The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
Saul Confirmed as King
1 Samuel 11:12–15 — Saul Confirmed as King. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
12Then the people said to Samuel, “Who said that Saul should not reign over us? Bring those men here so we can kill them!”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
hā·‘ām way·yō·mer ’el- šə·mū·’êl mî hā·’ō·mêr šā·’ūl yim·lōḵ ‘ā·lê·nū tə·nū hā·’ă·nā·šîm ū·nə·mî·ṯêm
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-said the-people unto Samuel: “Who is-the-one-saying, ‘Saul shall-reign over-us’? Give the-men, and-let-us-put-them-to-death!”
Where the English smooths the original
It was Samuel to whom the people looked to bring to punishment the men who had dared to question the wisdom of electing Saul as king.
These words refer to the exclamation of the worthless people in 1 Samuel 10:27 . "Bring the men (who spoke in this manner), that we may put them to death.K&D is doing grammar here, not sentiment: he is defending the received consonantal text against emendation, and grounding the question-force in intonation alone.
they did not say so in terms, a we may see, 1 Samuel 10:27 , but this was the design and consequence of their speech, as they rightly construe it.
The enthusiastic admiration of the people, under the impulse of grateful and generous feelings, would have dealt summary vengeance on the minority who opposed Saul, had not he, either from principle or policy, shown himself as great in clemency as in valor.JFB's entry is a single block covering 11:12-15, so the same text stands at every verse in the source; it is cited here once, at the verse it actually describes.
13But Saul ordered, “No one shall be put to death this day, for today the LORD has worked salvation in Israel.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
šā·’ūl way·yō·mer lō- ’îš yū·maṯ haz·zeh bay·yō·wm kî hay·yō·wm Yah·weh ‘ā·śāh- tə·šū·‘āh bə·yiś·rā·’êl
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-said Saul: “Not shall-be-put-to-death a-man in-the-day the-this; for today YHWH has-wrought salvation in-Israel.”
Where the English smooths the original
The execution even of malcontents would have clouded the general rejoicing: and Saul’s best hope of uniting the kingdom under his rule lay in a policy of conciliation.
But the moderation which he now manifested, after he had been so wonderfully victorious, argued still greater nobleness of mind, and benevolence, and mildness of disposition. For nothing is more glorious than to be humble and meek in the height of power.
he does not ascribe the victory to the quick dispatch he made, to his wisdom and prudence in forming the scheme he did, and to his valour and courage, and that of his troops, but to the power and goodness of God.
By showing mercy he thought to overcome their malice.The Geneva gloss reads the clemency as strategy (“he thought to overcome”), where Gill and Pulpit read it as piety. The Hebrew supplies a motive clause — kî hayyôm, “for today” — and that clause is theological, not tactical; but the commentators are genuinely divided, and the text does not settle Saul's interior.
14Then Samuel said to the people, “Come, let us go to Gilgal and renew the kingship there.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
šə·mū·’êl way·yō·mer ’el- hā·‘ām lə·ḵū wə·nê·lə·ḵāh hag·gil·gāl ū·nə·ḥad·dêš ham·mə·lū·ḵāh šām
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-said Samuel unto the-people: “Come, and-let-us-go the-Gilgal, and-let-us-make-new there the-kingship.”
Where the English smooths the original
He suspended the confirmation to Saul at first, whilst the generality of the people were disaffected and discontented at the meanness of his person; and now when he had given such eminent proof of his princely virtues, and when the people’s hearts were unanimously and eagerly set upon him, he takes this as the fittest season for that work.
The seer, with striking generosity to one who superseded him in his position as judge, again presented the hero Saul to Israel as their anointed king.
It was not far from Jabesh-Gilead, and naturally the victorious host would move from the field of battle to the nearest religious spot to consecrate their king.Pulpit's “not far” assumes the Jordan-valley Gilgal near Jericho; K&D disputes exactly this, and Gill cites Bunting's estimate of thirty-six miles from Jabesh-Gilead. The distance is not settled.
From this verse to 1 Samuel 12:22 is the Haphtarah or lesson from the Prophets appointed to be read in the Synagogue in conjunction with the history of KorahA datum about later Jewish liturgical practice, not about the text's origin: the synagogue pairs this passage with Korah's revolt (Numbers 16), reading Samuel's farewell alongside a rebellion against divinely appointed leadership.
