The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
Samuel’s Warning
1 Samuel 8:10–18 — Samuel’s Warning. 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.
10So Samuel spoke all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a king.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
šə·mū·’êl ’êṯ way·yō·mer kāl- diḇ·rê Yah·weh ’el- hā·‘ām haš·šō·’ă·lîm mê·’it·tōw me·leḵ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-said, Samuel, all the-words of-YHWH unto the-people, the-ones-asking from-with-him a-king.
Where the English smooths the original
In accordance with the instructions of God, Samuel told the people all the words of Jehovah, i.e., all that God had said to him, as related in 1 Samuel 8:7-9 , and then proclaimed to them the right of the king.
The rights of a king 10 . unto the people ] Through their representatives the elders.Cambridge titles 10–18 “the rights of a king,” which is the translation question the whole speech turns on: is mishpat a legal entitlement or a description of behaviour? Geneva (at v. 11) denies it is an entitlement.
that asked of him a king; which is observed, not to distinguish a part of them from the rest; for this was an united request of the people.
11He said, “This will be the manner of the king who will reign over you: He will take your sons and appoint them to serve his own chariots and horses, and to run in front of his chariots.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
way·yō·mer zeh yih·yeh miš·paṭ ham·me·leḵ ’ă·šer yim·lōḵ ‘ă·lê·ḵem ’eṯ- yiq·qāḥ bə·nê·ḵem wə·śām lōw bə·mer·kaḇ·tōw ū·ḇə·p̄ā·rā·šāw wə·rā·ṣū lip̄·nê mer·kaḇ·tōw
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-said: This will-be the-mishpat of-the-king who will-reign over-you: your-sons he-will-take, and-he-will-set for-himself in-his-chariot and-on-his-horses, and-they-shall-run before his-chariot.
Where the English smooths the original
Were they willing to exchange their Republican freedom for the condition of subjection to a sovereign who, after the manner of those other kings of foreign nations—the Pharaohs, for instance—would of course govern Israel after his own will? in other words, were they really willing to give up their Republic for a Despotism?Ellicott's "Republic" is a Victorian political category laid over a theocracy; the Hebrew text speaks of God as King, not of a republic. The rhetorical force is his, the constitutional vocabulary is not the text's.
Not that kings have this authority by their office, but that such as reign in God's wrath would usurp this over their brethren, contrary to the law, De 17:20.
He will take your sons, to wit, injuriously and by violence, as this Hebrew word is oft used, as Genesis 20:3 27:36 Job 5:5 ; and so it must be here;
12He will appoint some for himself as commanders of thousands and of fifties, and others to plow his ground, to reap his harvest, and to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·lā·śūm lōw śā·rê ’ă·lā·p̄îm wə·śā·rê ḥă·miš·šîm wə·la·ḥă·rōš ḥă·rî·šōw wə·liq·ṣōr qə·ṣî·rōw wə·la·‘ă·śō·wṯ kə·lê- mil·ḥam·tōw ū·ḵə·lê riḵ·bōw
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-to-set for-himself chiefs-of thousands and-chiefs-of fifties; and-to-plow his-plowing and-to-reap his-harvest, and-to-make his-weapons-of war and-the-gear-of his-chariotry.
Where the English smooths the original
Forced labour was one of the most unjust, oppressive, and wasteful exactions of absolute governments, and was the chief cause of the revolt of the ten tribes from Rehoboam
And though this might seem to be no disadvantage, but an honour to the persons so advanced; yet even in them that honour was accompanied with great dangers, and pernicious snares of many kinds, for which those faint shadows of glory could not recompense them
This organization was as old as the time of Moses Numbers 31:14 ; Deuteronomy 1:15 , and prevailed among the Philistines alsoBarnes is answering a question the text does not raise — whether the ranks themselves are an innovation. His answer (they are Mosaic) sharpens Samuel's point: the novelty is not the structure but who owns its output.
13And he will take your daughters to be perfumers, cooks, and bakers.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·’eṯ- yiq·qāḥ bə·nō·w·ṯê·ḵem lə·raq·qā·ḥō·wṯ ū·lə·ṭab·bā·ḥō·wṯ ū·lə·’ō·p̄ō·wṯ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-your-daughters he-will-take for-perfumers and-for-cooks and-for-bakers.
