King Saul’s Baggage (I Samuel 10:22)

Where was Saul when he was chosen to be king? Hiding among the baggage (I Samuel 10:22)

After the Israelites demand a king “like all the nations” (I Samuel 8:1-22), Saul is chosen by God as the nation’s first monarch (I Samuel 9:1-10:8, 10:17-27). Initially only Samuel, Israel’s last judge and de facto national leader, and the king-to-be are privy to Saul’s destiny. Then, Samuel calls a national assembly at Mizpah (I Samuel 10:18) where the new king will be selected before the people and be officially presented (I Samuel 10:17-27).

The process by which Saul is chosen is unclear as he is selected without being physically present. It can be determined that the nation is aligned by tribe and that the choice is presented as a process of elimination. Though the method seems random by modern standards, it was acceptable during the period and seen as a way of insuring God’s will.

Anticipation builds as the options dwindle to Saul’s tribe (Benjamin) and clan (Matri) but the proceedings are quickly reduced to an anticlimax as Saul is nowhere to be found (I Samuel 10:20-21). The man who is assured of being the #1 pick in the draft has chosen not to attend. The expectant people are put into a quandary and they ask a question which reads literally, “Is anyone else as yet come here?” (I Samuel 10:22). After human efforts fail, God outs Saul - the would-be-king is hiding among the baggage.

Therefore they inquired further of the Lord, “Has the man come here yet?” So the Lord said, “Behold, he is hiding himself by the baggage.” (I Samuel 10:22, NASB)

Peculiarly, instead of putting himself forward when presented, Saul instead steps back, hiding by the baggage. The Hebrew, k@liy, clearly has a broad range of meaning as it is translated alternately “baggage” (ASV, CEV, ESV, NASB, MSG, NLT, NRSV, RSV), “supplies” (HCSB, NIV),“equipment” (NKJV) and “stuff” (KJV).

P. Kyle McCarter, Jr (b. 1945) designates that the:

Hebrew hakkēlîm...can refer to almost any kind of equipment or paraphernalia, so that exactly where Saul was hiding is something we cannot know with certainty. He may have been concealed in a stockpile of weapons or a store of cultic utensils or, as many translators have supposed, a collection of baggage. (McCarter, I Samuel (Anchor Bible), 193)

The baggage may have been the necessary provisions for the national convention. Ronald F. Youngblood (b. 1931) suspects that it is indicative of the people’s high expectations:

The reluctant “leader” was subsequently found hiding among the “baggage” (I Samuel 10:22; the Hebrew word in this specific sense is elsewhere translated “supplies,” always in a military context, perhaps hinting at the major task that the people had hoped Saul would enthusiastically assume; cf. I Samuel 17:22, 25:13, 30:24; Isaiah 10:28). (Tremper Longman III [b. 1952], The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 3, 110)

Regardless of what the term entails, Saul’s hiding place is a good one as the Israelites cannot find him without divine intervention.

A more pertinent question than where Saul is hiding is why the nation’s potential leader is lurking among its supplies. Some have speculated that with time to contemplate this life changing event, the future king is getting cold feet. Timidity would be a natural response to such responsibility. A Targum reference claims that Saul slips out for prayer and Bible Study. Most, however, interpret Saul’s absence in one of two polarizing ways: commendable modesty or a flaw in character.

Some have viewed Saul’s action as evidence that he possesses the necessary modesty to be Israel’s king (I Samuel 9:21). Prominent rabbis Rashi (1040-1105) and Radaq (1160-1235) support this theory. Saul’s absence is not necessarily incriminating as David, Israel’s model king and Saul’s successor, will also initially be absent when being chosen (I Samuel 16:10-12). Even so, given the tragic way Saul’s life will unfold, it is difficult for many to see his truancy as a sign of the king’s goodness.

Many have viewed Saul’s concealment as unwillingness to lead. From this perspective, it is Saul’s personal baggage that leads the leader into the nation’s baggage. Reluctant to take the position, Saul’s physical position screams, “Not me!”