15So all the people went to Gilgal and confirmed Saul as king in the presence of the LORD. There they sacrificed peace offerings before the LORD, and Saul and all the Israelites rejoiced greatly.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ḵāl hā·‘ām way·yê·lə·ḵū hag·gil·gāl šām ’eṯ- šā·’ūl way·yam·li·ḵū lip̄·nê Yah·weh bag·gil·gāl šām way·yiz·bə·ḥū- šə·lā·mîm zə·ḇā·ḥîm lip̄·nê Yah·weh šā·’ūl wə·ḵāl ’an·šê yiś·rā·’êl way·yiś·maḥ šām ‘aḏ- mə·’ōḏ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-went all the-people the-Gilgal, and-they-caused-to-reign there Saul before-the-face-of YHWH in-the-Gilgal; and-they-sacrificed there sacrifices of-peace-offerings before-the-face-of YHWH; and-rejoiced there Saul and-all the-men of-Israel unto exceedingly.
Where the English smooths the original
The renewal of the monarchy may very well have consisted in nothing more than a solemn confirmation of the election that had taken place at Mizpeh, in which Samuel once more laid before both king and people the right of the monarchy, receiving from both parties in the presence of the Lord the promise to observe this right, and sealing the vow by a solemn sacrifice.
The Septuagint has another reading, "and Samuel anointed Saul king there." The example of David, who, besides his original anointing by Samuel 1 Samuel 16:12-13 , was twice anointed, first as king of Judah 2 Samuel 2:4 , and again as king over all Israel 2 Samuel 5:3 , makes it probable that Saul was anointed a second timeBarnes here sides with the LXX against the Masoretic text; K&D and Pulpit argue the opposite from the same evidence. Held together, they mark the exact point of uncertainty rather than resolving it.
Not before the ark, the symbol of God’s presence, as the expression sometimes means; for the ark was now at Kirjath-jearim, and not at Gilgal; but in a solemn manner, as in God’s presence, appealing to him as a witness of their sincerity in this transaction, and with solemn sacrifices and prayers for his blessing upon it.
The once despised Saviour will at length be acknowledged by all as the Lord's own anointed king.Henry's reading is figural, not exegetical: he moves from the crowd's reversal about Saul to Christ's final acknowledgment, and the move is his own, offered as application.
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
The victory at Jabesh has been won, and the first political act of the new era is a demand for blood. ✦ Ellicott catches what is strange about the scene: even “in the first flush of this great victory of Saul’s,” it is Samuel the people address, not the king — the seer is still the standing authority in Israel. ✦ Pulpit names the mood without flattering it: they turn on their neighbors “with the old tumultuous violence.” ⚙ The Hebrew is sharper than the English. There is no negative particle in יִמְלֹךְ; ✦ K&D records that the clause “contains a question, though it is indicated simply by the tone,” and that no emendation is required. The people are quoting a sneer back, and ✦ Poole is careful about the reference: the dissenters of 1 Samuel 10:27 “did not say so in terms,” but this was “the design and consequence of their speech.” ⚙ Note the verb they choose for themselves: וּנְמִיתֵם, Hifil — let us cause them to die. The first proposed exercise of royal power under the monarchy is proposed by the mob, and it is an execution.
⚙ Saul answers in the same root and cancels the stem. The people said Hifil, let us cause them to die; Saul says יוּמַת, Hofal — no one shall be caused to be put to death. Then he gives a reason, and the reason is not politics: kî hayyôm, “for today YHWH has made salvation in Israel.” ✦ Gill fastens on the subject of that clause: “he does not ascribe the victory to the quick dispatch he made… but to the power and goodness of God.” ✦ Benson measures the moral weight — “nothing is more glorious than to be humble and meek in the height of power.” The commentators divide honestly on motive. ✦ Cambridge is coolly political: “Saul’s best hope of uniting the kingdom under his rule lay in a policy of conciliation.” ✦ Geneva is frankly tactical: “By showing mercy he thought to overcome their malice.” ✦ Gill preserves the sharpest ancient dissent, reporting Ben Gersom’s reading that the day-limit left the executions open for later, or was “an artifice of Saul to deliver those men out of the hands of the Israelites.” ✦ K&D and Ellicott both hand on Seb. Schmidt’s argument — the same sentence in both, and it should be counted once, not twice — that Saul was “reminding them of the clemency of God,” urging that since Jehovah had overlooked their sins that day, they should forgive their neighbours’ without bloodshed. ⚙ That argument is the strongest one available, because it is the one the Hebrew’s causal particle actually makes: the day belongs to a divine act, and human blood may not be added to it.
