It has been so long since we interrupted our studies on First Samuel that I contemplated abandoning it altogether. However, I like to finish what we start, so I want to return there tonight and press ahead beginning at Chapter 13, verse 15. But first, I think it is necessary to do a quick overview of where we’ve been up until now. Context is everything in the study of the Scriptures, so we need the momentum of the backstory to carry us into this portion of the narrative.
In Chapter One, we met Elkanah and his two wives, one of whom was Hannah. After being barren for some time, the Lord granted her a son, whom she named Samuel. She sent Samuel to learn under Eli the priest, and there he met the Lord and committed himself to the Lord’s service. Because of the sin of Eli’s sons, God raised up Samuel as the prophet and priest of
In Chapter 8,
With the people trembling in fear, they sought to make a sacrifice to the Lord to seek His aid. But when Samuel did not come on the appointed day to make the sacrifice, and with the troops beginning to scatter, Saul took it upon himself to offer the sacrifice. As soon as the offering was burned, Samuel arrived and rebuked Saul for his failure to obey and announced to him that his kingdom would not endure, for the Lord had sought out for Himself a man after His own heart. We have not even met David yet in the narrative, but we know that this is who God has raised up as the new king.
So, here we find Saul in a miserable state. And it is here that we will pick up the narrative beginning in Chapter 13, Verse 15, and discuss the Pitfalls of Poor Leadership.
& 1 Samuel 13:15-23
God had raised Saul up to a position of unparalleled prominence. He set before him tremendous opportunities to prove himself. On the battlefield, he demonstrated success, but in the matter of personal obedience to God, Saul proved to be a failure. He owed his entire rise to power to God, yet he failed to obey God by recognizing the limitations of his office, yielding to spiritual authority, and approaching God in a proper way. This debacle revealed the private man inside the public image. It really doesn’t matter how well we perform on the battlefield if we fail at the altar. It has been said the good leaders lead from their knees. This Saul did not do. And therefore he failed as a leader. The impact of his failure is seen in three ways in this short passage. I have called them the pitfalls of poor leadership.
I. A Diminished Following (v15)
A leader with no followers is merely a man taking a walk. And though Saul had amassed a sizeable army of 330,000 at the battle against the Ammonites in 11:8, and had sent away all but 3,000 of the most choice soldiers, his ranks had now dwindled down to 600. It is of interest that even as a fugitive whose life was constantly in danger, David was able to amass a group that size (23:13). When the can’t even rally a group larger than a fugitive, it is a sign that he has failed as a leader.
People who are confident in their leader will follow them into the very face of death knowing that their leader has a viable plan for victory. People who lack confidence in their leader would not follow him across the street, unless out of morbid curiousity to see how he might fail once he got there. Saul’s men had no confidence in him. They had lost confidence in their leader’s ability to bring about victory because they knew that God’s hand was not on Saul. In spite of his past success, they realized that a new day had dawned in which he could not repeat victory. Saul’s men had splintered and scattered as they trembled in advance of the impending Philistine attacks. Their fear of the enemy eclipsed their confidence in their king, and anytime that happens, it is a sad day for a nation.
Today, leadership is a popular subject. I get mail every day inviting me to various leadership conferences. The bookstores have entire sections devoted to the subject. Christian bookstores are no exception. However, a disturbing trend that I see in the field of Christian leadership is that secular principles are indiscriminately applied, sometimes with a veneer of pseudo-religious vocabulary (and woefully, sometimes not even that). Yet, none of those principles or patterns will amount to anything without the blessing of God on the leader’s life. So, those of us who find ourselves in positions of leadership must, first and foremost devote ourselves to live lives of personal obedience prior to public performance in order to know that we are walking under the hand of God. We must remember that leaders do not monopolize the Spirit of God, and when the followers who are spiritually discerning detect that God’s blessing has departed, they will no longer follow. So, followers must expect and demand this of their leaders, and hold them justly accountable for it, lest they ultimately fail as leaders.
Failed leaders not only face the pitfall of a diminished following, but perhaps more importantly there is the second pitfall:
II. An Endangered Following (vv16-18, 23)
The cities of Geba and Michmash stood on opposite sides of a valley, separated only by a couple of miles at the most. The 600 men with Saul at Geba knew full well that across that valley the Philistines had assembled for battle. Verses 5 and 6 tell us that they saw themselves in a strait (for the people were hard pressed). They saw 30,000 Philistine chariots, 6,000 horsemen, and people like the sand which is on the seashore in abundance. This is the largest recorded fighting force the Philistines ever mustered. The awareness of this caused the Israelites to hide in caves, thickets, cliffs, cellars, and pits (v6). Some of them fled in fear, scattering from Saul (v8).
