No Sense of God

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting December 28 to study Judges 17 and possibly 18.  There are two separate accounts in these final chapters of Judges. I always put them together, and while they do seem to work together, they are not the same characters.  This first account is the migration of the tribe of Dan.

Read through the two chapters together, 17 and 18.  There are plenty of distractions along the way, with funky things people say and do.  My recommendation is to make lots of notes, because you'll get bogged down in the surprises if you don't.

You should have lots of questions.  Make sure you write them down.  Then, with your notes and questions, go to commentaries.  You can revise your notes accordingly, but be sure to look at more than one commentary.  They do not all agree on these chapters.  This is confusing for everyone.

After you have gone through your own study and commentaries, go back through with the questions below:

• The events of chapter 17 happen in the "hill country of Ephraim".  They happen around a man who has a righteous name based on Yahweh.  Why do you think these details might be important, keeping in mind how often they are repeated?
• Micah (Mikayehu in the Hebrew of the first part of the chapter) has stolen silver from his mother, silver which she then cursed in his hearing.  Why do you think Micah stole the money but didn't spend any?
• He confesses to his mother, and she "blesses him to Yahweh". When he returns the money she "consecrates" it (makes it holy) to Yahweh, but, holy to make an idol and a "cast image".  How does something holy to Yahweh then be used to make something He has forbidden?  Why do you think these children of Israel didn't know that was wrong?
• So, of the 1,100 silver, she gives him 200 to make the idol and cast image.  Perhaps a "tithe" of it was for the image (110 silver), and the other 90 for the smithy?  So, do these sound like two images, or one image made of two processes?  Look at several translations, why do you think they have so much trouble understanding what Micah did?
• Micah then makes a "house of God", ephod, teraphim (household gods), and sets one of his sons as a priest.  Sin is "missing", iniquity is "twisting", and transgression is "rebelling".  In your opinion, which one has Micah and his family done here?
• In verse 6, we have the author's explanation of how things got this bad, "In those days, there was no king in Israel, and everyone did what was right in their own eyes."  But there was worship happening in Shiloh (see 18:31).  So, why do you think a king is such an important detail here for this author?
• Enter the young itinerant Levite from Bethlehem.  He wanders to the hill country of Ephraim and happens upon Micah and his house of God.  What you would you expect the young Levite to think of Micah's setup there in his house?
• Micah offers him room, board, a stipend, and clothes to be his priest in his idolatrous "house of God".  Why do you think the Levite would consent to such an arrangement?
• Micah consecrates the Levite in verse 12.  Then in verse 13, he says he now knows he has found favor with Yahweh.  So, what have Micah (and, most likely, everyone living around him) believed about Yahweh at this point in Israel's history?
• The first verse of chapter 18 probably belongs to chapter 17 as the final say, "In those days, there was no king in Israel..."  That verse also sets us up for the events of chapter 18.  Read both chapters together.  Why do you think they've been separated?

What should be most disturbing about this chapter is the way Micah and his people/family consider themselves devoted to Yahweh, yet worship Him in a Canaanite way.  They have set aside His rules for how to relate to Him for the culture of the displaced people of the land.  In what ways do we endanger ourselves in the same way in this culture?  What steps can we take to make sure we don't fall into the same trap?

Mutual Admiration Society of Legendary Figures (MASLF for short)

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Study group meeting January 22 to study 2 Samuel 7.  This is an odd chapter.  Essentially, it's a lot of superlatives connecting rejection and mutual admiration.  God speaks highly of David, so highly it's amazing.  And David speaks highly of God, humbly and meek.  It's so sappy it's sick, and yet, there are vital elements we need to consider emulating in our own relationship with God.

Read through the chapter a few times.  Look for the word usage differences between versions, however many you have.  Jot them down, note the more interesting ones, think of the similarities and differences in word meaning.  The flow of 'plot' or action isn't difficult to follow, but consider that as well.  Who is involved here?  What do they do? Then consider what they say.