Where the English smooths the original
Cookery, baking, and the kindred works are, in Eastern countries, female employment, and thousands of young women are occupied with these offices in the palaces even of petty princes.
It is remarkable that Samuel does not mention the far worse use to which Solomon put their daughters
To have their daughters taken in this manner would be peculiarly grievous to the parents, and dangerous to themselves, because of the tenderness of their sex
14He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his servants.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·’e·ṯś- yiq·qāḥ haṭ·ṭō·w·ḇîm śə·d̲ô·t̲ê·k̲em wə·’eṯ- kar·mê·ḵem wə·zê·ṯê·ḵem wə·nā·ṯan la·‘ă·ḇā·ḏāw
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-your-fields and-your-vineyards and-your-olive-groves, the-good-ones, he-will-take, and-he-will-give to-his-servants.
Where the English smooths the original
He will take your fields, to wit, by fraud or force, as Ahab did from Naboth.
for otherwise kings might not, and did not by their absolute authority, take away those from their subjects; otherwise Ahab would have taken away Naboth's vineyard at onceGill and Pulpit read the Naboth episode in opposite directions from the same facts — Gill as proof that kings could not simply seize land, Pulpit as proof of the despotic intent. The verse settles neither; both readings are printed here on purpose.
The history of the seizure of Naboth's vineyard shows that the kings were not able to exercise this arbitrary power.
15He will take a tenth of your grain and grape harvest and give it to his officials and servants.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ya‘·śōr wə·zar·‘ê·ḵem wə·ḵar·mê·ḵem wə·nā·ṯan lə·sā·rî·sāw wə·la·‘ă·ḇā·ḏāw
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-your-seed and-your-vineyards he-will-tithe, and-he-will-give to-his-eunuchs and-to-his-servants.
Where the English smooths the original
The tenth. i.e. the king will cost you as much as all the ordinances of religion.
besides the several tenths which God hath reserved for his service and servants, he will, when he pleaseth, impose another tenth upon you.
In Babylon, as Aristotle (g) relates, there was an ancient law which required the tenth of whatever was imported for the public revenueGill's classical parallels (Aristotle, Diodorus) are cited from eighteenth-century editions and are historical illustration, not exegesis; they show the tenth was an ordinary royal rate in the ancient world, which is exactly why Samuel's hearers would not have flinched at it.
lit. the eunuch; here it is used in a wider sense for the royal chamberlains.
16And he will take your menservants and maidservants and your best cattle and donkeys and put them to his own use.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·’eṯ- yiq·qāḥ ‘aḇ·ḏê·ḵem wə·’eṯ- šip̄·ḥō·w·ṯê·ḵem wə·’eṯ- haṭ·ṭō·w·ḇîm wə·’eṯ- ba·ḥū·rê·ḵem ḥă·mō·w·rê·ḵem wə·‘ā·śāh lim·laḵ·tōw
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-your-menservants and-your-maidservants and-your-choice-young-men and-your-donkeys he-will-take, and-he-will-make for-his-work.
Where the English smooths the original
The LXX. Greek Version here reads, “your best oxen,” which required only the change of one letter of similar sound in the Hebrew word here.
between the slaves (men-servants and maid-servants) and the asses, is very striking and altogether unsuitable
“Young men” in the Heb. appears to be a copyist’s error, and we should probably adopt the Sept. reading “ cattle. ” Men-servants and maid-servants, cattle and asses, are then coupled together naturally.Cambridge, Ellicott, K&D and Pulpit all prefer the Septuagint's "oxen"; the Masoretic text printed in the interlinear above still reads "your choice young men." The disagreement is recorded, not resolved.
17He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ya‘·śōr ṣō·nə·ḵem wə·’at·tem tih·yū- lōw la·‘ă·ḇā·ḏîm
Literal — word-for-word from the original
Your-flock he-will-tithe; and-you — you shall-become to-him for-slaves.
Where the English smooths the original
Ye elders and chiefs of the people must make up your minds, in the event of electing a king, to the loss of all political and social freedom.
made slaves of by him, even as the Canaanitish servants were, according to Abarbinel; though others interpret it more mildly of their being obliged to pay tribute and taxes, for the support of his government.