⚙ Samuel’s verb is rare. וּנְחַדֵּשׁ (châdash, H2318, Piel) appears in only ten verses in the canon — the verb for repairing the temple, rebuilding ruined cities, renewing the face of the ground, creating a clean heart. Applied to a monarchy weeks old it is almost paradoxical, and it tells you what is actually being renewed: not Saul, but ✦ Cambridge’s “kingship founded in the national assembly at Mizpah,” the covenant frame within which a king can exist at all. ✦ Poole reads Samuel’s timing as deliberate statecraft in the best sense: he had “suspended the confirmation to Saul at first” while the people were disaffected, and now “takes this as the fittest season.” ✦ Ellicott adds the human note — “the seer, with striking generosity to one who superseded him in his position as judge.” ⚙ The place matters: הַגִּלְגָּל, the circle of stones, Israel’s first camp in the land. ✦ K&D even mines Samuel’s grammar for geography, observing that he did not say “let us go down” — which may point to Jiljilia rather than the Jordan valley; ✦ Pulpit assumes the opposite. That question is open. ⚙ What v. 15 records is unambiguous: וַיַּמְלִכוּ, they caused him to reign, twice לִפְנֵי יְהוָה, “to the face of YHWH,” with זְבָחִים שְׁלָמִים — the one sacrifice that ends in a shared meal. ✦ K&D: these thank-offerings “shadowed forth a living and peaceful fellowship with the Lord.” ✦ Poole protects the theology from the grammar: “to speak properly, Saul was not made or constituted king by the people, but by the Lord’s immediate act,” and ✦ Gill reaches for Acts 2:36 to say the same. The chapter ends עַד־מְאֹד, “unto vehemence” — and it is the last unclouded joy of this reign.
⚙ This is the tool’s own fallible reading, offered to be tested against the text. Read the four verses as one motion and the subject is never Saul: it is what a day of God’s rescue does to a people’s appetite for blood. The crowd arrives with a Hifil — let us cause them to die — and the king answers with a Hofal and a causal particle: no one shall be caused to die, because today YHWH made deliverance. He does not argue that the dissenters were innocent. Poole and Gill both note they were not, and Gill preserves Ben Gersom's suspicion that the mercy was only a postponement. The argument is simply that the day is already full — occupied by an act not ours — and that vengeance would have to be inserted into it. Then Samuel takes that day and does the one thing that keeps it from curdling into a personality cult: he moves everyone to Gilgal, the oldest covenant ground in the land, and uses the rare verb châdash. Not “crown him”; make the kingship new. The office is placed under review in the presence it was granted from, before the man who now holds it can imagine he generated it. ⚙ Here is the fallible part, and the reader should weigh it. The text gives us Saul at his best — magnanimous, pious, ascribing the victory rightly — and the narrative will return to this same Gilgal in chapter 13 to record his unmaking there. The unit does not say this; the Verifier only confirms that Gilgal and these names recur. But if the placement is deliberate, the lesson is not that Saul had a good day and later a bad one. It is that a kingship which must be made new at a sanctuary is a kingship the covenant never simply handed over, and that the day Saul refused to spill blood because the day belonged to God is the exact measure against which every later day of his is read. Israel's joy is real and the text records it ʻad-mᵉʼôd. It is also, in this book, the last of its kind.
The kingship had to be made new before it was three weeks old — because it was never Israel's to make.