After reading through a few times, making your own notes, read through again using the questions below:

• The setting is that all is going well for David.  So why do you think it bothers him that God is still in a 'tabernacle'?
• David speaks to Nathan (who's last name seems to be 'prophet') about his concern and Nathan gives him the 'go ahead'.  Why do you think Nathan would do that?  Try and ignore the rest of the chapter, what do you think Nathan is thinking?
• God corrects Nathan that night in a dream.  The first thing God addresses is the whole, 'tent' issue.  What's God's point about the tent?  Why do you think God is happy in a tent at this time?
• God then recites what He has done for David, and continues into a statement that He will 'build the house of David'.  What do you think God is doing here?  Why do you think God would take the position of 'house-builder' with David, and not the 'house dweller'?
• Verse 9 is worded strangely, in that God will make David's name 'like that of the greatest in the land."  Who else is there?  Who are these 'greatest in the land' of whom God speaks?  What do you think it means for God to word this the way He does?
• God speaks of David's death and descendants.  In a sense, God does not establish David's throne, but Solomon's.  Why word it that way?
• Nathan passes on the word of God to David.  Then David goes and sits in the Lord's presence.  Where do you think David goes?  Why is David able to go there?
• Translations vary with verse 19, especially the ending.  Essentially, it says '...and this the 'torah' of adam (human as made from dust/dirt)...'  Think about that term, 'torah of adam'.  Considering what 'torah' usually means with Scripture, what do you think it's use here might mean?
• David claims that God has done for him what He did because of God's heart and own word.  What do you think David is saying by that?  What do you think he means?
• Verse 22 is what David concludes from what God has done, what he believes about God.  What do you think is interesting about this claim, considering he and his men capture idols from their enemies?
• David then recounts that the people of Israel are unique.  Other people's considered themselves to be 'chosen' by gods to do stuff.  What do you think or see here that makes Israel different?
• Verse 25 is the turn into David's conclusion.  David now asks for what God has promised.  What does this teach you about your relationship with God?  Remember the 'Favor Of God' lessons?  How does this relate?

This isn't a long chapter, but it's not short either.  There's a lot more in it than I went over in these questions.  Be sure to bring your notes and questions as we go through it together.

Don't Touch That!

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting January 15 to study 2 Samuel 6.  This is an interesting chapter.  The details in how the ark is being moved illuminate some problems and misunderstanding by God's people.  The account of this in 1 Chronicles is very lengthy and drawn out.

Read over this chapter a few times.  Picture in your mind what it looks like; what's happening, who's doing what, what's it sound like, what sort of day is it?  As you read through it and imagine the events be sure to imagine the differences between the two attempts to bring the Ark into Jerusalem.  1 Chronicles splits these two attempts into three chapters, 13 and 15 through 16.  Read those, but look specifically at the differences in detail between the two attempts.  1 Chronicles is written from a priestly standpoint, so the emphasis is totally different.  Jot down observations and questions even between the two accounts.

After going through this chapter a few times, go back through with the questions below:

• Why was the Ark at Kiriath Jearim in the first place?  (Go back and read 1 Samuel 6 and 7) 
• The essential detail in Chronicles is the involvement of the Levites following the prescriptions from the Law on treatment of the Ark (Levies carry on poles).  Why do you think the whole involvement of the Levites might have been difficult at this particular stage of Israel's history?
• 1 Chronicles 13:3 says the people did not seek it all the days of Saul.  Why now?  Why not before?  
• All the priests at Nob were killed by Saul (except Abiathar), so how does that help you understand the 'priestly' historical context at this point?
• I said that Chronicles is written from a 'priestly context'.  What do you suspect would be the context of Samuel and Kings then? (consider the three roles of Jesus and that might help)
• Why do you think they would have tried to use a cart first to move the Ark?  Who do you think gave them  the idea? (read back to chapter 6 of 1 Samuel?)
• Who are Ahio and Uzza?  Why involve them in moving the Ark?
• If Uzza reaches out to steady the Ark about to fall, why do you think that would anger God?  What does that tell you about 'good stuff' we might do?
• It says that God struck him for his "error", "irreverent act", "irreverence", and some translations simply skip translating it all together.  Look up the word in the Strong's here.  There's even less, and somewhat contradictory information in another lexicon I have.  This word is only used here, and no where else.  In 1 Chronicles 13:10, it doesn't even have a term, it just says 'because he stretched out his hand on the Ark'.  So, what's happening here?  Why do you think God is so angry that He kills one who has guarded the Ark for many years?
• What is David's response to the death of Uzza? 
• David is angry, but also afraid.  What do you think he's thinking?  He is 'unwilling' to bring the Ark to Jerusalem.  Why do you think he would be 'unwilling'?
• Is there something missing in all this that is present as David goes to fight Philistines?
• They now place it with Obed-Edom.  His name is literally "servant of Edom".  Chronicles makes him out to be a Levite, but that's not mentioned here or later on in 2 Samuel.  Since God blesses him and his house (literally all that is to him), what is God communicating about the Ark?  How do you think this helps us understand what went wrong with Uzza, or does it?
• After 3 months, David hears that God blesses Obed-Edom.  What lesson does David seem to take from this? What do you think David was thinking/feeling before?
• It seems from verse 13 that the Ark is no longer being 'carted' to Jerusalem.  In this edition, there's no real description of any difference nor how David arrived at this particular difference.  Read 1 Chronicles 15:1-15 for a better description of the difference.  So, why do you think how David arrives at his conclusion is omitted there too?  How did he find the 'ordinance'?  Where was it?  Who had it? Why wasn't it used before?
• It's probably easier (and more profitable) to simply examine the difference between how David behaved the first time versus the second time.  So what did you notice as the major differences between how he went about moving the Ark the first time versus the second?
• What was David wearing for the occasion?  Obviously Michal despises David, and then accuses him of 'exposing himself' so we always assume that was all he was wearing, but it doesn't say that.  What other reasons, regardless of what she said, do you think she might have to despise David (whether they're true or not)?
• What do you think is significant that Michal is looking down out of a window as they enter the city?
• It says she despised David 'in her heart'.  Everyone seems to love David, and all he does turns up roses and sunshine.  What do you think is going on with Michal?
• The Ark is placed, sacrifices complete and David gives out gifts.  What do you think is significant about the gifts given?  It's an interesting detail, consistent between the two accounts.
• David blesses the people, which is normally a priests responsibility.  Why do you think David does it and it's okay that David does it?
• David goes home, with the intent to bless his house.  Michal chooses right then to go out to insult him.  What do you think motivated her to choose that time?  
• What did she obviously miss out on by not letting David do what he had in mind?  
• Rash, Michal was rash; but why do you think she was?  What reasons do you think she might have?  Consider her life up to this point.
• The ending statement about Michal is missing in Chronicles as is her insult of David.  What does that tell you about the focus of each?

That should keep us all busy for the evening.  I look forward to seeing everyone Thursday!

Worship Format?

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting October 23 to study 1 Corinthians 14:26-40.  This latter half of the chapter gets at practical application of what Paul has written so far on the topic of gifts in worship.  What he describes in worship is pretty different that what we experience.  We're not in a position to change how our church worships, but we can change how we participate within our format.  Be thinking about that.

Read through these verses a few times, look for things that don't seem to fit, questions you have about how Paul phrases things, and so on.  Try and get a sense of how this application he follows 'edifies' or 'builds up' the church.  Consider how he applies 'love' described in chapter 13 to his application.

Once you've gone through a few times, go back through with the questions below (they're from the previous study sheet).

