the convocation that recognizes Saul as king. Samuel is barely mentioned in chapter 11; Saul is barely mentioned, by name, in chapter 12. In 1Sam. 13, we have Saul’s kingship, including Saul’s first big mistake.

As an aside, I have occasionally said that the author of much of this book (or, at least, the first portion of it) is Samuel. What we should expect of Samuel’s speech is that it be in fairly simple Hebrew. We would expect a lot of wâw consecutive, a lot of simply constructed phrases, and a lot of very common Hebrew words, as this is what we have found in most of this book so far. We will, on occasion, run into a word not used before in the book of Samuel. This does not mean that it is a different author, but that there was no reason to use those words before (there are examples of this increased vocabulary at the end of v. 4 and early in v. 5). Interestingly enough, although Samuel begins with fairly simple Hebrew connected with a bunch of wâw conjunction’s and wâw consecutive’s, his Hebrew becomes a bit more eloquent near the end. In fact, it is as though he is caught up in his own message, and his passion overtakes his limitations.

Samuel expects that this is going to be his last speech before Israel. For the previous 40 years, he has been the spiritual leader of Israel. For the 20 prior to that, he was a youth being raised up in the Tent of God with the intention of becoming a slave to God (that he would lead Israel spiritually was not immediately apparent). During this time, we would expect that Samuel has read and reread and read again the Scriptures which were available to him. He knows what the final speech of a spiritual leader should be, as he has read many times the final words of both Moses and Joshua. Therefore, we should not surprised that his final words are very similar to the final words of those two great men.

There are some who teach that these are different speeches which have been later put together in the same chapter as one speech. While this is not entirely out of the question, this theory is essentially based upon the fact that Samuel covers different topics. Just because a great man in his last words in a public speech covers more than one topic, it does not mean that we are looking at more than one speech. Furthermore, everything that Samuel says can be tied together. He begins by teaching Israel that their desire for a king was unwarranted. In this approach, he must put his integrity to the test (vv. 1–5) and God’s integrity to the test (vv. 6–11). That Israel required a king from Samuel was a mistake (vv. 12–13). However, this is not the sort of mistake which will sever the relationship of God and Israel (vv. 14–15). Samuel reaffirms God’s present and active power (vv. 16–18), causing the people to realize their great mistake (v. 19). Then, with all the cards on the table, Samuel tells the people what their responsibility is and what his responsibility will be. In other words, there is no way that we are looking at two different speeches because all of this is tied together. What we have (and I will spend more time with this later) is a Pauline approach to a complex situation. That is, Paul would lay everything out and then say, to what conclusion are we forced?, after which, he would state the logical conclusion.

Now, also throughout the first fifteen or so verses, there will be a half-dozen places where there is a significant difference between the Greek Septuagint and the Massoretic text. The Greek tends to smooth out some sentences and, in some cases, adds what appears to be missing in the Hebrew. This should not cause us any concern. Although we could stand upon the Hebrew text alone (although there are some places where we would run into translational difficulties), the Greek is quite helpful in providing what appears to have been lost. Throughout the years, I have struggled with how to translate the Hebrew into English, and I have faced exactly what thousands of translators have faced in the past—just how literal and just how understandable do I want the translation to be? The result of this has been three translations, an approach with which I am very satisfied. However, another issue is, what about the Greek? If there is reason to believe that the Greek insertions represent what was originally found in the autographs, then how do I deal with that? What I have done in my most literal of translations is that I have usually stayed with the Hebrew. Occasionally, if I decided to add a word or two which are not in the Hebrew, I place those words in brackets. If I believe the Greek to be undeniably correct, then I often will insert it into the most literal of my translation, but generally in brackets. In the less literal but still literal second rendering into the English, I have almost always included the Greek (when I believed it to be probably the best rendering of the original manuscripts), but I have still placed it in brackets to indicate that this is what is found in the Greek of the Septuagint (circa 200 b.c.), but not in the Masoretic texts (circa 900 a.d.), which are in the original Hebrew language.

To give you a bit more detail on what is to come: Samuel, Saul and the victorious army of Israel have gone to Gilgal to celebrate their victory and to renew the kingdom. What is occurring is that Saul is being received as king by popular acclaim. He will actually begin ruling Israel immediately after this assemblage, even though he had been chosen as king by God several months previous to this.

What Samuel will say in his address to these men is quite impressive. As I got half-way through his address, I realized that he reminded me of Paul. Now, this is a surprise to me, given Paul’s outstanding skills in the realm of debate and given Samuel’s fairly basic vocabulary. What Samuel has to say is essential, but subtle. First off, he cannot call this whole king thing off. That Saul is king over Israel is a given. His victory in the previous chapter gives him popular acclaim. That does not mean that these men were right from the beginning to demand a king. So Samuel first interacts with the men from a podium. He puts himself, his character and his ministry on trial before Israel. He demands to know whether Israel views him as having served honorably or not—the men in the crowd are forced to admit that Samuel has been honorable in all of his dealings with Israel. Then he cites Israel’s history as proof of God’s faithfulness to Israel. So, God is now on trial. Has God done anything or not done anything to indicate that He is no longer faithful to Israel? You see, Israel demanded a king because they felt militarily threatened. They felt that a king was necessary to organize them to fight their battles. This position would be valid if Samuel did not properly administer his government; or, this position would be valid if God did not properly protect and guide Israel. Samuel illustrates from history that God has always guided them, regardless of the circumstances. So, the fact that Nahash, the king of Ammon, threatened them, was nothing new. He was not some menace which God had not foreseen. Nevertheless, the people demanded and received a king and that king led them to victory (this latter point was not a part of Samuel’s recorded speech). Samuel’s point should have been well-taken: he had not been unfaithful in any way to Israel; and God had not been unfaithful in any way to Israel.

Next point that Samuel makes—is the God of Israel today the same God of the past? Samuel calls for a tremendous storm, and God provides a storm, even though this is the dry harvest time. This causes the people great concern and they ask that Samuel pray on their behalf so that they do not die the sin unto death. Samuel assures them that God will not forsake them, as He would never abandon His own people. He has not in the past; therefore, there is no reason to think that He would abandon them at that time. What is unsaid, but certainly a part of what should be considered—Israel has been faithless in its demand for a king. Does this mean that Samuel will desert Israel? Does this mean that the God of their fathers will desert Israel? At the end of his speech, Samuel indicates that he will continue to play a role in Israel’s future; furthermore, he assigns specific responsibilities to the population of Israel as well. And he concludes that God will also continue to play a part in Israel’s history. Their unfaithfulness does not mean that God would abandon them. If they now turn again toward God, God will lead and protect them. If they continue in faithlessness, then God will discipline them and their king. This is the summary of what is to come; now, onto the exegesis:

Samuel Calls Upon the People to Witness His Faithfulness

First, what others have done:

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so says Samuel unto all of Israel, “Behold, I have hearkened in your voice, to all which you have said to me and so I have made king over you a king,...