If this is the case, Richard D. Phillips (b. 1960) understands Saul’s trepidation:

The context strongly suggests fear instead of humility as the reason that Saul hid himself. And who can blame him, since he was being called to step into God’s place! Perhaps Saul could see that God was angry and that his selection was God’s judgment on the nation. Given the difficulty of the task, we can hardly blame him for trying to get away. Nonetheless, Saul’s selfish neglect of duty foreshadows a pattern that will be repeated during his kingship. The people of Israel had desired a king who would give them the leadership edge enjoyed by the worldly nations, no longer willing to rely simply on God’s saving power. Here, then, is the kind of self-serving cowardice that they will have to get used to under human kings! (Phillips, 1 Samuel (Reformed Expository Commentary),163)

Robert Alter (b. 1935) critiques:

This detail is virtually a parody of the recurring motif of the prophet-leader’s unwillingness to accept his mission. Saul the diffident farm boy had expressed a sense of unworthiness for the high office Samuel conferred on him. Now, confronted by the assembled tribes and “trapped” by the process of lot drawing, he tries to flee the onus of kingship, farcically hiding in the baggage. (Alter, The David Story: A Translation with Commentary of 1 and 2 Samuel, 48)

From this perspective, Saul lacks true humility which would include depending on God. This stance is supported as fear fits the paranoia that will characterize Saul’s life. Though his action is highly irregular, it is typical of Saul.

Robert D. Bergen (b. 1954) explains that this inauspicious start is fitting:

Saul’s actions, however off, were consistent with the portrayal of Saul to this point; previously the king-designate had shut out both his servant (I Samuel 9:27) and his uncle (I Samuel 10:16) from any knowledge of his destiny. Saul’s vacancy at his own coronation suitably foreshadows a reign that would vacate responsibilities associated with the exercise of godly rule and perhaps suggest the lack of wisdom of those who preferred such a king to Yahweh. At the same time, divine assistance in the search for Saul reinforced the conclusion that Saul was indeed the Lord’s answer to Israel’s demand for a king “like the other nations.” (Bergen, , 2 Samuel (New American Commentary), 132)

Clinical psychologist David A. Stoop (b. 1937) concurs, characterizing:

Saul’s fearful posture toward life is...seen in his response to being publicly anointed as king. He simply wants to avoid the whole process. The way he attempts to avoid being anointed king in front of all Israel is to hide. (Stoop, What’s He So Angry About?, 80)

Whatever his motives for hiding, when discovered, Saul assumes the crown. Saul’s reluctance is completely ignored and the people accept him as king (I Samuel 10:23-24). On cue, they chant, “Long live the king!” (I Samuel 10:24, NASB).

Despite his awkward discovery, Saul’s impressive stature makes an even more immediate first impression. The only descriptor mentioned is that he stands a head taller than any of his peers: Saul is tall (I Samuel 9:2, 10:23). This detail adds to the story’s humor as the nation’s tallest man is theoretically the most difficult to hide, comparable to 7'6" Yao Ming attempting to hide in a Chinese national assembly. Aside from Saul, impressive height is a quality reserved for non-covenant people and Saul’s more ideal successor, David, will not share this trait (I Samuel 16:7). In picking Saul, the Israelites receive what they ask for - a king like all the nations (I Samuel 8:5) and his selection foreshadows the typical lack of godly commitment exhibited by most of Israel’s monarchs.

What motivates Saul’s hiding, modesty or timidity? Who is he hiding from? If Saul does not want the position, why does he attend the convention at all? Why would God select a king that did not want the responsibility? Have you ever known anyone to turn down a promotion? Have you ever gotten a position that you didn’t want? Would you follow a leader who did not want her position? Would you want to be a monarch? Are you currently hiding from anything?

Whatever Saul’s reasons, his concealment has a significant consequence: it provides another opportunity for God to demonstrate divine involvement in his selection. It is God, not the Israelites, who finds Saul (I Samuel 10:22). Despite one of the implicit desires in asking for a monarch being independence, once again, the Israelites are reliant upon God. And they have enough access to God to use divine assistance to find the ruler they have chosen instead of God.

Eugene H. Peterson (b. 1932) comments:

Once chosen, Saul is nowhere to be found! He has gone into hiding. Did that last sermon by Samuel put the fear of God in him? Did he have a premonition that despite all the signs of God’s Spirit in his choosing, the kingship was flawed from the start by the people’s God-rejecting ambitions, and it was going to be a rocky road ahead? The story does not provide us with Saul’s motives for hiding. What it makes quite clear, though, is that this whole king business was going to be a mixed bag, involving both God’s mercy and God’s judgment...And here is a telling detail: They are now forced to pray to God to help them find the king they have just chosen with God’s help, but against God’s will (I Samuel 10:22). God graciously condescends to do for them what they cannot do for themselves. (Peterson, First and Second Samuel (Westminster Bible Companion), 66)

If the Israelites are close enough to God to find the concealed candidate, why do they seek a king? Is your trust in God’s leadership or in human rulers?

