“But now your kingdom shall not continue. The Lord has sought for Himself a man after His own heart, and the Lord has commanded him to be commander over His people, because you have not kept what the Lord commanded you.”
— First Samuel 13:14.
Saul must have been crushed by Samuel’s rebuke (1 Sam. 13:13–14). It seems he would have been justified to say he had never sought to be king in the first place. Anyway, wasn’t God’s giving irrevocable (Rom. 11:29)? And since Samuel and God had forced the kingship upon him, should not Samuel have at least stayed with him rather than leaving him to try to take care of things by himself? And wasn’t the whole reason he was forced to offer the sacrifice because Samuel was tardy? Then wasn’t Samuel the one who was responsible for all his hardship?
Adapted from David: After God’s Heart, page 33.
Tomorrow: “We Must Seek the Lord’s Leading (2)”