Septuagint                             And Samuel said to all Israel, “Behold, I have hearkened to your voice in all things that you have said to me, and I have set a king over you.

Significant differences:          No significant differences.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Samuel told the Israelites: I have give you a king, just as you asked.

NLT                                        Then Samuel addressed the people again: “I have done as you asked and give you a king.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Then Samuel said to all Israel, “I have listened to everything you have said to me and appointed a king over you.

JPS (Tanakh)                        Then Samuel said to all Israel, “I have yielded to you in all you have asked of me and have set a king over you.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     Then Samuel said to all Israel, “Behold, I have listened to your voice in all that you said to me, and I have appointed [lit., made] a king over you. .

Young's Updated LT              And Samuel says unto all Israel, “Lo, I have hearkened to your voice, to all that you [all] said to me, and I cause to reign over you a king,...

What is the gist of this verse? Samuel is speaking to Israel during the inauguration of Saul. He tells them that he has listened to all that they have said to him and he has placed a king over them.

Translation: Then Samuel said to all Israel... Vv. 14–15 of the previous verse have set up the situation or the scenario for Samuel’s speech. They are in Gilgal celebrating their victory, offering sacrifices to God and renewing the kingdom there.

Translation: “Hear me! I have listened to your voice...” Samuel acknowledges that he has listened to what the Israelites have said to him. They requested a king and Samuel supplied them a king (see 1Sam. 8, particularly vv. 5, 7, 9, 20–22).

Translation: “...to all that you have said to me...” This tells us that a delegation did not simply approach Samuel at one time and tell him that they wanted a king. Certainly, this did occur in Ramah when he was approach by the elders of Israel. However, Samuel interacted a great deal with the people. He apparently was still on his judges circuit, as we find him in Ramah, in Gilgal and in Gibeah, which would mean that there would be a lot of interaction between himself and other Israelites. No doubt did he occasionally speak to individual Israelites and hear again and again that they all desired a king. The delegation which originally spoke to Samuel was a result of strong public support for a king.

Translation: “...and I have caused to rule over you a king.” The Israelites have approached Samuel for a king and he provided them with one. God chose Saul, clearly indicated this choice to Samuel, and Samuel presented Saul to the people as their king (1Sam. 10:1, 24 11:14–15).

Next verse as others have rendered it:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       ...and now behold, your king is walking to your faces. And I, [even] I have aged and greyed and my sons behold them with you [all]. And I have walked to your faces from my youthful years until the day the this.

Septuagint                             And now, behold, the king goes before you; and I am grown old and I will rest, and, behold, my sons are among you. And, behold, I have gone about before you from my youth to this day.

Significant differences:          There is a minor difference whether Samuel says he has greyed (MT, Peshitta, Vulgate) or that he would rest (LXX). As mentioned in previous chapters, it is the norm for the Hebrew, Syriac and Latin to be in agreement.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       You have seen how I have led you ever since I was a young man. I’m already old. My hair is gray, and my own sons are grown. Now you must see how well your king will lead you.

NLT                                        I have selected him ahead of my own sons, and I stand here, an old, gray-haired man. I have served as your leader since I was a boy.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         And now, here is the king who will lead you. I am old and gray, but my sons are with you. I have led you from my youth until this day.

JPS (Tanakh)                        Henceforth the king will be your leader. As for me, I have grown old and gray—but my sons are still with you—and I have been your leader from my youth to this day.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     “And now, here is the king walking before you, but I am old and gray, and behold my sons are with you. And I have walked before you from my youth even to this day.

Young's Updated LT              ...and now, lo, the king is walking habitually before you, and I have become aged and gray-headed, and my sons, lo, they are with you, and I have walked habitually before you from my youth till this day.

What is the gist of this verse? Samuel points out that Saul is the king which will rule over them. Then he begins a personal message, telling Israel that he is old and his sons are known to all Israel; and he has been known by all Israel from his earliest youth.

Translation: “And, behold, your king walks before you.” Samuel, no doubt, looks off to the side toward Saul and gives a nod of the head in Saul’s direction.

Translation: “And I, even I, have become old and I have grayed...” Interestingly enough, our knowledge of Samuel has been him in his youth and him as an old man. In 1Sam. 1–3, we get Samuel’s birth, his parents, and his youth. In 1Sam. 4–6, we follow the Ark of God, and Samuel’s name is never mentioned (recall that 1Sam. 4:1a belongs with chapter 3). In 1Sam. 7, we have our only exposition of Samuel during his prime, along with what he expected was to be his swan song. His leadership had obviously gone by the wayside for about 20 years and the people returned to him and to God for guidance. This led to the sound defeat of the Philistines. And then, for an extended period of time, there was peace in the land. The Philistines were kept within their borders; the Amorites did not encroach on the cities of Israel. Samuel had grown old and he felt as though he had come to the end of his useful life at the end of 1Sam. 7. He wrote that chapter as though he was completing the information about his life and service to God and Israel. With 1Sam. 8, it is as though Samuel is writing an epilogue (that is, if he wrote this a little at a time). At least twice in chapter 8, Samuel makes reference to his old age (vv. 1, 5). He is at the end of his life, he believes; Israel is desirous of a king, and Samuel records this information, as it is extremely important to the history of Israel. After all, Israel is now in the stage of changing from being a theocracy to being a monarchy.

Translation: “...and my sons, behold them [they are] with you!” I think the implications of the CEV and the NLT are both apropos here. Samuel is going on about how he is old and gray, and he adds to this that his grown sons are among those listening to him. It is a further statement as to his age and his time of retirement. He has grown sons with whom Israel is familiar. The fact that his sons are worthless as leaders is not a part of what Samuel is saying (see 1Sam. 8:3). Now, Barnes incorrectly suggests that Samuel is again holding out his sons as possible leaders of Israel or that he is indicating some sort of disappointment that they have not been chosen by Israel to lead. This is silly. There is no possibility that his sons will lead Israel; Samuel himself does not want that. The little authority that he gave his sons was abused. Therefore, the only reason that he mentions his sons is a further illustration of his advanced age and their existence is a testimony to Saul’s personal integrity (that is, Samuel did not set things up so that one of his sons would rule over Israel). Samuel is passing the torch of leadership to Saul and not to his sons. This is probably on Samuel’s mind (as well as in the thoughts of his audience), but there is no direct statement in his recorded speech regarding that sentiment (i.e., that his integrity is also borne out by the fact that he does not appoint either of his sons as king of Israel). That Israel would go to Samuel and request him to appoint a king over them, and that he would not consider his own sons for this position is remarkable in itself (even given their corrupt behavior).