• In verses 26 through 33 Paul describes a way to all gifts to be utilized in church in an orderly manner.  What do you think such a church service would look like?  How would you feel in such a service?  Could you see such a practice in our church?  What would that look like, and how would you feel about that?
• In verse 29, what do you think it means that 'the others pass judgement' on the prophesy? What do you think that would look like in a 'worship' setting?
• You've probably heard verse 33 quoted a lot, but considering the context, does it really mean that "God always follows logical rules" or something to that effect?
• In verses 34 and 35, what is the setting?  What elements in common with the rest of the chapter do you see?
• Read back through 1 Corinthians 11:1-16; how does that make sense if this is the rule?
• How do you make sense of the tone of verses 34 and 35, with the tone of chapter 7, and 11:1-16?
•  Read verses 33 through 40 but skip 34 and 35.  Does it read consistent to you?  Now read it again with 34 and 35 back in there, does it make more or less sense?
• Trying reading the same passage (33-40) only put verse 34 and 35 after verse 40.  Does that make more or less sense to you?
• So, what makes more sense in this reading, leaving 34 and 35 where there are, putting them after 40, or leaving them out?  Verses 34 and 35 occur in every manuscript and ancient reference we have to this passage, sometimes at the end (after 40) and sometimes where we find them here.  What do you think about these verses within this argument about gifts and practice in worship?
• Paul calls on the church in Corinth to essentially 'fall in line' with the other churches.  How does that affect your consideration of such varied practice in churches today?
• Paul calls on prophets to evaluate his directive.  How does his 'call' sound to you?  Do you think he is really seeking their 'validation'?
• Consider verse 39 in light of the rest of the chapter.  What indication do you see that this particular verse is only for that historical context?  Consider the wider considerations if this verse is only for this historical context.  What else would remain there and not be for us today?
• In verse 40, what connection do you believe there is for Paul between order in worship, and 'edifying' and 'building up of' the church?

Be sure to jot down your questions and bring them.  They're important for us understanding this passage  better.  We all need various perspectives on this to get a better picture of what God is revealing to us.

Doing Gifts In Church

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Study Group meeting October 16 to study 1 Corinthians 14; or at least as far as we can get in this chapter.  This chapter has more problems than any other single chapter in this letter.  This caps off the discussion of the use of spiritual gifts in the church, and especially the placement of tongues among those gifts.  In some places Paul is just flat out difficult to understand.  In others, it seems completely contradictory to what he has said previously in the letter.

Read through the chapter slowly because there are some places it's easy for your mind to simply skip over rather than try and make the difficult connections.  Jot down questions, insights, and so on as you pass through the chapter.  Pay special attention to problems in wording.  Use different translations to help get through some of those, but also note how almost all translations say the same thing at some problem spots.

After you have read through the chapter a few times, read  back through using the questions below:

• Paul starts by telling the people to 'earnestly desire' spiritual things.  What do you think that means as far as who might get what gift?  Does this sound to you like we get to 'pick' or something?
• Again Paul sets tongues over against prophesy.  In his description in verse 2, what sort of 'speaking' does it seem to be to you?  Does other foreign human languages seem to be in view here?
• In verses 1 through 19 Paul goes to great lengths to demonstrate that intelligible language is preferred over unintelligible language.  What do you see as Paul's point throughout this discussion, beyond tongues versus prophesy?
• In each occurrence of some form of the verb, 'edify' (only in verse 12 does the NIV switch to 'build up'), the word truly does refer to a construction term in Greek, as in constructing a building or house.  How does that help you understand Paul's intent in all of this? Or how does it help you understand Paul's underlying concept of worship in general?
• In verse 5, Paul says that he wishes they all spoke in tongues.  In the context of the rest of the verse, and even the rest of the chapter, do you think he 'wishes' with expectation that they all will? Or is this simply a general wish without expectation?  Consider chapter 12:15-20 in your answer as well.
• In verse 6, what sorts of 'alternatives' does Paul list besides tongues?  What do you think of these alternatives?  Have you ever experienced them in worship?
• In verses 7 and 8, Paul points out some rather important considerations in the practice of tongues.  This along with verses 9 through 17, would seem to apply even to public prayer in tongues.  So, what 'exception' does Paul leave to having an interpreter when tongues are used in church?
• Verses 20-25 is probably the most difficult part of Paul's argument to figure out.  To help, read Isaiah 28, not just verses 11-12, but from the beginning through 13 (farther if you have time).  The element in Isaiah 28:9 may be to what Paul refers in verse 20, and serves to introduce 11 and only part of 12.  Why do you think Paul only used part of verse 12 in Isaiah?  
• In verse 22, Paul introduces his statement with 'so then' or 'then' meaning that he is inferring this statement from his quote.  How do you think Isaiah 28:11-12 connects to tongues being a sign to unbelievers?  Even Isaiah 28 aside, how do you see tongues as a sign to unbelievers?  A sign from who?  How do you see Isaiah 28:11-12 connecting to prophesy being a sign for believers?
• The answers to these might more easily be found in verses 23 through 25.  So, the correspondence now relies on verse 23 somehow describing how tongues are a sign to unbelievers.  So, from verse 23 perhaps combined or explained by Isaiah, how do you think tongues are a sign to unbelievers?
• From verses 24 and 25, perhaps combined with the Isaiah quote, how do you think prophesy is a sign to believers?
• In verses 26 through 33 Paul describes a way to all gifts to be utilized in church in an orderly manner.  What do you think such a church service would look like?  How would you feel in such a service?  Could you see such a practice in our church?  What would that look like, and how would you feel about that?
• In verse 29, what do you think it means that 'the others pass judgement' on the prophesy? What do you think that would look like in a 'worship' setting?
• You've probably heard verse 33 quoted a lot, but considering the context, does it really mean that "God always follows logical rules" or something to that effect?
• In verses 34 and 35, what is the setting?  What elements in common with the rest of the chapter do you see?
• Read back through 1 Corinthians 11:1-16; how does that make sense if this is the rule?
• How do you make sense of the tone of verses 34 and 35, with the tone of chapter 7, and 11:1-16?
•  Read verses 33 through 40 but skip 34 and 35.  Does it read consistent to you?  Now read it again with 34 and 35 back in there, does it make more or less sense?
• Trying reading the same passage (33-40) only put verse 34 and 35 after verse 40.  Does that make more or less sense to you?
• So, what makes more sense in this reading, leaving 34 and 35 where there are, putting them after 40, or leaving them out?  Verses 34 and 35 occur in every manuscript and ancient reference we have to this passage, sometimes at the end (after 40) and sometimes where we find them here.  What do you think about these verses within this argument about gifts and practice in worship?
• Paul calls on the church in Corinth to essentially 'fall in line' with the other churches.  How does that affect your consideration of such varied practice in churches today?

 This may be too much to cover in one evening, so we may break it up into segments, like maybe 3.  But there are only 2 more chapters after this, so maybe we can finish up this month...maybe not.

Worship Problems, From Head Gear to Meal Ettiquette

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting September 4 to study 1 Corinthians 11.  This is a somewhat weird chapter, at least it begins weird.  The first verse actually goes with chapter 10, the first issue is very confusing after 2,000 years of cultural change, and the second issue seems to refer to a practice of the Lord's Supper we no longer use, and no one seems to remember.

So, part of our problems will be how to apply these peculiarities to our life today.  If it's so difficult to see what Paul's talking about then, it will be extremely hard to come up with what we need to carry forward 2,000 years to our church life today.  I'm confident we'll find something, but it will be very interesting to discover what.

Read through the chapter in as many translations as you have.  I know this takes time, but there isn't a better practice that will bring linguistic issues to the forefront.  Even as I translate, I still have about 6 versions right there to look at while I'm doing it; it helps to spot inconsistencies or consistencies in translation.  Differences are good places to ask questions or make some further investigation, like with a Strong's.