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
⚙ וּנְחַדֵּשׁ (châdash, H2318, Piel) is not a common word. The Verifier finds it in only ten verses across the canon, and the company it keeps is startling for a coronation: David asking for a created-clean heart and a renewed right spirit (Psalm 51:10); the Spirit sent out to renew the face of the ground (Psalm 104:30); Jerusalem's exiles pleading “renew our days as of old” (Lamentations 5:21); the ruined cities renewed in Isaiah 61:4; youth renewed like the eagle's (Psalm 103:5); and the repair of the altar of the LORD under Asa (2 Chronicles 15:8) and of the house of the LORD under Joash (2 Chronicles 24:4, 12). ⚙ Nearly every one of these is the restoration of something that had decayed or been ruined — the single outlier in the Verifier's list is Job 10:17, where God renews his witnesses against Job, and honesty requires naming it rather than rounding the pattern off. Samuel applies the verb to a monarchy days old. The word itself carries the verdict: the kingship needed repair from the start, and what is renewed at Gilgal is the covenant frame, not the man. ✦ Cambridge points to the thing renewed — the kingship “founded in the national assembly at Mizpah” (1 Samuel 10:25).
Psalm 51:10 · Psalm 104:30 · Lamentations 5:21 · Isaiah 61:4 · 2 Chronicles 24:4
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H2318 châdash, attested in only 10 verses canon-wide — a genuinely rare root, which is the ground for the verbal tier. This is a lexical link, NOT a quotation: none of these passages cites 1 Samuel 11:14 and 1 Samuel 11:14 cites none of them.
⚙ The narrative gives Gilgal three times in a single verse (vv. 14–15), and the Verifier's candidate list shows why that repetition matters: the same place-name and the same cast return at every hinge of Saul's reign. At 1 Samuel 10:8 Samuel had already commanded Saul to go down to Gilgal and wait seven days for sacrifices; at 13:7–8 Saul is at Gilgal, the people trembling, waiting out that appointed time and then not waiting; at 15:12 and 15:33 Samuel goes to Gilgal to confront him over Amalek and hews Agag in pieces “before the LORD in Gilgal” — the identical prepositional phrase that crowns him here. ⚙ The joy of 11:15 and the rejection of chapter 15 happen on the same ground, before the same face, with the same two men. ✦ K&D notes that Gilgal is “in all probability the place where Samuel judged the people every year” (1 Samuel 7:16) — which is to say, Israel's standing courtroom. ⚙ We do not claim the author signals this; we observe that the text does not vary the location.
1 Samuel 10:8 · 1 Samuel 13:8 · 1 Samuel 15:12 · 1 Samuel 15:33
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H1537 Gilgâl (in 38 vv), H2076 zâbach (in 127 vv) with 1 Samuel 10:8; H1537 Gilgâl plus H8050 Shᵉmûwʼêl (in 120 vv) with 1 Samuel 13:8 and 15:33; H7586 Shâʼûwl (in 335 vv) with 15:12 and 13:7. The lexemes are common, so the link is recurrence of setting and cast, not a quotation.
⚙ The Masoretic text says וַיַּמְלִכוּ — “and they caused him to reign.” The Septuagint reads instead “and Samuel anointed Saul there to be king,” and Josephus (cited by ✦ Gill) says Samuel anointed him with the holy oil. The commentators split cleanly and the division is worth preserving rather than resolving. ✦ Barnes and ✦ Cambridge lean toward a second anointing: Cambridge notes that the title “the LORD's anointed” at 1 Samuel 12:3 “gains point if the ceremony had just been performed,” and that David was anointed three times. ✦ K&D refuses it outright — “yamlikû does not mean ‘they anointed,’ although the LXX have rendered it ἔχρισε Σαμουήλ, according to their own subjective interpretation” — and argues that if an anointing had occurred the text would have said so, as it does at 2 Samuel 2:4 and 5:3. ✦ Ellicott and ✦ Pulpit agree with K&D. ⚙ We do not adjudicate. The link from 11:15 to 12:3 is real but its force depends on a disputed textual reading, so it is flagged.
1 Samuel 12:3 · 2 Samuel 2:4 · 2 Samuel 5:3
basis: Provenance disputed: the connection rests on the LXX plus at 1 Samuel 11:15 (ἔχρισε Σαμουήλ) against the Masoretic וַיַּמְלִכוּ, and on the titular use of “the LORD's anointed” at 12:3. Barnes, Cambridge and Josephus for; K&D, Ellicott and Pulpit against. No Verifier lexeme link was computed for this pair; the basis is text-critical and contested.