Literally, "his slaves." Under an absolute monarchy no one is flee."flee" is a typographical error for "free" in the digitized public-domain text; it is quoted here as printed rather than silently corrected.
18When that day comes, you will beg for relief from the king you have chosen, but the LORD will not answer you on that day.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ha·hū bay·yō·wm ū·zə·‘aq·tem mil·lip̄·nê mal·kə·ḵem ’ă·šer bə·ḥar·tem lā·ḵem Yah·weh ’eṯ·ḵem wə·lō- ya·‘ă·neh ha·hū bay·yō·wm
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-you-shall-cry-out in-that day from-before your-king whom you-have-chosen for-yourselves — and-not will-YHWH answer you in-that day.
Where the English smooths the original
When we bring ourselves into distress by our own wrong desires and projects, we justly forfeit the comfort of prayer, and the benefit of Divine aid.
Because you do not repent for your sins, but because you long for your afflictions, into which you cast yourselves willingly.
is drawn from the despotic conduct of the heathen kings, and does not presuppose, as many have maintained, the times of the later kingsK&D is arguing against the nineteenth-century critical claim that this speech was composed after the monarchy's abuses were known; Ellicott cites the Speaker's Commentary on the same side. The dating question remains contested outside these sources.
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 verse contains no argument, only a delivery. K&D: Samuel spoke “in accordance with the instructions of God,” telling the people all that God had said and then proclaiming “the right of the king.” Gill stresses that the audience is not a faction — “this was an united request of the people” — and Cambridge specifies the mechanism, “through their representatives the elders,” so that what follows is addressed to a nation acting through its constitutional organs, not to a mob. Grammatically the point is כָּל־דִּבְרֵי יְהוָה (kāl-diḇ·rê Yah·weh): all stands first and governs. Nothing is withheld from people who have already decided. ⚙ And the participle that names them, הַשֹּׁאֲלִים (haš·šō·’ă·lîm, H7592 shâʼal), is not an action they performed but a description of what they now are: the askers — the very verb from which the name of the king they will receive is formed.
Everything turns on מִשְׁפַּט (miš·paṭ, H4941), a judicial word covering verdict, statute, custom and penalty at once. Cambridge renders it “the right of the king; such prerogatives as an absolute monarch claims.” Pulpit narrows it: “not so much the legal right itself, as the way in which that right was exercised.” Geneva denies the legal sense altogether — kings do not have this authority “by their office,” but “such as reign in God's wrath would usurp this over their brethren, contrary to the law, De 17:20.” Benson makes the same observation from the syntax: Samuel does not say the manner of a king, but “the manner of the king that shall reign over you.” Ellicott dramatizes the choice as a constitutional one, asking whether the elders were “really willing to give up their Republic for a Despotism” — his republican vocabulary is Victorian, not Hebrew, though the alternative he names is real. Against all of this stands the verse's actual grammar: a single verb, יִקָּח (yiq·qāḥ, H3947), which Poole insists means seizure — “injuriously and by violence, as this Hebrew word is oft used.” K&D adds a small but telling detail: the chariot is singular, and pârâsh is “not a rider, but a saddle-horse,” so this opening image is of a state-carriage and its escort, not a war machine. The first thing the monarchy costs is not blood. It is sons, standing decoratively beside a vehicle.