After reading through several times, jotting down notes and questions, read through again with the questions below:

• Do you think Paul is being 'truthful' in verse 2?  Do they really 'remember him'?  Do they really hold firmly to traditions?  Has he given any examples of that either in previous chapters or in this one?
• Do you think there is a 'progression' in verse 3?  Does it go 'Christ, man, woman'? What about God?
• The word 'head' is used twice in verse 4, do you think Paul is referring to the man's literal head both times?  Why or why not? (you may need to think about this verse in light of verse 3 to answer)
• Not only is 'head' used twice in verse 5, but clearly a literal head is in view because of 'shaved', and 'shorn' in verse 6.  But do you think her literal head is 'disgraced'?  Why or why not? (again, consider verse 3 and then verse 7)
• Read Genesis 1:27.  What do you think of Paul's allusion to this verse in verse 7?  Do you think his argument makes sense as he applies Gen 1:27 to this issue of head-coverings?
• Verses 8 and 9 originate out of the Genesis 2 creation story (Gen 2:20-24).  What do you think of Paul's use of those verses here?
• From verses 7 through 9, Paul clearly refers to the creation account in Genesis.  Why do you think he would go there for this issue?
• You really need to look at verse 10 in at least a King James or New King James translation.  Then look at a New International or New American Standard version.  If you have it, look at the whole passage in the New Revised Standard.  All these translations work over verse 10 differently.  Note especially the 'italics' where a word is added that does not appear in the Greek text.  Read the verse through without the italicized words.  What do you think might be an alternative meaning after reading it that way?
• Do you think verses 11 and 12 soften Paul's stance on women in church, or do they simply reveal his true belief which lies behind what he writes here?  Why do you think any such distinction is important, both to us and to the church in Corinth?
• In verses 13 through 15, does Paul truly support his view of head covering with his point about hair?  Have you ever seen a picture of Jesus with short hair?  Any of the apostles?  Ever?  What do you think he's referring to here? 
• Since Roman customs seemed to include men with what we would consider 'short hair', it might be easy to say this is local for Corinth, a Roman colony.  But do you think we can really do that considering verse 16?
• Switching gears, he says, 'But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you...'  What instruction, the one he concluded, or the one coming up?  And if the one concluded, why would he start it with a statement that seems to imply he does praise them?  If the one coming up, then what do you make of the 'praise' in verse 2?
• Read 1 Corinthians 1:10 and 11.  Why do you think Paul would put 'in part' about his belief of 'divisions' when he's already covered some of them?  What might that mean for this particular issue?
• After criticizing their 'divisions' at the beginning of the letter, he now claims they are necessary?  What do you think he means by that?
• In their practice of the Lord's Supper, Paul says it has stopped being the Lord's Supper.  Why do you think that would be the case?
• Paul describes what they are doing in verses 21 and 22.  How would you describe what they are doing?  For instance, where do you think this happens?  Try, as best as you can, to remove your own 21st Century practice out of the mix, and imagine what is happening.
• Paul repeats for them what he had delivered to them when he was there.  Where does he say he got it?  What do you think he means by 'I received from the Lord...' since he wasn't a disciple of Jesus?
• Paul uses a word 'remembrance' in his quotes of Jesus in verses 24 and 25. Look it up here.  What do you think could be another or even better English word choice?
• What do you think about Paul's point of the Lord's Supper in verse 26?  Is that what it's all about to you?
• What is Paul's claim that to eat the Lord's Supper in an 'unworthy manner' is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord tied back to?  Why does that make you guilty of the body and blood of the Lord?
• Look up the word, 'examine' here.  What other English words would work well here?
• What do you think you should be looking for in this examination?
• What are the consequences for not examining yourself as you take the Lord's Supper?
• Considering the consequences, what do you make of verse 32?  Do you think Paul is saying it's for our own good when we die because we take the Lord's Supper unworthily?
• Paul applies this to the specific practice in Corinth in verses 33 and 34.  How do you think we should apply it in our worship?