And the Philistine raiders began their maneuvers. Raiders is sort of a sanitized term for them. Literally, they were destroyers, and they went out in four detachments. One went north toward Ophrah. One went west toward Beth-horon, and the third went east toward Zeboim. In verse 23, we learn that a fourth garrison went south to the pass of Michmash. The meager camp of Israelites were surrounded with no where to go. One Hebrew scholar suggests that the Hebrew verb rendered turned in the NASB implies repeated action, indicating that they repeatedly ravaged the regions to which they were deployed in order to whip the Israelites into submission or else to force an engagement on the battlefield.
So, not only were the 600 fighting men with Saul in danger, as fighting men always are, and moreover those who are so grotesquely outnumbered. Innocent people were suffering as well. The residents of these regions were being decimated by the destroyers. Saul’s failure as a leader bore consequences that trickled down to the men, women, and children who were going about their daily lives in the surrounding areas.
Leaders must always remember that no one sins unto himself alone. There are always ripples of impact that proceed from the epicenter of the individual’s moral lapse. And many times, those affected are innocent parties. The influence of leadership is a gift from God. Romans 13:1 says there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore leadership is a stewardship in which lives of individuals, organizations, societies and nations are placed in the hands of the leader. Certainly, Saul did not intend to endanger his people when he failed to obey the Lord. If we can trust his own testimony, he said that he was asking for God’s favor (v12). But God’s favor cannot be obtained by ungodly means. Any attempt to do so is poor stewardship of the influence God has given to the leader. And when leaders fail in this regard, it endangers their followers.
This is but one more of the pitfalls of poor leadership. But there is a third pitfall as well:
III. An Ill-Equipped Following (vv19-22)
When the Philistines dominated the territory, they put an end to whatever metal-working industry
The Hebrew text literally reads that the charge was a pim. This used to present a conundrum, because this is a hapax-legomena. That means that this is the only time in the Bible that this word is used. When that is the case, it makes translation very difficult because we have no other reference to determine precise meaning. However, archaeology has unearthed sets of Hebrew weights, some of which are marked with this word. From that, we can determine that the pim was equivalent to approximately two-thirds of a shekel, and we know that this was an exorbitant price for the Israelites to pay.
So, the Philistines strategy was successful in keeping state-of-the-art military technology out of the hands of their enemies, while economically oppressing them as well. The Philistines, on the other hand, benefited from iron weaponry. They controlled the seaports, and had access to the materials and a monopoly on the industry, so they made for themselves an unmatched arsenal of cutting-edge (no pun intended) armament. The Israelites were limited to whatever weapons did not require a blacksmith. They had slings, bows, arrows, javelins, clubs, crude stone knives, and the like. Perhaps they would even carry their farming tools into battle. These were deadly enough, but no match for the superior bronze and iron weapons of the Philistines. One old commentator said that the Philistines probably regarded
Somehow, however, Saul and Jonathan, his son, did have swords and spears. A poor leader always takes better care of himself than his people. While he had the tools he needed for battle, the people did not. They did not have access to them, and could probably not afford them if they did, because they were financially strapped because of the Philistine strangle-hold on them. As a leader, Saul had an obligation to equip his people with the tools they needed to stand a fighting chance against the enemy.
Leaders must be people-builders, not empire builders. I am reminded of Ephesians 4 here which states that the leaders of God’s church are to “equip the saints for the work of service,” with the result that God’s people are built up, unified, mature, no longer tossed about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming. When leaders fail to build the people under the influence, their people are ill-prepared for the challenges they face on the battlefield we enter daily called life. So, we must ask ourselves as leaders, in the day of battle, will the people under my watchcare be found with their armor on?
Ephesians 6 tells us that the armor of God which we must wear consists of the belt of truth, the breastplate of righteousness, the shoes of the gospel, the shield of faith, the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God. It will matter very little in your day of battle if your pastor, or your deacon, or your Sunday School teacher, have that armor and have that sword in their hands. If we have led well, then our people will have the armor and the sword as well. It is a poor testimony of a leader if they do not. It will not matter how much I know, how quick I am with a verse, or how strong I can stand, if you cannot stand up in your battle because I have failed to equip you. So, those of us who are leaders must use our influence to build people up and equip them toward maturity in the faith, lest we face this pitfall of an ill-equipped following as well.
Warren Wiersbe concludes his treatment of this passage in this way: In the way it functions or doesn’t function, the
So, may we be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might, and may God grant His church leaders who avoid these pitfalls by walking in personal obedience and godliness, and equipping God’s people for the battles we face.