Samuel now works through an Israelite household as an inventory. Barnes notes the military ranks are nothing new — “as old as the time of Moses,” shared even with the Philistines — so the grievance is ownership, not organisation; Benson concedes the offices look like honours and then removes the floor beneath them, since the honour is held at a king's pleasure and “those faint shadows of glory could not recompense them.” Then the agricultural conscription, which Pulpit identifies as the historical fuse: forced labour was “the chief cause of the revolt of the ten tribes from Rehoboam.” The rare noun חֲרִישׁ (ḥă·rîš, H2758, only 3 verses in the canon) means the ploughing or its season, and Barnes gives the Hebrew idiom straight — “to plow his plowing.” The daughters follow: רַקָּחוֹת (raq·qā·ḥōwṯ, H7548), which Cambridge traces through the archaic “confectionaries” back to Exodus 30:35, “compounds of spices and perfumes”; JFB observes that such work filled “the palaces even of petty princes.” Pulpit then notes the mercy of Samuel's restraint: he “does not mention the far worse use to which Solomon put their daughters.” The land goes next, and here the commentators openly divide — Poole and Pulpit read Naboth's vineyard as evidence of despotic seizure, Gill reads the same story as evidence that kings could not simply seize (“otherwise Ahab would have taken away Naboth's vineyard at once”). Then the tithe, twice, using the rare verb עָשַׂר (ʻâsar, H6237, 8 verses); Pulpit measures it exactly — the king “will cost you as much as all the ordinances of religion.” At v. 15 the recipients are סָרִיסָיו (sā·rî·sāw, H5631): K&D takes it broadly for “royal chamberlains,” Poole literally, as a charge that the king will make eunuchs of his own people. And at v. 16 the text itself becomes uncertain: Ellicott, Cambridge, K&D and Pulpit all prefer the Septuagint's “oxen” to the Masoretic “choice young men,” K&D calling the transmitted word “very striking and altogether unsuitable,” Pulpit arguing from placement that “Samuel would scarcely place their choicest young men between the female slaves and the asses.”
The flock is tithed, and then the pronoun arrives: וְאַתֶּם (wə·’at·tem), grammatically redundant, emphatic by design. Cambridge: “To sum up all briefly, ye will be slaves to the king ye have chosen.” Ellicott hears it as an address to the elders standing in front of Samuel — make up your minds “to the loss of all political and social freedom.” Pulpit gives the literal force of the noun: “his slaves.” K&D catches what the vocabulary has been doing all along — the same word that named the king's beneficiaries in vv. 14–15 now names the whole nation, so that “the king would make all the people into his servants or slaves.” Then the last verse, and the only verb of prayer in the unit: זָעַק (zâʻaq, H2199), to shriek from anguish. Cambridge corrects the old rendering of the divine response — “Rather, will not answer you” — and records that the Septuagint supplies the reason the Hebrew leaves unspoken, “because ye have chosen yourselves a king.” Poole roots the silence in reciprocity (“because you will not hear him, nor obey his counsel, in this day”), comparing Proverbs 1:24 and Zechariah 7:13; Geneva is harsher, saying they long for the afflictions “into which you cast yourselves willingly”; Henry generalizes it into pastoral warning: distress of our own manufacture “justly forfeits the comfort of prayer.” Ellicott and Pulpit both then trace the fulfilment through the northern kingdom, where “no prayers then availed.” K&D, alone here, defends the speech's antiquity: it “is drawn from the despotic conduct of the heathen kings,” not retrojected from Israel's later experience.
⚙ Read the speech by its verbs and it is not primarily a warning about monarchy. Five times: he will take (לָקַח). Twice: he will tithe (עָשַׂר). Twice: he will give (נָתַן) — and never to them. Israel had a King whose relation to them was described by the opposite verbs: He gave them a land, vineyards and olive groves they did not plant, and asked back a tenth. What they request in chapter 8 is an exchange of one tithe-taker for another, and Samuel's argument is not that kings are wicked but that this one will occupy, item by item, every place God already held — the tenth, the firstfruits of the sons, the claim on the whole people. That is why the last word is עֲבָדִים, slaves: the nation that God brought out of a house of slaves now votes itself back into one. And the deepest wound is in the verb of v. 18, בָּחַר (bâchar) — the election word. Everywhere else God is its subject; here Israel is. The judgment pronounced is therefore not destruction but consent: you will be given what you chose, and you will be permitted to keep it. The silence of God in v. 18 is not the withdrawal of His love; it is the honouring of a vote. ⚙ Offered to be tested: the mercy hidden in this passage is that God says yes at all, and that the anointing of a king in the chapters following is His work and not merely their punishment — which is why the story does not end here.
The line that follows is the tool's own fallible reading, not a verse of Scripture: “They asked for a king to carry them, and were told what the king would carry off.”