“Well, he’s always the tallest man in the room. He’s bound to end up leading something.” - Benjamin Franklin (Tom Wilkinson) to John Adams (Paul Giamatti) after Adams exclaims that George Washington is a “natural leader” in the HBO miniseries John Adams (2008)

Nic(odemus) at Night (John 3:2)

Who came to Jesus by night? Nicodemus (John 3)

Early in Jesus’ ministry, he has a clandestine encounter with a Pharisee named Nicodemus (John 3:1-21). The incident is only recorded in John’s gospel where Pharisees are presented as antagonists to Jesus with only two exceptions (John 3:1, 9:16). Nicodemus is also a member of the Sanhedrin which indicates that he is a member of a high social strata (John 3:1). Given this background it is perhaps not surprising that Nicodemus chooses to meet with Jesus under cover of night (John 3:2).

Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews; this man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “ Rabbi, we know that You have come from God as a teacher; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.” (John 3:1-2, NASB)

Nicodemus, a prominent religious man who engages Jesus by night stands in contrast to Jesus’ meeting with the Samaritan woman at the well, a disenfranchised woman who meets Jesus in broad daylight, in the next chapter (John 4:1-26, 39-42). Despite their differences, both serve as foils for Jesus.

As was customary, Nicodemus addresses Jesus with diplomacy. Though traveling alone Nicodemus speaks in the plural. Despite his grammar, the ensuing conversation lends itself to a personal visit not official business. Presumably intrigued by Jesus’ miracle working, Nicodemus’ limitations are seen in his flattering opening statement as he immediately attempts to fit Jesus into a ready-made worldview (John 3:2).

Robert Kysar (b. 1934) explains:

He honors Jesus as a Rabbi and a teacher come from God, but in terms of John’s view of Christ such titles fail to penetrate the identity of the revealer. The affirmation that God is with Jesus ironically contrasts to Jesus’ true identity, the Father’s unique Son. The signs done by Jesus are not sufficient grounds for belief in him in any full sense. Signs arouse curiosity but not mature faith. (Kysar, John (Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament), 52)

The gospel stresses that the rendezvous occurs at night. Daniel B. Wallace (b. 1952) analyzes the case:

Had the evangelist used the dative, the point would have been that Nicodemus came at a particular point in the night. With the genitive, however, the emphasis is in the kind of time in which Nicodemus came to see the Lord. The gospel writer puts a great deal of emphasis on dark vs. light; the genitive for time highlights it here. In the least we can say that Nicodemus is not cast in a good light (contrast John 19:39)! (Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament, 123-24)

The inclusion of this detail invites the question as to why the Pharisee chooses to call at night. Though the text does not state his reasons, many theories have been posited. Most have seen the observation as more than just a temporal reference to establish the setting or evidence that Nicodemus is too consumed by his own ministry to visit during the day.

Some suggest that night was the typical time for scribal discussion (Str-B 2, 419-20). The Jews at Qumran spent one-third of every night studying their beliefs (1QS 6:7). While nighttime learning might have been commonplace, this rationale does not fit John’s context.

Others note the prudence of the after hours visit. In meeting Jesus at night, Nicodemus avoids the crowds which provides the opportunity for a longer, more uninterrupted conversation. It also insures privacy and an intimacy that fosters an honest, real conversation free from the political pressures that an audience and their respective positions might yield. Coming at night breaks down barriers and facades that come with a public meeting.

Many have suspected rational self interest as the reason for Nicodemus’ timing: he did not want to lose professional credibility by openly identifying with Jesus. The cover of darkness shields him from the temple authorities. His colleagues would not understand why a member of the educated elite would seek out an itinerant preacher, much less lose an argument to him. This explanation parallels king Zedekiah seeking a private audience with the imprisoned prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah 37:16-21). Were he discovered, Nicodemus would have a lot of explaining to do and likely need to answer far more questions from his peers than he asks of Jesus. In short, associating with Jesus is a bad career move for Nicodemus and unlike Jesus’ disciples, he is unwilling to risk everything for the radical preacher (Matthew 19:27-29; Mark 10:28-30; Luke 18:28-29).