Translation: “...and I have walked before you [all] from my youthful years until this day.” Israel has observed Samuel and his behavior up until this time period. They know that he is an honorable man. This is the focus of Samuel’s speech in vv. 2–5.

Here is what others have done with v. 3:

Ancient texts:

Latin Vulgate                         Speak of me before the Lord, and before his anointed, whether I have taken any man's ox, or ass: if I have wronged any man, if I have oppressed any man, if I have taken a bribe at any man's hand: and I will despise it this day, and will restore it to you.

Masoretic Text                       Behold me! Answer in me before Y^ehowah and before His anointed: an ox of whom have I taken? And a donkey of whom have I taken? And who have I exploited? Who have I oppressed? And from a hand of who have I taken a ransom and I conceal my [two] eyes in him? And I will restore [it] to you [all].”

Peshitta                                 Behold, I am standing before you: testify against me before the Lord and before His anointed: whose ox have AI taken? Or whose ass have I taken? Or whom have I defrauded? Or whom have I oppressed? Or of whose hand have I taken a bribe to look upon him with favor? Tell me, and I will restore it to you.

Septuagint                             Behold, here am I—answer against me before the Lord and before His anointed: whose calf have I taken? Or whose ass have I taken? Or whom of you have I oppressed? Or whom have I been violent with? Or from whose hand have I taken a bribe, even a sandal? Bear witness against me, and I will make restitution to you.”

Significant differences:          You will note that the MT and the Peshitta are in almost full accord—Samuel is a judge, so the things which can impugned to a judge are dealt with: Saul has not exploited or defrauded anyone, despite the fact that he had the power to do so. Furthermore, he has not oppressed anyone—i.e., thrown them in jail, had them executed, or anything like this, without a reason. The Greek’s notion that Samuel has not been violent with anyone is fine, but not really in keeping with Samuel’s position. The Latin here is closer to the actual meaning—Samuel has not wronged any man.

The Peshitta also gives us a better idea as to what is the exchange for Samuel (or anyone) taking a bribe. An unjust judge would look upon a defendant with favor after receiving a bribe from the defendant. This is what we find in the Syriac and, more or less, in the Hebrew. What is found in this place in the Vulgate and in the Septuagint make little sense. My guess is, they were trying to interpret the meaning of the Hebrew, but only the Syriac seems to have gotten that correct.

Interestingly enough, both the Greek and Syriac ask for a testimony from the crowd, in case Samuel is guilty of not dispensing justice from his position as judge. Whether there is manuscript evidence for this, or whether they inserted this by implication, we do not know. In most similar cases, I lean toward the Greek translators having found this in the Hebrew manuscripts which they worked with. Equally interesting is that we do not find this phrase in the Latin.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Let me ask this. Have I ever taken anyone’s ox or donkey or forced you to give me anything? Have I ever hurt anyone or taken a bribe to give an unfair decision? Answer me so the Lord and his chosen king can hear you. And if I have done any of these things, I will give it all back.

NLT                                        Now tell me as I stand before the Lord and before his anointed one—whose ox or donkey have I stolen? Have I ever cheated any of you? Have I ever oppressed you? Have I ever taken a bribe? Tell me and I will take right whatever I have done wrong.”

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Here I am. Testify against me in front of the Lord and in front of his anointed king. Did I take anyone’s ox? Did I take anyone’s donkey? Did I cheat or oppress anyone? Did I take a bribe from anyone to look the other way? [if so,] I will give it all back.”

JPS (Tanakh)                        Here I am! Testify against me, in the presence of the Lord and in the presence of His anointed one: Whose ox have I taken, or whose ass have I taken? Whom have I defrauded or whom have I robbed? From whom have I taken a bribe to look the other way? I will return it to you.”

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     “Here I am; bear witness against me before the Lord and His anointed. Whose ox have I taken, or whom have I defrauded? Whom have I oppressed, or from whose hand have I taken a bribe to blind my eyes with it? I will restore it to you.”

NRSV                                    Here I am; testify against me before the Lord and before his anointed. Whose ox have I taken? Or whose donkey have I taken? Or whom have I defrauded? Whom have I oppressed? Or from whose hand have I taken a bribe to blind my eyes with it? Testify against me and I will restore it to you.” [the second testify against me is found in the Greek but not the Hebrew].

Young's Updated LT              “Lo, here am I; testify against me, over-against Jehovah, and over-against His anointed; whose ox have I taken, and whose ass have I taken, and whom have I oppressed; whom have I bruised, and of whose hand have I taken ransom, and hide my eyes with it? —and I restore to you.”

What is the gist of this verse? Samuel is about to tell the people that if he has ever done anything illegal or immoral to them in his position as judge, and that it is time to let him know, as he stands right before them in this public forum, if they believe him to be guilty of these infractions.

Translation: “Here I am! Testify against me before Y^ehowah and before His anointed.” Anointed, in the Greek, is Christos. Although some might like to make this a reference to God the Father and God the Son, Y^ehowah and His anointed actually refer to Jehovah, the God of Israel (Jesus Christ) and to Saul, who is God’s anointed one (1Sam. 10:1 24:6 26:9, 11 2Sam. 1:14). This is the first instance of a king of Israel being called God’s anointed; however, the High Priest has been so designated in the past (see Lev. 4:3, 5 6:22 1Sam. 2:35).

Up until this time, Samuel has been the visible administrator of God’s government. Now Samuel gives examples of areas where one could have defrauded the people from his position.

Translation: “Whose ox have I taken? And whose donkey have I taken?” In the ancient world, the ox and the donkey were two of the most valuable possessions that a person could own. Samuel has never decided a court case in such a way as to defraud some person of their possessions merely so that Samuel could take them.

There are, in the Houston area, neighborhood associations. Some of those who work for these associations are quite honorable and others behave like little Nazi’s. There have been neighborhood associations who have legally taken property from others for a piddling amount of fees. These men would not stand before a crowd of people like Samuel here and ask whom have they defrauded.

Translation: “And who have I exploited? Samuel is a judge in Israel. Men have stood before him day after day, some of whom face criminal charges and some of whom are being sued. Samuel, on numerous occasions, could have exploited this situation—could have asked for a bribe, could have sided with a friend against someone that he did not know. Samuel could have abused his position of power, but he did not.

Could you imagine a contemporary political figure taking such a stand before his constituents in a public forum? “If I have defrauded anyone or stolen anything, I am standing before you—you tell me what I have taken, and I will restore it.” There would be a mob. People would submit long lists of things taken from them. There would be hundreds and hundreds of people who were defrauded and stolen from in legal proceedings.

