In the previous chapter, we saw that God rejected Saul as king of Israel. In this chapter, we find God’s appointing of David to be Israel’s new king and ruler. Following on from this chapter, we begin to see the great tension which arose between Saul and David, which was motivated by Saul’s rejection.
The Lord doesn’t mix his words with Samuel; He tells him it’s time to stop mourning for Saul, 1 Samuel 16:1 / 1 Samuel 15:35, and get on with the task God has given him to do.
In other words, it was time to move on from the past and start to look to the future. God has chosen a new king for Israel from the household of Jesse, 1 Samuel 16:1 / Ruth 4:17 / Matthew 1:5. Bethlehem was a small insignificant village, but because of the event, which was about to happen, it was going to become very significant, Micah 5:2.
Samuel asks God how can he go because if Saul hears about it, he will kill him, but God tells him to take a heifer with him and say, ‘I have come to sacrifice to the LORD,’ 1 Samuel 16:2.
God also tells him to invite Jesse to the sacrifice, and He will show Samuel what to do; he is to anoint for God the one He indicates, 1 Samuel 16:3. I’m sure you notice that although Samuel was concerned about Saul, God didn’t even mention him.
Clarke, in his commentary, says the following concerning 1 Samuel 16:3.
‘The common custom was, after the blood of the victim had been poured out to God, and the fat burnt, to feast on the flesh of the sacrifice. This appears to have been the case in all, except in the whole burnt-offering; this was entirely consumed.’
As with most towns and cities, there were elders who met at the city gates, and when Samuel arrived the elders ‘trembled’ and asked if he came in peace, 1 Samuel 16:4.
On the surface this seems like a strange reaction, they obviously feared the Lord and His authority but more likely they ‘trembled’ because they thought that anyone who supported Samuel was against Saul as their king, by default this would mean that they would end up being killed because they supported Samuel, 1 Samuel 22:11-19.
Samuel then asks them to ‘consecrate themselves’, 1 Samuel 16:5. In other words, they were to be set apart for God’s work. Then he consecrated Jesse and his sons and invited them to the sacrifice, 1 Samuel 16:5. They were to be ready for the sacrifice which Samuel was preparing to do.
Clarke, in his commentary, says the following.
‘Change your clothes, and wash your bodies in pure water, and prepare your minds by meditation, reflection, and prayer; that, being in the spirit of sacrifice, ye may offer acceptably to the Lord.’
Samuel meets some of Jesse’s sons, seven in total, but only three are mentioned, Eliab, Abinadab and Shammah.
Barnes, in his commentary, says the following.
‘It appears that Jesse had eight sons, but in 1 Chronicles 2:13-15, only seven are ascribed to him.’
Samuel saw Eliab first and was convinced he was the one whom God had chosen, 1 Samuel 16:6. Whilst Samuel was looking at the physical appearance of Eliab, the outward appearance, God was looking at the hearts of the men, 1 Samuel 16:7.
Next up was Abinadab but once Samuel saw him, he knew he wasn’t the one God chose either, 1 Samuel 16:8. Next up was Shammah and when Sameul saw him, he was rejected too, 1 Samuel 16:9.
Jesse had seven of his sons brought to Samuel but none were chosen, 1 Samuel 16:10. If we learn anything from this, it’s simply this, we shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, Matthew 7:15-20 / Galatians 5:22-23.
After meeting Jesse’s seven sons, Samuel asks if he has any other sons, 1 Samuel 16:11, to which Jesse tells him about David, who was the youngest of his sons. Although we don’t know how old David was at this time, we do know that he was mature enough to look after his father’s sheep. He was the youngest, but a very handsome young man, 1 Samuel 16:12.
The important point is that God knew him and knew his heart and knew what kind of a person he would become. And so, God tells Samuel to anoint David, 1 Samuel 16:12, as he did with Saul and all the other kings who would come. No man chose David to be king but God, later as time goes by, this would change because man would then choose a king for themselves.