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
The rare noun חָרִישׁ (chârîysh, H2758) appears in only three verses in the canon, and it names the ploughing or its season. At Genesis 45:6 Joseph tells his brothers there are five years left “in which there shall be neither earing nor harvest”; at Exodus 34:21 the sabbath command is made explicit precisely for the two moments a farmer can least spare — “in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest.” The Verifier finds both those verses sharing chârîysh and קָצִיר (qâtsîyr, H7105) with 1 Samuel 8:12, the same pair. Barnes gives the Hebrew flatly: “to plow his plowing.” ⚙ The force of the link is legal: Exodus protects the ploughing season even from the farmer's own necessity, and the king in Samuel's warning will requisition exactly that protected time. Pulpit's historical note lands on the same nerve — for “a nation of agriculturists to have to leave their own fields just when their presence at home was most needed” was not merely loss but wrong.
Exodus 34:21 · Genesis 45:6
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H2758 chârîysh (rare — in 3 vv canon-wide) and H7105 qâtsîyr (in 49 vv) linking 1 Samuel 8:12 with Exodus 34:21 and Genesis 45:6. The rarity of chârîysh makes this a genuine verbal link; no party is quoting another, so the claim is lexical contact, not citation.
עָשַׂר (ʻâsar, H6237) is a rare verb, occurring in eight verses. Every other occurrence concerns what is owed to God: Jacob's vow at Bethel, “I will surely give the tenth unto thee” (Genesis 28:22); the annual tithe of the increase of the field (Deuteronomy 14:22); the third-year tithe (Deuteronomy 26:12); Nehemiah's restored Levitical tithes (Nehemiah 10:37–38). 1 Samuel 8:15 and 8:17 use that same verb twice, of a king. Poole states the arithmetic: “besides the several tenths which God hath reserved for his service and servants, he will, when he pleaseth, impose another tenth upon you.” Pulpit turns it into a price tag — the king “will cost you as much as all the ordinances of religion.” Gill supplies the counterweight, documenting from Aristotle and Diodorus that a royal tenth was the ordinary ancient rate, which is exactly why the demand would have seemed reasonable. ⚙ The word chosen, however, is not a tax word. It is a worship word.
Genesis 28:22 · Deuteronomy 14:22 · Deuteronomy 26:12 · Nehemiah 10:37
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H6237 ʻâsar, rare (in 8 vv canon-wide), linking 1 Samuel 8:15/8:17 with Genesis 28:22, Deuteronomy 14:22, Deuteronomy 26:12 and Nehemiah 10:37–38. Deuteronomy 14:22 additionally shares H7704 sâdeh and H2233 zeraʻ. Lexical contact on a rare cultic verb; no quotation is claimed in either direction.
2 Chronicles 9:25 counts Solomon's stalls of horses and chariots and his twelve thousand horsemen, using מֶרְכָּבָה (merkâbâh, H4818), פָּרָשׁ (pârâsh, H6571) and רֶכֶב (rekeb, H7393) — the three vehicle-and-horse words of 1 Samuel 8:11–12. The Verifier confirms the overlap; all three lexemes are common, so this is a shared register rather than a citation. Cambridge names the historical outcome without hedging: “Prosperous as was Solomon's reign, it tended in this direction. See 1 Kings 5:13-18; 1 Kings 12:4.” Ellicott reads the sequel the same way, and Pulpit reads Rehoboam's levies as the direct continuation. ⚙ The chronicler is not alluding to Samuel; he is tallying, admiringly, the exact items Samuel listed as the cost.
2 Chronicles 9:25 · 1 Kings 12:4
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H4818 merkâbâh (in 41 vv), H6571 pârâsh (in 54 vv), H7393 rekeb (in 104 vv) between 1 Samuel 8:11–12 and 2 Chronicles 9:25 — real lexical contact but all three words are common, so the tier is thematic, not verbal. 1 Kings 12:4 carries no computed lexeme overlap; it is included on the historical reading recorded by Cambridge, Ellicott and Pulpit, which is editorial rather than lexical.
