hide text
The writer introduced the history of Saul's reign by referring to the king's age and possibly the length of his reign. Verse one contains a textual corruption in the Hebrew text.132There the verse reads, "Saul was . . . years old when he began to reign, and he reigned . . . two years over Israel."
The first problem is Saul's age when he began to reign. No other text of Scripture gives us his age at this time. The NASB translators have supplied "40"and the NIV translators "30."The AV translators wrote, "Saul [was . . . years old],"leaving the number undefined.
Saul reigned about 40 years (Acts 13:21). If he was about 40 years old when he began to reign, he would have been about 80 when he died in battle on Mt. Gilboa (ch. 31). This seems very old in view of the account in chapter 31. Even if Saul was 70 he would have been quite old, hardly the age we would assume as we read chapter 31. The account of his anointing by Samuel pictures a young adult with a measure of maturity. I would suggest that 40 may be the first number that the copyists lost in 13:1. My reasons follow below.
The second problem is, what was the second number in 13:1 that is absent in the Hebrew text? The NASB has "32, "the NIV "42, "and the AV "2."If the last part of verse 1 gives us the length of Saul's reign, as is customary in similar summaries of kings' reigns (cf. 1 Kings 14:21; 22:42; 2 Kings 8:17, 26; et al.), the missing number probably should be 42.133If the last part of verse 1 gives the year of Saul's reign in which the events of chapter 13 happened, the number probably should be 2. I think probably the total length of Saul's reign is in view in verse 1. I prefer the NIV's 42 years here.
When did the events of this chapter happen if the last number in verse 1 indicates the length of Saul's reign? In 10:8 Samuel commanded Saul to go to Gilgal and to wait seven days for him there. In 13:8 we read that Saul went to Gilgal and waited seven days for Samuel there. Therefore the events of chapter 13 appear to have followed those in chapter 10 soon.134
However in 13:3 Jonathan is old enough to lead an invasion against a Philistine garrison. Jonathan must have been at least about 20 to do that. If he was about 20 and this was the beginning of Saul's reign, we have two problems. First, Saul must have been somewhat older than 30 when he began ruling. Yet this would make him quite old when he died in battle, as explained above. I think he was probably about 40 even though this would make him about 80 when he died. Second, if Jonathan was about 20 at the beginning of Saul's reign, he would have been about 60 when he died with Saul since Saul reigned about 40 years (Acts 13:21). If David was a contemporary of Jonathan, as 1 Samuel implies, David began reigning when Jonathan was about 60. Yet 2 Samuel 5:4 says David was 30 when he began to reign.
Some of the evidence (10:8 and 13:8) seems to support the view that the events of chapter 13 happened early in Saul's reign. Other evidence (the ages of David and Jonathan) suggests that they may have happened much later. I favor the view that the events in chapter 13 follow those in chapter 10 closely.135
Gibeah was Saul's hometown and his capital. Michmash was five miles northeast of Gibeah, and Geba was four. Evidently Saul wanted to clear the area around Gibeah--and the central Benjamin plateau on which it stood--of Philistines to make this center of Israelite life more secure. Jonathan's initial victory at Geba provoked the Philistines who massed their forces across the steep valley between Geba and Michmash.136Saul mustered the Israelite forces in the Jordan Valley at Gilgal, about 12 miles east of Michmash.137In doing so, he was following orders that Samuel had given him earlier (10:8). Apparently Saul was to meet Samuel to offer sacrifices of worship before he engaged the Philistines in battle. Because of the superior Philistine army the Israelite soldiers were afraid and some even fled (cf. Judg. 6:2). The enemy must have been strong to threaten Israel's eastern territory since Philistia was Israel's neighbor to the west.
"Since Hebrew' was commonly used by non-Israelites as a synonym for Israelite' (cf. 4:5-10), it is understandable that the two terms should alternate throughout the narratives of the Philistine wars in chapters 13-14."138
Fearful lest the mass desertion of his soldiers continue Saul decided to slay the sacrificial animals before engaging the enemy and to attack rather than to wait for Samuel to come and offer the sacrifices. This was a violation of the prophet's orders (10:8).139Saul could have asked for the Lord's help in prayer, of course, as Hannah did. Evidently ritual was very important to him so he offered the sacrifice and disobeyed Samuel. His choice suggests that he had a rather superficial relationship with Yahweh. Contrast Gideon who also faced overwhelming odds fearfully yet trusted and obeyed Yahweh nonetheless (Judg. 6).
Saul's punishment may appear excessively severe at first. However the king of Israel was the Lord's lieutenant. Any disobedience to his Commander-in-Chief was an act of insubordination that threatened the whole administrative organization of God's kingdom on earth. Saul failed to perceive his place and responsibility under God.140He assumed more authority than was his. For this reason God would not establish a dynasty for him (cf. 24:21). Had he obeyed on this occasion God would have placed Saul's descendants on his throne for at least one generation if not more (v. 13; cf. 1 Kings 11:38). Perhaps Saul's descendants would have reigned in a parallel kingdom with the king from Judah.141Now Saul's son would not succeed him. Eventually God would have raised up a king from the tribe of Judah even if Saul had followed the Lord faithfully (Gen. 49:10). That king probably would have been David.
Samuel's departure from the battlefield (v. 15) was symbolic of the breach that now opened up between Samuel and Saul. Saul's presumptuous plan also failed to bring his departing soldiers back to him.