Translation: [And] who have I oppressed? This latter verb is a reference to an act of violence which a person in power might be able to get away with (which explains the translation of the LXX). The idea is, someone has come to court and Samuel did not like the way the looked, or their background, or they were enemies of Samuel’s friends, and so, for these reasons, he levied a heavy sentence or fine against the defendant. He oppressed the defendant not for justice, but for other considerations. Samuel asks this crowed, “Have I ever been guilty of doing this? Have I ever oppressed someone unjustly?”

I’ve been in court before, taken there by a neighborhood association. I did not think much of it at first, as the nearest judge in the nearest courtroom was a very just and honorable man. However, I later found out that we would go to court half way across town, which confused me. So, I went half way across town. The judge there had been very active in his own neighborhood association and had been president of his neighborhood association, so his mind was made up before we even walked into the courtroom. It made no difference what I said. Now, an honorable judge would have recused himself at this point. He should have said, “I am biased toward the neighborhood association, because I have been very actively involved with my own association.” This judge did not have that sort of personal integrity. Now, you may think that this is sour grapes on my part, but that is incorrect—this same judge was removed from the bench within two years of this court case for some sort of judicial impropriety. He was a man who oppressed others apart from the facts of the case put before him; Samuel, on the other hand, was not that sort of man.

Translation: And from whose hand have I taken a bribe... Samuel has been very honorable in his dealings with Israel. He has not taken a bribe from any man in his tenure as a judge over Israel. As a judge, one common temptation is to take a bribe in order to render this or that judgment. In fact, Samuel’s own sons did this (1Sam. 8:3).

When Jethro suggested to Moses that he delegate some of his work, one of the qualifications for a judge was a man who hated dishonest gain (Ex. 18:21). Of course, you recall Samuel’s sons who were not above taking bribes in order to influence their judicial decisions (1Sam. 8:3). The idea is that the bribe has caused Samuel to not look at what he is supposed to. He is blind to an infraction or to correct judgment because of this bribe.

In life, you are always going to find out that you just don’t seem to have enough money. Very few millionaires suddenly stop working, saying, “Hell, I’ve got more money than I know what to do with; I quit.” They continue to make money. People who are a lot richer than you or I defraud others, take money, and do so to increase their own personal wealth, even though millions of others look upon them as being incredibly rich already. The problem is not the money—it is legitimate to make money and it is legitimate for a wealthy person to continue to work and make more money each hour than others of us make in a lifetime. However, what is not legitimate is the lust one has for wealth—when one is willing to do a number of illegal things in order to gain wealth. It is the love of money which is the root of all evil.

By the way, just because you are poor, this does not mean that you can apply this verse to every rich person you come in contact with. Again, it is not the money, but the love of money which is sinful. You can be as poor as the proverbial church mouse, and suffer from a lust for money. You need to be able to trust God for what He has given you. As Paul said, I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I find myself (Philip. 4:11b).

Application: Your focus should never be on wealth or on personal possessions, but upon God. God can provide the things which you need. Can you think of some item that you would like right now that you don’t have the money for? Certainly. Maybe a house that is three times larger than the one you live in now; or, simply for a house, because you are now renting an apartment. However, what you do and do not have should not be your primary focus—Bible doctrine should be your focus.

Translation: ...—even a sandal [Hebrew: that I conceal my eyes (from judging correctly) because of it (the bribe]? This describes what a judge might do for a bribe—instead of delivering a just sentence, he might look the other way, so to speak. That is the idea behind this statement. The Peshitta interprets this as looking upon a defendant with favor, which is a reasonable interpretation (although not exactly what we find here).

In the LXX, we have that Samuel has not taken a bribe, not even a sandal. Obviously, they either are dealing with a different text or have assumed that there was a minor mistake in the Hebrew text, which was thus corrected. The specific idea is quite different than what we find in the Hebrew; however, the general sentiment is the same: Samuel has not taken any bribes for any reason. In the Hebrew and Syriac, Samuel has not taken any bribes to affect the outcome of a judgment; and in the Greek, Samuel has not taken even the smallest of bribes.

The Greek, according to Brenton, reads: “...or from whose hand have I taken a bribe—even a sandal?” Obviously, there is some disagreement here, but nothing which dramatically changes the general meaning of the verse. There are also two different interpretations of this taking a sandal—Brenton, and others, indicate that such a bribe is insignificant, almost a gift. However, Samuel has not had his judgement impaired because someone has given him a gift or something relatively insignificant. The idea is that the bribe may have been something which flew beneath the radar; that is, was insignificant enough to be taken as an innocent gift or to not be noticed at all. The second interpretation is that a sandal could represent a token payment which is made in order to validate certain legal transactions.

However, neither reading nor interpretation should cause us any sort of problem. In either case, a man who would take a bribe or who would defraud someone of their personal property—such a person violates the tenth commandment: “You will not desire you neighbor’s house; you will not desire your neighbor’s wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor.” (Ex. 20:17). And no one will accuse Samuel of such a thing.

As Xander might say, “That’s just crazy talking.” Samuel was extremely honorable and no one can fault him for his work or behavior.

Translation: [Testify against me] and I will restore [it] to you.” Samuel has been very honorable in his dealings with Israel.

Notice what Samuel has done: Whereas the tribal elders had used the venality of the prophet’s sons as a pretext for constitutional change, Samuel ensures that on this occasion the spotlight falls on himself and his record of probity in public affairs.

In reality, the human authority that the elders are replacing is Samuel. Therefore, Samuel focuses the attention on his own personal integrity. The sons could have been sorted out at the urging of the people. Samuel, since he vindicates himself before the people by his acknowledged character, would have dealt with his sons appropriately (or, so we would hope).

A reasonable question that might be asked right now is, why is Samuel justifying himself here? We are not told in Scripture to run to every person who has ever imagined that we have done something wrong and clear ourselves in their eyes. There is not enough time in our lives to do that. Plus, very often, someone will imagine that we have done some wrong and this will be a legitimate observation. There are times that we will slight one person or another. So our lives should not be centered on self-justification. However, Samuel is setting a high bar for Saul to meet. He has set up rules and regulations for the function of a king; however, he drives this home with his own life. From his youth to his old age, he has stood in a position of power before Israel. During those many years, Samuel did not abuse his power. Now, before Saul, who is about to assume power over Israel, Samuel makes public his spotless record of service. Saul is not to think that now that he is king, he can take advantage of this situation. Samuel holds himself out as an example as to the sort of conduct to which Saul should aspire.