Genesis 40:2 sets three words beside each other that 1 Samuel 8 also uses: שַׂר (sar, H8269, the chief), אָפָה (ʼâphâh, H644, to bake) and סָרִיס (çârîyç, H5631, eunuch/officer) — Pharaoh's chief baker and chief cupbearer, both his officers. Samuel's speech assembles the same court out of Israelite children: chiefs (v. 12), bakers (v. 13), eunuchs (v. 15). ⚙ The shape of the warning is therefore Egypt, rebuilt domestically: the very court from which God brought them out is the court they are asking to be staffed by their own sons and daughters, and the speech ends by naming them ʻăbādîm, the word for what they were in Egypt. K&D confirms the summary force of that last clause — “the king would make all the people into his servants or slaves” — though the Egypt reading itself is the tool's, not his.
Genesis 40:2
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H8269 sar (in 368 vv), H644 ʼâphâh (in 24 vv), H5631 çârîyç (in 42 vv) between 1 Samuel 8:12–15 and Genesis 40:2. The lexemes are common to moderately common, so the recorded basis supports a shared court-vocabulary motif, not a verbal citation; the Egypt-reversal reading built on it is ⚙ synthesis.
Joshua 24:13 describes the gift of the land in the very nouns the king will confiscate — כֶּרֶם (kerem, H3754) and זַיִת (zayith, H2132): vineyards and oliveyards “which ye planted not.” Exodus 23:11 places the same pair under the sabbath-year law that feeds the poor; Nehemiah 5:11 demands their restoration to mortgaged farmers. 1 Samuel 8:14 has the king take “the good” of exactly these. ⚙ The vineyard and the olive are the canon's standard image of settled, inherited, generational security, which is why their seizure is not measured as revenue but as the undoing of the conquest. Poole and Pulpit both reach for Naboth here; Gill resists, arguing the king took produce rather than title. The lexical link is genuine but the words are common, so the tier stays thematic.
Joshua 24:13 · Exodus 23:11 · Nehemiah 5:11
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H2132 zayith (in 36 vv), H3754 kerem (in 81 vv) with Joshua 24:13, Nehemiah 9:25 and Amos 4:9; H7704 sâdeh (in 309 vv) added at Exodus 23:11 and Nehemiah 5:11. Common lexemes forming a shared land-inheritance motif — explicitly not a quotation link.
Barnes, commenting on this transaction, sends the reader to two passages: “For a comment on this transaction, see Hosea 13:9-11; Acts 13:21-22.” Hosea has God say He gave a king in anger and took him away in wrath; Paul at Pisidian Antioch narrates the same request, God's grant of Saul, and the raising up of David. ⚙ The link is doctrinal and canonical rather than lexical: the Verifier computes no shared lexemes for either reference, and Acts is Greek, so no shared Strong's number is even possible between it and 1 Samuel. The provenance of the reading is Barnes's own cross-reference (JFB and Gill reach the same judgment independently, that the request was granted “in anger”), and it is recorded here as such rather than as a demonstrated verbal connection.
Hosea 13:9-11 · Acts 13:21-22
basis: No Verifier-computed lexeme basis; the connection is Barnes's editorial cross-reference, repeated by JFB and Gill. Acts 13:21–22 is Greek and 1 Samuel is Hebrew, so a shared-Strong's verbal basis is impossible in principle. Flagged so the reader checks the reference rather than trusting the chain.
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
⚙ Every verb in Samuel's warning moves in one direction: לָקַח (lâqach, H3947), he will take — sons, daughters, fields, produce, servants, beasts, and at last the people themselves as עֲבָדִים (ʻăbādîm, H5650, slaves). Jesus describes the same office in the same terms — the rulers of the nations lord it over them — and then reverses every verb: the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many. Where Samuel's king takes sons, this King gives His own life; where Samuel's king makes the nation slaves, Paul says He took the form of a slave Himself. The connection cannot be verbal in the technical sense — the New Testament is Greek and shares no Strong's number with 1 Samuel — but the structural inversion is exact and point-for-point, and it is the oldest Christian way of reading the contrast between the kings of the nations and the King who was crucified.