⚙ Saul's amnesty is bounded by a day, and the reason is the day's content: kî hayyôm, because today YHWH made תְּשׁוּעָה. ✦ Cambridge sets the same logic beside David's answer to Abishai on the day of his restoration — “Shall there any man be put to death this day in Israel?” (2 Samuel 19:22) — where the verb, the day-clause and the refusal of vengeance all recur in a king returning to a throne he nearly lost. ✦ Barnes makes the same comparison from the other end, calling Saul's clemency “an instance of great moderation, as well as good policy,” and pointing to David's conduct. ⚙ The pattern in both scenes: a rescue has just occurred, the crowd names a culprit, and the king refuses on the ground that the day belongs to God's act and not to his own vindication. ⚙ We record this as a pattern the commentators draw, not as a verbal link the Verifier computed for this pair.
2 Samuel 19:22 · 1 Samuel 10:27
basis: Basis is the recorded cross-reference of Cambridge (on 11:13, citing 1 Samuel 10:27 and 2 Samuel 19:22) and Barnes' marginal comparison to David, plus the shared narrative pattern of clemency on a day of deliverance. No Verifier-computed lexeme overlap was supplied for these pairs, so no verbal claim is made.
⚙ The coronation ends not in a proclamation but in a meal. The only sacrifice named is זְבָחִים שְׁלָמִים — zᵉbach shelem, from the root of shalom — and ✦ K&D supplies the mechanics: these “were always connected with a sacrificial meal, and when presented on joyous occasions, formed a feast of rejoicing for those who took part, since the sacrificial meal shadowed forth a living and peaceful fellowship with the Lord.” ✦ Geneva glosses them simply, “In sign of thanksgiving for the victory.” ⚙ The New Testament's language of peace made by blood and of a table where the reconciled eat before God (Colossians 1:20; 1 Corinthians 10:18) stands in the same structural place: a deliverance accomplished, then a shared meal that enacts the peace rather than purchasing it. ⚙ This cannot be a verbal link — the Old Testament passage is Hebrew and the New Testament ones are Greek, so no shared Strong's number is possible between them, and we make no claim that either passage cites the other.
Colossians 1:20 · 1 Corinthians 10:18 · Leviticus 7:11-15
basis: Cross-Testament (Hebrew ↔ Greek): shared Strong's numbers are impossible across the language boundary, so no verbal tier is available. The recorded basis is the shared institutional pattern — shelamim as the thank-offering eaten in fellowship, described by K&D on 11:15 and legislated at Leviticus 7:11-15 — set beside the New Testament's peace-and-table language. Structural only; neither text quotes the other.
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
✦ Matthew Henry reads the reversal of v. 12 figurally and says so plainly: “They now honoured Saul whom they had despised… The once despised Saviour will at length be acknowledged by all as the Lord's own anointed king. As yet, upon his mercy-seat, he receives the submission of rebels, and even pleads their cause; but shortly, from his righteous tribunal, he will condemn all who persist in opposing him.” ⚙ The structural warrant is real and lies in the text's own vocabulary: the sneering יִמְלֹךְ of “shall this man reign over us?” is answered by the enthroning Hifil וַיַּמְלִכוּ three verses later, and Luke puts the identical sentence on the lips of the citizens in the parable of the nobleman — “We will not have this man to reign over us” (Luke 19:14). ✦ Poole and ✦ Gill both insist that the human verb only ratifies: “Saul was not made or constituted king by the people, but by the Lord's immediate act,” and Gill sends the reader to Acts 2:36, “God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” ⚙ The made-king language of Philippians 2:9–11 lands in the same place: the acknowledgment is universal and it is not the source of the authority.