Because God anointed David to be king and ruler of Israel, He was sending a clear message to all of Israel that David was His choice, and he would become king a few years from now. Although many wouldn’t understand God’s choosing of David, even his brothers, 1 Samuel 17:28, God’s plan was now underway.
Notice that the Spirit of the Lord came upon David powerfully and he was blessed with wisdom and power, 1 Samuel 16:13 / 1 Samuel 10:6 / Judges 3:10 / Judges 6:34 / Judges 11:29 / Judges 14:18 / Judges 15:14.
In other words, the Holy Spirit would protect David for his role as king and would help him not to become arrogant and filled with himself as Saul was. The Holy Spirit would help him to put his trust in God rather than trusting men as Saul did. He would help him to look for God’s approval rather than looking for the approval of men, as Saul did.
After King Saul’s slaughter of the Amalekites, we are told that ‘the Spirit of the LORD had departed from Saul and an evil spirit from the Lord tormented him’1 Samuel 16:14.
Does this mean that God sent an ‘evil spirit’ to possess Saul? There is no doubt that this verse is often taken to mean that God actually sent an evil spirit to take possession of King Saul, and this is an idea which is both puzzling and disturbing.
But whenever we encounter difficult or strange statements in the Scriptures, we must bear in mind that, although God inspired the writers in the making of their historical records, they had to cope with the limitations of human language.
This means that often they were faced with the serious problem of trying to explain divine actions in human terms, and that could never be easy. We also sometimes experience a problem of a similar nature.
For example, how would you describe snow to people who have never seen snow? Or how would you explain to an Eskimo, who has never seen a sheep, that the Lord Jesus is ‘the Lamb’ of God? Whatever explanation you offer, you will only succeed in presenting a partial picture of the truth.
Therefore, when we encounter a verse such as 1 Samuel 16:14, we should not ask, How does this statement look to me? But what lies behind this statement? What is it meant to convey? What does God want us to understand? The only way of determining this is by looking at the circumstances in which the problem statement is found.
Notice that our problem verse is connected with this event recorded in 1 Samuel 15:1-35. King Saul had been given a plain command by God, a command which he had quite deliberately disobeyed. This wasn’t his first act of disobedience, 1 Samuel 13:8-14. He had already been warned!
The consequence of this later offence was that God rejected him as King of His people, and, as evidence of his rejection, ‘the Spirit of God left him’, 1 Samuel 16:14. It’s at this point that we are told that ‘an evil spirit from the Lord tormented him’, 1 Samuel 16:14.
There are two questions I think we should ask.
1. What is meant by ‘an evil spirit’? and
2. In what sense was it ‘from the Lord’?
But first, think about the event which brought this matter to a head. Saul’s failure to obey God in the matter of the Amalekites, because this piece of Old Testament history has long discomforted Christians and delighted unbelievers, even though it should be noted that this is the only time that such a command was ever issued.
In other words, God meant it to be recognised as a singular, special and serious event. For God to have commanded the destruction of both Amalekite life and property has embarrassed even those who probably appreciate that the wickedness of the Amalekites constituted a danger to His people and also to the purpose He planned to accomplish through them.
But someone asks, would it not have been sufficient simply to destroy the Amalekites’ army? Must everything be declared, ‘herem’, placed under the ban and utterly destroyed?
We must understand that this command meant that the Israelites were not ordered to engage in an ordinary conflict but were called by God to execute an act of divine judgment.
To make this absolutely clear, contrary to what would normally have happened in the time of war, they were forbidden to retain as the spoil of battle anything that belonged to the Amalekites.
In those days, a battle in which the victors did not plunder the defeated was remarkable and unusual indeed and would certainly be recognised as a significant event. This unusual behaviour would prove to Israel’s neighbours that the purpose of the action really was punitive and not the seizure of property.
However, when the rest of the Canaanite tribes learned what King Saul had done, in disobeying God by keeping the best of the spoil, a quite different message was sent out.
It appeared that Israel had committed a blatant act of aggression against the Amalekites, merely for the purpose of self-gain, and this reflected badly not only on the Israelites themselves but also on their God.