Mark 10:42-45 · Philippians 2:7
Barnes points to Acts 13:21-22 as “a comment on this transaction”: Israel asked for a king, God gave them Saul, and then removed him and raised up David — of whose seed, Paul continues in the next verse, God brought Israel a Saviour. ⚙ The unit's own vocabulary sets this up: at 8:18 the verb is בָּחַר (bâchar, H977), the election verb, and its subject is Israel — “the king you have chosen.” The rest of the canon takes that verb back: the king God chooses is David, and the King God chooses finally is David's son. Ellicott reads the tragedy of the request as the surrender of “the old grand ideal of a nation… ruled over directly by a King whose throne and home were in the eternal heavens.” The apostolic reading is that the ideal was not abandoned but fulfilled in a man who is that King. This is the widely-held redemptive-historical reading; the reliance on a Greek text means it is a canonical and theological connection, never a verbal one.
Acts 13:21-22 · Deuteronomy 17:15
⚙ This is offered as the tool's own reading and marked novel. 1 Samuel 8:18 ends with a scream, זָעַק (zâʻaq, H2199), and a refusal: “the LORD will not answer you in that day.” Cambridge insists on that rendering — “Rather, will not answer you” — and the root עָנָה (ʻânâh, H6030) means to turn the face toward. ⚙ There is one other place in Scripture where a cry to God on a named day meets no answer, and it is on the lips of the King Israel eventually received: “My God, my God, why have You forsaken Me?” — where Psalm 22 says plainly “I cry in the daytime, but You do not answer.” The proposal is that the unanswered cry Samuel pronounces over a people who chose their own king was finally borne by the King God chose. The sources in this unit do not make this connection; Poole and Henry read v. 18 only as forfeited prayer, and no lexical basis links the Hebrew of 1 Samuel to the Greek of Matthew. Tested and rejected, nothing in the unit's sourced material is lost.
Psalm 22:1-2 · Matthew 27:46
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. 1 Samuel 8:16 carries a real textual problem. The interlinear above prints בַּחוּרֵיכֶם (ba·ḥū·rê·ḵem, H970, “your choice young men”), and the BSB rendering in the same brief reads “your best cattle” — i.e. the English follows the Septuagint's τὰ βουκόλια, presupposing בּקריכם. Ellicott, Cambridge, K&D and Pulpit all prefer the Greek reading; K&D calls the Hebrew word “very striking and altogether unsuitable,” Pulpit argues from placement, Cambridge from the natural pairing of servants with cattle. The Hebrew as transmitted has not been emended here, and both readings are recorded in the notes and divergences for v. 16. At 8:18 Cambridge reports that the Septuagint adds “because ye have chosen yourselves a king”; that clause is absent from the Hebrew and is not treated as text.
Interlinear ordering. The word indices in this unit follow the Berean interlinear's presentation, which orders entries to the English rather than strictly to the Hebrew line (clearly visible at 8:10, where the direct object marker precedes the verb, and at 8:11, 8:13, 8:14 and 8:16, where the object marker is separated from its noun). The literal renderings above are built from Hebrew word order, so they will not always run in index sequence. The transliteration printed for 8:14 index 0 (wə·’e·ṯś-) is anomalous in the source data; the surface form is the ordinary וְאֶת־.
Sources. Matthew Henry's entry in this unit is a single block comment on 8:10–22, so the same paragraph stands behind every verse; it is quoted once, at 8:18, to avoid the appearance of nine distinct judgments. Poole has no note at 8:10. Gill's classical citations (Aristotle, Pliny, Diodorus) are from eighteenth-century editions and function as historical illustration. The Pulpit Commentary's text at 8:17 contains the typographical error “flee” for “free” in the digitized public-domain source; it is quoted as printed and flagged in the editorial note rather than silently corrected.
What is uncertain. (1) Whether מִשְׁפַּט at 8:11 names a legal entitlement or a predicted practice — Cambridge, Pulpit and Geneva give three different answers, and the unit does not adjudicate. (2) Whether סָרִיס at 8:15 is literal (Poole, Pulpit) or an administrative title (K&D). (3) Whether Naboth's vineyard proves royal seizure was possible (Poole, Pulpit) or impossible (Gill). (4) Whether this speech predates the monarchy — K&D and the Speaker's Commentary cited by Ellicott argue it does, against nineteenth-century critics; that debate is outside these sources and is not settled here. (5) The Christ entry titled “The cry that was not answered” is marked novel and is the tool's own proposal, unsupported by any commentator in this unit.
✦ = 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)