There is a second reason that Samuel justifies himself publically. He does not want there to be any appearance of impropriety in the installation of Saul as king. It may have appeared to some that Saul was simply Samuel’s boy who Samuel hand-picked for this position, but that was clearly not the case. Samuel did not rig the choice of Saul in 1Sam. 10 to put in his own golden boy. Saul was God’s choice, not Samuel’s, and Samuel’s personal character which testified to this.

Here is what others have done with v. 4:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so they say, “You have not exploited us and you have not oppressed us and you have not taken from a hand of a man anything.”

Septuagint                             And they said to Samuel, “You have not injured us, and you have not oppressed us, and you have not afflicted us, and you have not taken anything from anyone’s hand.”

Significant differences:          The LXX has a few additional words; the Syriac and Latin are, as is most often the case, in agreement with the Hebrew.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       “No,” the Israelites answered, “You’ve never cheated us in any way!”

NLT                                        “No,” they replied, “you have never cheated or oppressed us in any way, and you have never taken even a single bribe.”

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         They answered, “You didn’t cheat us, oppress us, or take anything from anyone.”

JPS (Tanakh)                        They responded, “You have not defrauded us, and you have not robbed us, and you have taken nothing from anyone.”

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     And they said, “You have not defrauded us, or oppressed us, or taken anything from any man’s hand.”

Young's Updated LT              And they say, “You have not oppressed us, nor have you crushed us, nor have you taken from the hand of anyone anything.”

What is the gist of this verse? The people respond to Samuel, saying, “You have not oppressed or exploited us; you have never taken a bribe in order to distort justice.”

Translation: And they answered [him], “You have not exploited us... Again, you will note slight differences between the Hebrew and the Greek. The general meaning of the verse is unchanged. Obviously, there are different words and individual meanings, but the overall thrust of the verse is the same. The first verb is the 2^nd person masculine singular, with the 1^st person plural suffix, Qal perfect of ׳âshaq (ק ַש ָע) [pronounced ģaw-SHAHK] again, which means to exploit, to oppress, to wrong, to extort. With this verb is the negative. The elders present acknowledge that Samuel has not exploited them.

Translation: ...and you have not oppressed us;... Altogether, this gives us: And they said, “You have not exploited us and you have not oppressed us...” The response uses the exact same words that Samuel used, except with negatives. It is clear to those in this group that Samuel has never defrauded them in anyway.

Translation: ...you have not taken anything from [any] man’s hand.” The affirming testimony of the elders continues: “...and you have taken nothing from the hand of [any] man.” It is clear to the public that Samuel has been completely honest and fair with the Israelites. How many men could stand before their constituents or before their congregation and allow for such a public examination? How would you feel about all those who have known you standing before you judging you with respect to your character. You might be able to stand up to it, but quite frankly, I have known too many people and have made too many mistakes. I don’t know that I could survive such close public scrutiny. Samuel was a man of great faith and great integrity. He has lived his life in a glass house, so to speak. He has expressed the interests of his personal volition again and again from its earliest inklings. Still, he can stand before these men and ask them to come forward if he has cheated them in any way. What Samuel has achieved here is that he has gotten the men of Israel to acknowledge by oath that they had no grounds for dissatisfaction with Samuel’s administration, and, consequently, no well-founded reason for their request for a king.

As I have made clear, there are some exegetes who simply make my blood pressure rise because of the goofy things they say and the conclusions that they come to. And I have made no secret that Gnana Robinson is one of those. However, now and again he makes an observation which is unique and important. The religion of the Bible is a down-to-earth religion; it speaks about mundane things of the world here and now—stealing, defrauding, oppression, bribery, and corruption, and it does not speak about other-worldly eschatological things alone.

There are many times in the history of the church (and I am referring to any denomination now), where things would have been better if someone had simply stopped and said, “Is this moral? Is this righteous? Am I doing that which is right? Am I responding to this situation honorably?” The same questions which we should ask ourselves, those in the clergy should ask of themselves as well (and, quite obviously, there are pious men everywhere where such self-examination is at the forefront of their deliberations). Samuel is able to do this in a public forum and remain unscathed.

Here’s what has been done with v. 5:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And he says to them, “Witness [is] Y^ehowah in you [all] and a witness [is] His anointed the day the this that you have not found in my hand anything.” And so he says, “Witness.”

Septuagint                             And Samuel said to the people, “The Lord [is] a witness among you, and His anointed [is] a witness this day, that you [all] have not found anything in my hand.” And they said, “Witness.”

Significant differences: 

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Samuel said, “The Lord and his chosen king are witnesses to what you have said.” “That’s true,” they replied.

NLT                                        “The Lord and his anointed one are my witnesses,” Samuel declared, “that you can never accuse me of robbing you.”

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Samuel told them, “The Lord is a witness to what you’ve said, and his anointed king is a witness today that you’ve found nothing in my hands.” “He is a witness,” they answered.

JPS (Tanakh)                        He said to them, “The Lord then is witness, and His anointed is witness, to your admission [lit., against you] this day that you have found nothing in my possession.” They [Heb., he] responded, “He is!”

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     And he said to them, “The Lord is witness against you, and His anointed is witness this day that you have found nothing in my hand.” And they said, “He is witness.”

Young's Updated LT              And he says unto them, “A witness is Jehovah against you; and a witness is His anointed this day, that you [all] have not found anything in my hand.” And they say, “A witness.”

What is the gist of this verse? Samuel says that Jehovah God is a witness to his testimony and to their mistake in demanding a king; also, even their king, God’s anointed, is a witness to this.

Translation: And he said to them, “Y^ehowah [is] a witness against you... We have some minor discrepancies between the Greek and the Hebrew at first. However, what surprises me is that Young does not agree with the literal Hebrew (compare the JPS translation). We will sort that out when the time comes.

The first phrase, And he said to them, “Jehovah [is] a witness against you [all]...” does not mean that these people have done something wrong in their testimony to Samuel. Samuel is just saying that what they have said before God stands as a witness against them; his point is going to culminate in their mistaken notion that they need a king.

Translation: ...and His anointed [is] a witness [against you] this day... The witness of God in heaven is supplemented by an earthly witness. Jehovah God is the heavenly witness to what these men have said; Saul is the earthly witness to what these men have said. The irony here is quite amusing—the people desire a king, which means that they have rejected Samuel and they have rejected God; and the earthly witness to all of this is the king they desire.

Translation: ...that you have not found anything in my hand.” This is what God and Saul are witnesses to. The idea is, there is no evidence of any impropriety on Samuel’s part. Not finding something in Samuel’s hand means, there is no evidence of him doing anything which is unjust.