Some have seen embarrassment as the issue behind the nighttime meeting as this timing provides secrecy (John 19:38). Nicodemus is uncomfortable in Jesus’ presence, treating Jesus like the guilty pleasure CD that you enjoy but do not play when your peers are present. Even today, many professors (people expected to have answers) do not wish to be seen asking questions. According to some, Nicodemus simply does not wish to be seen with Jesus.

Some have interpreted Nicodemus as sincere, but cautious. He is a reluctant seeker who is not yet ready for public support, instead wishing to administer an honest examination before making a public profession. Part of Nicodemus wants to believe and he at least gives the itinerant preacher the time of night.

In a similar vein, J. Louis Martyn (b. 1925) has postulated a “two-level” hypothesis whereby Nicodemus is representative of a group of “secret believers” who cloak their allegiance to Christ (Martyn, History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel, 113). Others also conceal their affiliations and Nicodemus is an exemplary of a more open element of the Pharisees (John 12:42, 19:38; Acts 5:34-39). For Martyn, Nicodemus symbolizes both this group’s belief that Jesus could be the long awaited wonder working Mosaic prophet (Deuteronomy 18:15-18) and their fear of being cast out of the synagogue for that belief (John 9:22, 34, 12:42, 16:2).

Herman N. Ridderbos (1909-2007) counters:

One must guard against inferring from the fact that Nicodemus went to Jesus by night that he represents a certain type of faith, namely that of the “secret believers,” a typology that is supposed to govern unfavorably his conduct from one end of the Gospel to the other. In the “two-level” theory the “figure” of Nicodemus even develops into an entire class of secret believers in the later synagogue with a “midrashic” christology of their own...The entire notion that in the Fourth Gospel Nicodemus represents the model of the crypto-believer in which the definitive break between synagogue and church is mirrored lacks support in the texts. Whatever moved Nicodemus to come to Jesus by night...it was certainly not that in secret he had already in some way committed himself to faith in Jesus as the Messiah (Ridderbos, The Gospel of John: A Theological Commentary, 283)

Many have seen the reference to night as reflecting Nicodemus’ spiritual condition; the outer darkness resonates with Nicodemus’ inner lightlessness. The polarity between light and darkness is a prominent theme in John’s gospel. Jesus is introduced (and as such has already been described) as light (John 1:4-5, 8).

In contrast, elsewhere in the gospel, night appears to have negative associations (John 9:4, 11:10, 13:30). Traitorous Judas is the only other character in John’s story who appears at night (John 13:30). Colin G. Kruse (b. 1938) illumines:

Elsewhere in the Gospel the word ‘night’ appears to have negative connotations. In John 9:4 Jesus urges people to work in the ‘day’, for the ‘night’ is coming when no-one can work. In John 11:10 he says that those who walk in the ‘night’ stumble because they have no light. In John 13:30, after receiving the bread from Jesus’ hand, Judas went out into the ‘night’ to betray him. Bearing these things in mind, the statement in John 3:2 that Nicodemus came ‘by night’ suggests he was in a state of spiritual darkness when he approached Jesus. (Kruse, John (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, 104-105)

Gail R. O’Day (b. 1954) adds:

In a gospel that from its opening verses emphasizes the contrast between light and darkness (John 1:4-5), this reference to the time of Nicodemus’s visit is more than an incidental detail. The visit under the cloak of darkness strikes a discordant note with the description of Nicodemus’ status in John 3:1. As a Pharisee and leader of the Jews, Nicodemus is a public figure, but he does not come to Jesus publicly. Nicodemus’s night visit suggests that he wants to hide himself, and thus introduces a note of tension into the narrative. That Nicodemus comes in darkness points to possible tension between Nicodemus and the community with whom his credentials so tightly link him, but also indicates possible tension between Nicodemus and Jesus. (O’Day, The Word Disclosed: Preaching the Gospel of John, 16-17)

Gerald L. Borchert (b. 1932) concludes:

