Skip to main content

Obedience Rather Than Sacrifice

Saul it seems, was instructed to have the Israelite completely destroy the Amalekites – people and animals. Rather, Saul allowed the Israelites to capture the Amalekite king, and to bring back the choicest live stock. When Samuel returns to visit Saul, the bleating of the sheep and the lowing of the cattle are clearly audible. Assuming that the Israelites had done what had been directed, Samuel finds this noise to be somewhat unexpected, and so he asks Saul to explain what has happened. Saul’s response is a two-parter. The first is that the people have brought back the best of the plunder to sacrifice it to God. The second is that Saul was afraid of the people and so he let them bring back the plunder [and in this explanation, we don’t know why].

Samuel’s response is his mission for God, and he will complete it. Samuel tells Saul that he has failed in his mission to destroy the Amalekites and as a result God has rejected him as king of Israel. In Samuel’s discussion with Saul, he says:

“Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as idolatry and teraphim. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.” (1 Sam 15.22-23, RSV)

Verse 22 is one of the most familiar verses in all of Scripture: God prefers obedience rather than sacrifice. What exactly does this mean, and what are the implications for us? What does the word obedience entail, what does it mean?

Obedience in the immediate context deals with Saul’s failure to wipe out the Amalekites, as he was told by God to do. And why are we told Saul failed to do this? It is simply this: Saul’s pride. After returning from the Amalekite battle, he goes to Carmel and sets up a monument to himself. This is in stark contrast to what the people of Israel have done in the past when given victories by God. In those instances, altars and sacrifices, accompanying praise to God have been offered. Here, Saul apparently thinks the victory has been secured through his efforts rather than God’s. Perhaps bringing the Amalekite king and the best stock isn’t so much for God’s glory but more as a procession to exalt Saul as the conquering king. Saul has a pride problem.

As verse 23 tells us, God says Saul is rebellious and stubborn, two characteristics of prideful people. This gives us a window into Saul’s problem and why God is so displeased with him. Obedience it seems is not obedience for its own sake. Rather, obedience is an indicator of Saul’s submission to God in all things. Saul didn’t complete his mission because he was dismissive of God’s directive.

And God knew it.

Sacrifice is secondary to obedience because acceptable sacrifice comes only from those who submit to God and who trust Him above their own reasoning, above their own ideas of what is “right.” The words in the Hebrew that are used here for obedience and hearken have as their root, the idea of listening, of pricking up the ears, of intelligently hearing and owning what has been said. Obedience then carries with it much more than simply hearing the words, and arises out of a hearing and owning what has been said. It stands to reason then that sacrifices made by those who are rebellious toward God are worthless.

What does this say to us? There are at least two things we can gather from this event. The first is that God wants us to trust Him and to submit to what He wants, especially in contrast to our own glory and advancement. As Paul will say in Ephesians, God has submitted Himself to us and we in turn submit to one another. It is in this submitting to one another that we are tested in the same way Saul was tested. Do we trust God sufficiently to submit ourselves to each other, or do we reserve the option of asserting our rights if we get too uncomfortable? Do we become self-righteous, counting the number of times we have been hurt, and justifying this instance of taking care of Number One? We do so at the peril of our souls.

The second application is that sacrifice, or worship is unacknowledged by God if it comes from rebellious and prideful people. Even if done correctly, according to the book, sacrifice and worship avail nothing. Worship, rightly done, is a response of a grateful people to their gracious God to whom they are submissive.

Obedience then is not simply lock-step behavior, but arises from the heart and is itself colored by the kind of heart out of which it comes. Worship arises from and is colored by the same heart and is acceptable to God on the basis of the worshipper rather than the worship behaviors themselves.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Freewheeling

Merton never disappoints. Here's an excerpt from "Love and Living," a collection of individual writings collected after his death in 1968: "Life consists in learning to live on one's own, spontaneous, freewheeling; to do this one must recognize what is one's own—be familiar and at home with oneself. This means basically learning who one is, and learning what one has to offer to the contemporary world, and then learning how to make that offering valid." This short passage is pregnant with meaning and spiritual insight (would we expect anything less?). Let's start with the last few words: "…make that offering valid." The offering of ourselves, of our lives is our calling. We offer ourselves to assist the re-creation of Creation; the reconciling of Man to God. The validity of our offering is measured in how closely we mirror the work of God; to what extent our motivations are based on knowing who we are rather than a slavish obedience to p...

Wineskins II

       In chapter 16 of Matthew, Peter ‘makes the great confession’ - Jesus he says is the Son of the Living God. At Covenant, when someone wants to become a member or to be baptized, we ask them who Jesus is and we expect this response. Peter is correct when he says this, but it is not clear that Peter (or the other disciples) understood the ramifications of his statement. Following Peter’s statement we find a series of incidents that make us wonder just how much Peters actually believed what he had said.      In the first instance, Jesus compares Peter to Satan. Jesus tells his disciples that he is going to Jerusalem and there he will die. Peter exclaims that he will not let that happen; Jesus will not be killed. Peter is expecting great things from Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of God on behalf of Israel and he cannot fit Jesus dying into his hope for a greater Israel under this Messiah. This cannot happen, he reasons. Jesus’s response is a harsh re...

Wineskins

  Jesus comes from the Wilderness where the Spirit has driven him for testing, announcing the imminent coming of the Kingdom of Heaven. His message to the crowds calls them to repent because the “Kingdom is at hand.” The kingdom or the effective rule of God has come upon Israel and Israel’s expected response is to return to her God. A number of passages tell us the sorts of things God has against Israel or at least her leaders. They have the form of the People of God, but not the substance. He will call those opposed to him “white-washed tombs” to describe their religious and moral corruption. They look good but are dead. He calls these people to repentance, to return to “their first love,” to actually live as though they are the People of God. In another place, he will tell them that while they do well to tithe mint and cumin, they have missed the larger point of caring for people. In the judgment scene, he describes sending into a place of gnashing of teeth those who failed to gi...