Translation: And he [Saul] said, “Testimony [confirmed].” [or, “I am a witness to this”]. Literally, this reads: And so he says, “Witness.” Witness, used by itself here, means an affirming testimony. Now, like everyone else, and as most have rendered this verse, I look at this and I am thinking that whatever group of people that Samuel is talking to (whether it is face to face with thousands of men or with a smaller delegation of men); whoever—these are the ones who respond to Samuel. They say, in so many words, “Our words are a witness to this.” However, the Hebrew has this as a masculine singular subject, which made me think, perhaps this is Saul’s contribution. He is affirming that he is a witness to this. Samuel just said, “And His anointed is witness this day...” That is a reference to Saul. Therefore, it is reasonable for Saul to interject, “I am a witness to this.” That is the gist of this latter portion of this verse. There are no contradictions of any sort. It is a simple matter of interpretation, and the Hebrew makes it more likely that Saul interjects that he is a witness, confirming what Samuel and the people have just said. The other alternatives are: (1) we have a spokesman for the men there answering Samuel. (2) There is an official who is making a transcript of what was said; or any other assistant of Samuel’s and he is the one who speaks. (3) The third option is that a copyist, at one time, went to write down what was here, but wrote down, by accident, the first and he says rather than and they said. This is a common error found in the Hebrew manuscripts. However, none of these alternatives ring as true as Saul simply affirming, as God’s anointed, what Samuel has said and the people have affirmed.

Samuel Reminds Israel of God’s Faithfulness to Them in the Past

As we delve into the next several verses, we need to keep the following in the back of our minds: Israel, by asking for a king, has questioned God’s faithfulness. They have essentially said to Samuel that God was unable to continue to take care of them and therefore they needed a king to do what God was unable to do. Now, they certainly do not state their case like that—that would be the absolute wrong approach to take with Samuel. However, what they do is state why they need a king according to their human viewpoint, without making mention of God. What Samuel will do is give these men several illustrations of how God has faithfully taken care of Israel in the past; and then, to show them that this is the God Who is over them now, he will call for proof from God to let these men know that they have defied the Living God of Israel.

I must admit that I, as a young person, had very little interest in history. I was interested in the now; but mostly in myself and my own personal desires. As a young person, I had very little personal history; so history, I believed, did not concern me. As I have become older and just a little less egocentric, I recognize the importance and validity of history. In Samuel’s day and time, more people had a more profound respect for history; and Samuel—like Moses, like Joshua, and like Gideon—will now review Israel’s history so that they can get a clear understanding of God’s involvement in Israel’s history. The point is, the people can trust and depend upon their God. At the end of Samuel’s speaking, he will make it clear that, even though the people screwed up and required a king, still God was faithful to them and would remain faithful to them.

As we have seen several times before, Israel’s redemption history begins with the exodus (compare Acts 13:17). Here’s is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so says Samuel unto the people, “Y^ehowah Who made Moses and Aaron and Who brought up your fathers out from a land of Egypt.

Septuagint                             And Samuel spoke to the people, saying, The Lord who appointed Moses and Aaron [is] witness, who brought our fathers up out of Egypt.

Significant differences:          In the LXX, the idea is, Jehovah God is a witness as well; and in the Hebrew, this is not the emphasis. That Jehovah God is a witness is already found in v. 5. This begins a new section which deals with God’s faithfulness to Israel.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Then Samuel told them, The Lord brought your ancestors out of Egypt and chose Moses and Aaron to be your leaders.

NAB                                       Continuing, Samuel said to the people: “The Lord is witness, who appointed Moses and Aaron, and who brought your fathers up from the land of Egypt.

NLT                                        “It was the Lord who appointed Moses and Aaron,” Samuel continued. “He brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt.

REB                                       Samuel said to the people, ‘The Lord is witness, the Lord who appointed Moses and Aaron and brought your fathers up from Egypt.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

JPS (Tanakh)                        Samuel said to the people, “The Lord [is witness], He who appointed Moses and Aaron and who brought your fathers out of the land of Egypt.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

The Emphasized Bible           And Samuel said unto the people: ║Witness║ is Yahweh, who wrought with Moses and with Aaron, And who brought up your fathers out of the land of Egypt.

NASB                                     Then Samuel said to the people, “It is the Lord who appointed Moses and Aaron and who brought your fathers up from the land of Egypt.

NRSV                                    Samuel said to the people, “The Lord is witness, who appointed Moses and Aaron and brought your ancestors up out of the land of Egypt.

Young's Updated LT              And Samuel says unto the people, “Jehovah—He who made Moses and Aaron, and who brought up your fathers out of the land of Egypt!

What is the gist of this verse? Samuel begins talking about Jehovah God, who sent Moses and Aaron to the people and brought them up out of Egypt.

Translation: Then Samuel said to the people,... As you may gather from the other translators, this appears to be a rather simple verse. There are some nuances, however. We begin with and so says Samuel unto the people.

Translation:...“Y^ehowah, Who fashioned Moses and Aaron... The confusing part of this verse is the relative pronoun (which will also occur once more in the second half of the verse). Here is what we have so far: And Samuel then said to the people, “Jehovah, Who fashioned Moses and Aaron...” We generally use a relative pronoun when we introduce a subordinate clause. We expect to have already had the main verb or to soon introduce the main verb. However, we do not have that here.

However, in the Greek, prior to the word Lord, we have the word witness. The Hebrew feels unfinished in this verse; the addition of the word witness completes this verse: “Jehovah, Who fashioned Moses and Aaron, [is] a witness,...” This does not mean that this word dropped out of the Hebrew by accident; there is enough inference in this and the previous verse for witness to be inserted by the principal of ellipsis—at least in the eyes of the translators of the Greek Septuagint. I see this instead as a new topic, one which deals with the faithfulness of God. However, the problem with my view is, the two relative pronouns which clamor for a main verb. Some deal with this by adding it is to beginning of this sentence: “It is Y^ehowah Who fashioned Moses and Aaron...”

Translation: ...and Who brought your fathers up out of the land of Egypt, [is witness]. Or, “...and [it is Jehovah God] Who brought your fathers up out from the land of Egypt.” God, through Micah, testified to this many years later in Micah 6:4: “Indeed, I brought you up from the land of Egypt and ransomed you from the house of slaves. And I sent before you Moses, Aaron and Miriam.”

Barnes writes: Samuel’s purpose is to impress the people with the conviction that Jehovah was their God, and the God of their fathers; that to Him they owed their national existence and all their national blessings, and that faithfulness to Him, to the exclusion of all other worship (v. 21) was the only safety of the newly-established monarchy. Observe the constant reference to the Exodus as the well-known turning-point of their national life (see iv. 8, vi. 6).