Luke 19:14 · Acts 2:36 · Philippians 2:9-11
⚙ The king's first judicial act is an amnesty, and its ground is a completed divine rescue: “for today YHWH has made tᵉshûwʻâh in Israel.” ✦ Seb. Schmidt — preserved by both K&D and Ellicott, and therefore one witness rather than two — states the logic as imitation: since Jehovah had that day “overlooked their sins, and given them a glorious victory, it was only right that they should follow His example, and forgive their neighbours' sins without bloodshed.” ⚙ That is the shape of the gospel's own argument in Ephesians 4:32 and Matthew 18:32–33: the forgiven may not collect. ⚙ The figural step we take beyond the commentators is this — that the day of salvation is precisely the day on which execution is forbidden, and that at Calvary the two coincide in one person: “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34), spoken by the king on the day his own deliverance was wrought. ⚙ We mark this as our reading. Seb. Schmidt's moral argument is ancient; the christological extension of it here is not, and Saul is a poor type — the amnesty is bounded by a day, and Gill preserves Ben Gersom's ancient suspicion that the postponement was a stratagem. The correspondence is one of shape, not of stature.
Luke 23:34 · Ephesians 4:32 · 2 Corinthians 6:2
⚙ Samuel does not crown; he renews — חָדַשׁ, the verb of repaired temples and restored ruins and created-clean hearts (Psalm 51:10; Psalm 104:30; Isaiah 61:4). ⚙ A monarchy needing repair within weeks is the first note of a long diagnosis that runs through Saul's rejection, David's adultery, and the divided house, and the prophets eventually stop repairing and promise a new thing outright: a new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31), a new heart and a new spirit (Ezekiel 36:26). ⚙ The New Testament takes up that line, not the Gilgal line — the kingdom is not renewed but given to a king who cannot need it renewed (Luke 1:32–33; Hebrews 1:8). ✦ Cambridge's observation that the synagogue reads this passage alongside Korah's revolt (Numbers 16) shows that the tradition itself heard the question of legitimate anointed rule underneath the text. ⚙ The typology here is figural and we mark it as ours: the commentators in this unit do not draw it, and nothing in 1 Samuel 11 announces it.
Jeremiah 31:31 · Ezekiel 36:26 · Luke 1:32-33 · Hebrews 1:8
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
Text. The scripture text is the Berean Standard Bible (CC0); the word-by-word data, Strong's numbers and parsings are the Berean interlinear. Word order. The interlinear indices follow the English ordering, not the Hebrew; our literal renderings restore Hebrew order (so 11:12 begins “And-said the-people,” not “Then the people said”). Note references are keyed to the interlinear indices as supplied.
Two real textual questions in four verses. First, at 11:12 the Hebrew שָׁאוּל יִמְלֹךְ עָלֵינוּ contains no negative and no interrogative particle; the “not” in the English is supplied, and K&D defends the received text against emending šāʼûl to haššāʼûl. Second, at 11:15 the LXX reads “and Samuel anointed Saul there to be king” where the Masoretic text has “and they made him king”; Josephus agrees with the LXX, Barnes and Cambridge lean toward it, K&D, Ellicott and Pulpit reject it. BSB's “confirmed Saul as king” quietly takes the Masoretic side. We have flagged the resulting thread rather than resolving it.
Geography. Which Gilgal is meant is unsettled. Pulpit places it near Jericho and calls it “not far” from Jabesh-Gilead; Gill cites Bunting at thirty-six miles; K&D argues from Samuel's “let us go” (rather than “let us go down”) for Jiljilia on higher ground. We report the dispute and take no side. Likewise, what constituted the presence “before the LORD” at Gilgal is disputed: Benson denies the Ark was there, Poole infers an altar from the sacrifices, Ellicott suggests Ark or high priest with Urim and Thummim.
Sources. Seb. Schmidt's argument about imitating divine clemency appears in both K&D (in a note) and Ellicott (quoting Keil); it is one witness reaching us by two routes and should not be counted twice. Matthew Henry's entry is a single comment on 11:12–15 and therefore reads identically at each verse in the source. Gill preserves the medieval dissent of Ben Gersom and the rabbinic note of Abarbinel; those are Gill's reports of others, not Gill's own judgments.
What is ⚙ and what is ✦. Every parse, gloss, Strong's number, frequency count and thread basis above is sourced. The reading of the Hifil/Hofal exchange between vv. 12 and 13, the weight placed on the rarity of châdash, the Gilgal-frames-Saul's-reign observation, the sola reading, and the second and third christological entries are the machine's own fallible synthesis, offered to be tested and, where wrong, discarded.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)