It was after this act of disobedience, which misrepresented God, that Saul was judged unworthy to remain king and God rejected him. When Samuel was sent to anoint David to succeed in the kingship. ‘The Spirit of God came upon David,’ and ‘an evil spirit’ came upon Saul, 1 Samuel 16:14.
I think it is clear from the events which followed that, deprived of the help of the Spirit of God and abandoned by Samuel the prophet on whose support he had relied, 1 Samuel 15:31 / 1 Samuel 15:35, something terrible happened to Saul.
That expression, ‘an evil spirit’, 1 Samuel 16:14, refers to physical or mental illness, and it is such an illness which afflicted Saul. He became mentally ill and began to suffer from mental depression, which rendered him unstable and caused him to suspect and distrust everyone around him.
His ailment also brought attacks of panic, in which no one was safe. This was not ‘demon-possession’, as some have supposed, because the passage doesn’t say that he was ‘possessed by an evil spirit’.
1. We are told that an evil spirit ‘troubled him’, 1 Samuel 16:14-15.
The word ‘baath’ means ‘to terrify’. In other words, Saul began to suffer from mental depression that brought on terrible panic attacks, which caused him to ‘rave’, 1 Samuel 18:10.
2. At first, these attacks were spasmodic, and his condition could be soothed by David’s music, 1 Samuel 16:16-18.
Consequently, when David played, the King was ‘refreshed’ and ‘made well again’, 1 Samuel 16:16 / 1 Samuel 16:23. This hardly suggests demon possession!
3. But gradually, and no doubt influenced by his deepening sense of isolation, Saul’s condition deteriorated to the point where the music of David failed to calm his troubled mind, and he became increasingly unreasonable and violent, 1 Samuel 18:10-11.
Saul lost all affection for David and began to see him as an enemy, 1 Samuel 18:29. Matters came to a head when it became obvious to David that, by attending to the King, his own life was in grave danger, 1 Samuel 19:8-10, and he decided it was unsafe for him to take his usual place at the king’s dinner table, 1 Samuel 20:24-27.
The psychological nature of Saul’s illness is proved by the fact that, although he had three times tried to kill David, he was genuinely surprised and puzzled by the young man’s absence! Yet, when Jonathan tried to offer an explanation, Saul became so angry that he tried to kill his own son.
It wasn’t ‘from the Lord’ in the sense that God deliberately afflicted Saul with insanity, but only in the sense that, when God so emphatically withdrew His endorsement and support of him, Saul became more and more depressed.
The medical word which describes his condition exactly is ‘melancholia’, which is defined as an ‘emotional mental disease marked by depression and ill-grounded fears’. This is what the Scriptures reveal in the case of Saul.
Saul began showing such great promise. He had so much ability and was blessed with so many advantages, having the help of the Spirit of God and the fatherly guidance of Samuel the prophet.
The highest possibilities were within his reach. But his life ended in depression and despair because he failed to appreciate that God looks for obedience in His people. That is the tragedy of King Saul. Even today, ‘to obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams,’ 1 Samuel 15:22.
Saul sends for David, 1 Samuel 16:19, and he instantly liked him, 1 Samuel 16:20-21.
Barnes, in his commentary, says the following concerning 1 Samuel 16:21.
‘The difficulty of reconciling this verse with 1 Samuel 17:55-58 is met thus. The words here are the ultimate sequence of David’s first visit to Saul, and of his skill in music, and are therefore placed here; but they did not really come to pass until after David’s victory over Goliath, 1 Samuel 18:2. It is quite conceivable that if David had only played once or twice to Saul, and then returned to his father’s house for some months, Saul might not recognize him.’
He also requests that David stay in his service because when David plays the lyre, he gets relief from the tormenting spirit, 1 Samuel 16:22-23. The lyre, interestingly enough, is the oldest instrument mentioned in the Scriptures, Genesis 4:21, and it appears that when David played it, Saul’s mind was soothed and helped him in his emotional state, 1 Samuel 16:23.