If you read the correct translation of this verse from the Hebrew, it appears to be incomplete. Even with the addition of the word witness from the Greek, it appears to be discombobulated. This is because, in the English, we tend to place our participles first and our main verb last; this is because the action of the participle is coterminous with or precedes the action of the main verb. We need that main verb. Being the chronologically-oriented people that we are, we put our sentences together in that same way—the action which occurs first is the action which comes first in the sentence. Since we do not have a main verb, in either the Greek or the Hebrew, we will need to insert the verb to be. Furthermore, to place everything in the order that we would expect it to be, we need to move the word witness to the end of the verse. Therefore, in the English, the entire verse would read: And Samuel then said to the people, “Jehovah, Who fashioned Moses and Aaron, and Who brought your fathers up out from the land of Egypt—[it is He who stands as] a witness.”

Now, it may appear as though Samuel is repeating himself, but he is not. He is not simply re-emphasizing that Jehovah God is a witness to this testimony of his character. Samuel’s point is this: this is not the witness of some god who is represented by an idol, but this is the living Jehovah God who chose Moses and Aaron to lead the people out of Egypt. This is a God Who is alive and operates in the life of Israel. Later on in this chapter, Samuel will make it clear that this same God is still a part of the history and function of Israel.

Bear in mind, this is one interpretation of the meaning here. I think it more properly reads: And Samuel then said to the people, “It is Jehovah, Who fashioned Moses and Aaron, and Who brought your fathers up out from the land of Egypt.” Samuel is certainly going on to a different topic; the word witness simply allows us to relate this back to what has already been said. The addition of the words it is allows this verse to stand on its own, apart from what has gone before.

Here is how v. 7 is handled by others:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And now take a stand and I may be judged with you to faces of Y^ehowah with all [the] righteous acts of Y^ehowah which He has done with you and with your fathers.

Septuagint                             And now stand still, and I will judge you before the Lord; and I will relate to you all the righteousness of the Lord; the things which He has done among you and your fathers.

Significant differences:          The additional phrase found in the Greek is not found in the Hebrew, Syriac or Latin. However, it does not significantly change the meaning of this verse.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Now the Lord will be your judge. So stand here and listen, while I remind you how often the Lord has saved you and your ancestors from your enemies.

NLT                                        Now stand here quietly before the Lord as I remind you of all the great things the Lord has done for you and your ancestors.

REB                                       Now stand up, and here in the presence of the Lord I shall put the case against you and recite all the victories which he has won for you and for your forefathers.

TEV                                       Now stand where you are, and I will accuse you before the Lord by reminding you of all the mighty actions the Lord did to save you and your ancestors. [by reminding you is according to one ancient translation]

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Now, stand up while I put you on trial in front of the Lord and cite all the righteous things the Lord did for you and your ancestors.

JPS (Tanakh)                        Come, stand before the Lord while I cite against you all the kindnesses that the Lord has done to you and your fathers.

NIV                                        Now then, stand here, because I am going to confront you with evidence before the Lord, as to all the righteous acts performed by the Lord for you and your fathers.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

The Emphasized Bible           ║Now║ therefore take your stand and let me plead with you, before Yahweh,—and tell you all the righteous acts of Yahweh, which he wrought with you and with your fathers;... [Rotherham sticks with the Septuagint here, saying that the Masoretic text is difficult]

NASB                                     “So now, take your stand, that I may plead with you before the Lord concerning all the righteous acts of the Lord which He did for you and your fathers.

NRSV                                    Now therefore take your stand, so that I may enter into judgment with you before the Lord, and I will declare to you all the saving deeds of the Lord that he performed for you and for your ancestors.

Owen                                     Now therefore stand still that I may plead with you before Yahweh concerning all the saving deeds of Yahweh which He performed for you and for your fathers.

Young's Updated LT              And now, station yourselves, and I judge you before Jehovah, with all the righteous acts of Jehovah, which He did with you and with your fathers.

What is the gist of this verse? Samuel tells the people to listen while he puts forth the case of Jehovah as their proper ruler and king; Samuel will recount the faithfulness of Jehovah in all that He has done for Israel.

The NIV (and to a lesser extent, the REB and the NRSV) have captured the gist of this verse. Samuel wants these men to take a moment and concentrate one what he is about to say. He is going to present evidence to prove that the God of their fathers is the God Who is taking care of them today. Now, we will set the gist of the verse aside for a moment and delve into the exegesis of it.

This may appear to be a fairly simple verse, but it is one of the most difficult that we will run into in this book of Samuel. The key, I believe to this verse, is Samuel’s limited vocabulary and his emotional involvement in what he is saying. We have him using one particular word in three different ways, which causes a translator some problems (the Greek may help to partially straighten this out). Since the word êth is found four times in this verse, we ought to first take a careful look at the word in question; therefore, you need to examine The Doctrine of êth.

Translation: Now, therefore, take a stand,... Although Samuel has just finished justifying his own authority and integrity in the past, he still has more to say. Perhaps the crowd began to get a little restless, thinking that Samuel was done speaking, I don’t know. But here, Samuel tells them to stand still for a moment and he will explain to them their own history.

Translation: ...that I may be judged with you before Y^ehowah... In this portion of v. 7, we have the 1^st person singular, Niphal imperfect (with a voluntative hê) of shâphaţ (ט ַפ ָש) [pronounced shaw-FAHT], which means to judge, to govern. The Niphal can (1) indicate that the verb is to be used in the passive sense (to be judged); however,

the Niphal can also (2) refer to an action in a state of progress or development; therefore we add in the word being. Finally, the Niphal (3) can express adjectival ideas and, in plural forms, stress the individual effect upon each member of the group. According to Gesenius, shâphaţ in the Niphal, means to litigate. According to BDB, in the Niphal, shâphaţ means to enter into controversy, to plead. This gives us: “Now, therefore, take a stand and I will be judged with you before Jehovah...” Interestingly enough, none of the translators render this verb in its most simple passive form. The reason that they do not will become more clear as we move along in this verse. Samuel is still a bit miffed that the Israelites have demanded a king. Here, they will have a king, but he sets them up to be judged along with himself before God. What Samuel is asking them to do is to stand with him before God as if they were on trial, and Samuel will review the evidence of God’s faithfulness, which they doubt.

Translation:...[and I will declare] the righteous acts of Y^ehowah... Or, “...[along] with all the righteous acts of Jehovah...” Note that in the Greek (which is followed by the NRSV and the REB), we have something along the lines of “Now, therefore, take a stand and I will be judged with you before Jehovah, and I will declare all the righteous acts of Jehovah...” With the insertion of this verb of declaration, we are no longer troubled by the sign of the direct object, which would naturally follow such a verb. You see, the direct object calls out for a main verb somewhere.