Although seasonal and day/night designations can properly be understood as time notations in this Gospel, they usually are more importantly also symbolic representations of the spiritual temperature of the people in the story (e.g., John 10:22-23, 11:9-10, 13:30). As indicated in the Prologue, light and darkness are conceived as opposing principles (John 1:4-5) with darkness in John illustrating the negative aspects such as the realm of Satan, error, evil, doubt, and unbelief. Some interpreters might suggest that Nicomedus came to Jesus “at night” (John 3:2) to prevent detection or alternatively that (as an intense rabbi) he studies late into the night, but most commentators are agreed that the reference to night is a picture of a man who was in an uneasy state of unbelief or doubt. (Borchert, John 1-11 (New American Commentary), 170)

In contrast to Jesus being light itself, Nicodemus, whom the world perceives as enlightened, is in the dark. In seeking Jesus, a man in darkness is taking his first steps into the light.

Nicodemus’ inner conflict is understandable on many levels. Whatever his reasons, it can be certain that Nicodemus sought Jesus when it was best for him, not best for Jesus. Like most of us, Nicodemus insists on meeting Jesus on his own terms.

Even so, it is a miracle that Nicodemus comes at all. All of the reasons for him to come at night are also reasons not to make the trip altogether. Even if not walking in the light, Nicodemus appears open minded as he investigates Jesus as opposed to taking the easier route of making a blanket rejection. He is independent enough to take the risk of pursuing Jesus. At the very least, he makes a significant movement toward believing the one sent to make God known (John 1:11-14). He may be in the dark, but Nicodemus is open to the light.

Frederick Dale Bruner (b. 1932) comments:

Hartwig Thyen [b. 1927]...noticed that initially Nicodemus came to Jesus by night (John 3:1), but at least he came, and Jesus promised that “whoever came” to him he would in no way cast aside (John 6:37); thus Nicodemus had in fact “come to the light” and received its promise (John 3:21). (Bruner, The Gospel of John: A Commentary, 500)

Why does Nicodemus visit Jesus at night? What does it say about Jesus that he is willing to meet with Nicodemus at night? What is the latest anyone has visited your home? What are the advantages of coming at night? How would the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus have looked differently had their been witnesses (John 3:1-21)? Are you more apt to be honest and revealing in private or public? Why? When do you get a more authentic response from a minister: in front of a crowd or in private? Who do you not wish to be seen with? Do you have any guilty pleasures? Whose disapproval motivates you? When have you encountered Jesus at night? What risk do you take when following Jesus? Can one be a secret disciple of Jesus? When do you seek Jesus?

Nicodemus becomes a recurring character in John’s gospel and while the fate of his faith is not stated explicitly, there are hints (John 7:50, 19:39). He is later seen defending Jesus before his peers (John 7:50-51) and preparing Jesus for burial (John 19:36-40). Even so, his initial timidity is never forgotten. The last time that he is referenced, he is remembered as the one “who had first come to Him by night” (John 19:39 NASB), perhaps providing hope for those who are still seeking Jesus by night.

Critics note that Nicodemus never professes faith, he only asks questions (John 3:4, 9). Even when he reappears, though well-intentioned, he appears diffident. In preparing Jesus for burial, he plays a secondary role to Joseph of Arimathea (John 19:39). These factors have led many to doubt that Nicodemus possesses the conviction to make a stand for Jesus. Lesslie Newbigin (1909-1998) characterizes Nicodemus as a “man who is drawn to the light but not yet able to leave the darkness (Newbigin, The Light has Come: an Exposition of the Fourth Gospel, 37).”

Gregory Stevenson (b. 1966) appraises:

Does Nicodemus belong to the darkness?...Ultimately, Nicodemus is an ambiguous figure. He is not blind, but his vision is not so great either. He remains distracted by his religious position. Nicodemus sees enough to come to Jesus, to stand up for him, and to help with burial preparations, but not enough to come fully into the light. He exists in the twilight, caught between day and night. (David Fleer[b. 1953] and Dave Bland [b. 1953], “Believing is Seeing: The Dynamics of Faith in the Gospel of John”, Preaching John’s Gospel: The World It Imagines, 113-114)

How would you characterize Nicodemus? Does he belong more to the light or the night? What does Nicodemus do wrong? What does he do right? Have you stepped into the light or are you lingering in the darkness?

Then Jesus again spoke to them, saying, “I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life.” (John 8:12, NASB)