Translation: ...which He has done among you and among your fathers. The NIV Study Bible comments: These righteous acts (see vv. 8–11) demonstrate the constancy of the Lord’s covenant faithfulness toward his people in the past and, by way of contrast, serve as an indictment of their present apostasy.

Essentially, Samuel is telling those present to stop for a moment and take stock of what has occurred. They have admitted to the integrity of Samuel. Here, Samuel says, “Stop, now lets allow ourselves to be judged together before God in view of the righteous acts of God.” In the desert wilderness and in the times of the judges, the fathers of those standing there witnessed God’s faithfulness. At this point in time, these men themselves had witnessed their own victory over the Ammonites, of whom they would have been afraid had Saul not led them into battle. Samuel will now give these men examples, but most of his examples will deal with the judges who have delivered Israel. His point is that, God is still in charge; given the Ammonite situation, God would have still provided a judge and deliverer for Israel (which would have been Saul) and there was no reason for them to have gotten panicked to the point of demanding a king.

The NIV Study Bible points out an important shift in these verses. Samuel, in the first several verses, stood before the people and suggested several areas where he could have been remiss in his duties to Israel and he asked the people to judge him before God. In these verses, there is a role reversal. Now he asks them to judge God’s faithfulness to Israel. If he, Samuel, was not unfaithful to Israel, then perhaps Jehovah God has been unfaithful to Israel. Then Samuel covers a very abbreviated history of God’s dealings with Israel. The idea is thus: “You people have requested a king? Is this because I have been unfaithful or unethical in my dealings with you? Then, how about God—do you have evidence that He has been unfaithful in His dealings with you?”

What will follow in vv. 8–11 will be a list of historical reasons why Israel cannot fault God for being unfaithful or inattentive. In these verses, Samuel will give two sets of reasons to affirm God’s faithfulness. (1) The most commonly cited indication that God functions with His great power on behalf of Israel is the exodus. God took a large handful of Israelites (i.e., the sons of Israel) to Egypt, and, when Egypt exploited them by slavery, God sent Moses and Aaron to take them out of Egypt and to bring them to the Land of Promise (which story is the bulk of the narrative found in Exodus through Joshua). (2) Cited less often is God’s involvement with Israel post-inhabitation of Palestine. However, Samuel names several examples from the times of the judges (which is continuing even until now, in the context of our chapter, as Samuel is a judge—1Sam. 7:15–17). What we will find in vv. 9–11 is proof positive that God remains active in the life of Israel.

Let’s see how others have dealt with this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       According as went Jacob [into] Egypt and so cries your fathers unto Y^ehowah and so sends Y^ehowah Moses and Aaron and so they bring forth your fathers from Egypt and so they cause them to dwell in the place the this. In the most literal text above, I included the Greek text in brackets.

Septuagint                             When Jacob and his sons went into Egypt, and Egypt humbled them, then our fathers cried to the Lord, and the Lord sent Moses and Aaron; and they brought our fathers out of Egypt, and He made them to dwell in this place.

Significant differences:          In the MT, it is your fathers as verses our fathers in the Greek. Furthermore, the Greek adds a few details—that Jacob went into Egypt with his sons and that Egypt humbled them. As usual, the Syriac and Latin are in agreement with the Hebrew. However, the Greek has important details, albeit minor, which appear to better hold this verse together.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       After Jacob went to Egypt, your ancestors cried out to the Lord for help, and he sent Moses and Aaron. They led your ancestors out of Egypt and had them settle in this land.

NLT                                        “When the Israelites were in Egypt and cried out to the Lord, he sent Moses and Aaron to rescue them from Egypt and to bring them into this land.

REB                                       After Jacob and his sons had gone down to Egypt and suffered at the hands of the Egyptians, your forefathers appealed to the Lord for help, and he sent Moses and Aaron, who brought them out of Egypt and settled them in this place.

TEV                                       When Jacob and his family went to Egypt and the Egyptians oppressed them, your ancestors cried to the Lord for help, and he sent Moses and Aaron, who brought them out of Egypt and settled them in this land. [and the Egyptians oppressed them comes from an ancient translation—it is not found in the Hebrew]

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         When you ancestors went with Jacob to Egypt [and were oppressed], they cried out to the Lord, who sent Moses and Aaron to bring them our of Egypt. The Lord settled them in this place.

JPS (Tanakh)                        “When Jacob came to Egypt, your fathers cried out to the Lord, and the Lord sent Moses and Aaron, who brought your fathers out of Egypt and settled them in this place.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

The Emphasized Bible           How that <when Jacob had come into Egypt,—and your fathers had made outcry unto Yahweh> then Yahweh sent Moses and Aaron and they brought forth your fathers’ out of Egypt, and he caused them to dwell in this place.

NASB                                     “When Jacob went into Egypt and your fathers cried out to the Lord, then the Lord sent Moses and Aaron who brought [lit., and they brought] your fathers out of Egypt and settled them in this place.

NRSV                                    When Jacob went into Egypt and the Egyptians oppressed them, then your ancestors cried to the Lord and the Lord sent Moses and Aaron, who brought forth your ancestors out of Egypt, and settled them in this place.

Young's Updated LT              “When Jacob had come in to Egypt, and your fathers cry to Jehovah, then Jehovah sends Moses and Aaron, and they bring out your fathers from Egypt, and cause them to dwell in this place,...

What is the gist of this verse? Samuel now reminds Israel of God’s faithfulness to them. He begins by telling them about their predecessors who lived in Egypt, whom the Lord brought out by the hand of Moses and Aaron.

Translation: For example, Jacob went down to Egypt... Or, more precisely: “According as, Jacob went to Egypt...” Now, in my opinion, what Samuel is doing now is giving an example. He’s emotionally stirred up and it is possible that the words here are not used with complete linguistic correctness. We might better understand this as reading: “For example, Jacob went to Egypt...”

The Greek adds and his sons after the word Jacob. “For example, Jacob and his sons went to Egypt...” This is probably the correct text. Most of this verse cannot be read in the Dead Sea Scrolls; however, there is enough space where the text should be to indicate that the expanded version that we find in the Greek is the more accurate text.

We do not know how much detail Samuel will go into here. Samuel is famous in his recollections for leaving out a great deal of detail, particularly when it comes to what he has said. Therefore, it would not be out of character for Samuel to spend 10 minutes on God’s faithfulness in the exodus while speaking to these men, but to record just the barest outline of what he said here in Scripture. Furthermore, since the exodus is mentioned so many times throughout Scripture, including several descriptions in the psalms, God the Holy Spirit knows that we do not need a full dissertation right here.