That should keep us plenty busy Thursday.  I hope you can make good use of the extra day to study.  This is a perplexing chapter, so let's puzzle over it together!

What God Regrets

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting September 5 to study 1 Samuel 15.  This is a very interesting chapter.  It recounts one of Saul's victories listed in chapter 14, but also the final failure and rejection of Saul as king.  There is no "time-table" so we don't know how far into his reign this happens.  It could be a decade or more of his twenty or so years reign.  Since for this account, timing is not important, we'll just study it as it's presented.

Read through the chapter several times, and note items like where are people when they are doing what is described.  It may be helpful to trace Saul's route on a map (or two maps perhaps - there's one down below).  Be sure to read the chapter in a few translations.  They read differently, and those differences are your clues to "difficulties" and the various possible solutions.  Make some note and bring them - we had some real good ones last week.

After reading through a few times, read back through using the questions below:

• Samuel gives Saul some instructions from God.  How explicit and clear are these instructions?  How much "room for error" did Samuel/God leave Saul?
• How long did Saul wait to start out?
• Who are the Kenites?  Look them up here.  Why let them go?  What "kindness" did they show Israel in the desert wandering?
• Verse 7 sounds good, then verses 8 and 9 depart from his instructions.  In the previous chapter (14:48), Amalek is described as ones having plundered Israel.  What difference might this make in influencing their obedience to the command of God?
• In verse 11, we are introduced to a word ascribed to God, a characteristic of His.  Look up H5162 in Strong's Concordance (your own or online).  Think about what this means, essentially all the meanings have a common thread.  What does this mean that God can do this?  Why might that be a problem "theologically" for people?
• This is where we trace Saul's route to Gilgal.  He comes back and goes to Carmel first.  Look at the map below.  Why is that a strange route to take?  Consider what he does there.  Hold that thought.
• When Samuel shows up at Gilgal, how does Saul greet him?  Consider that along with the thought you were holding from the previous question.  Now, how does Saul seem to view the situation?
• When Samuel asks Saul about the sheep and cattle, Saul says they are for sacrifice.  In such an act of worship, what happens to the sacrifice?  (think about this from previous references in Samuel).  So what is the intent of the people/Saul?
• In all the places where "utterly destroyed" or "completely destroyed" is used, it refers to this word at H2763, listen to it in addition to reading about it. Does the word sound familiar, but from a different context in the Middle East?  What is allowed to escape the "ban"?  Why or why not?
• Even through verse 16, Saul doesn't seem to grasp the situation.  Why might that be?  How could he not know he's done something wrong?
• Even as he answers Samuel, he still protests his innocence.  What is it the difference between Saul's intent, and the intent of the "ban"?  Wouldn't the end result be the same?
• In Samuel's response to Saul, he uses two words for "sacrifice", one the "whole burnt offering" where nothing is spared, all is burned, and then the word Saul has used throughout.  What's the difference?  How does this illuminate more about what is really wrong here?  But what would have been different had they intended a "whole burnt offering"?
• If God delights more in obedience than offerings, what does that say about our worship on Sunday's?  What is supposed to characterize us throughout the week?
• Read verse 23 in as many versions as you can find.  Saul's sins are rebellion (as bad as divination), and what?  What is as bad as idolatry?  Why might that be true, and connected to idolatry?
• Samuel calls what Saul has done, "rejection of God's command/word".  How aware was Saul of what he was doing and what it really meant?  Does God take that into account?
• Read both verses 24 and 30.  From Samuel's response, how much difference does it seem to make whether Saul is sincere or not?
• When Saul grabs Samuel's robe and it tears, consider what he says to Saul, what will God not do? This word "change His mind" or "relent" or "repent" is the same word used previously for God in verse 11 (H5162).  What's the difference here?  Why not here, but before God does?  Hold that thought.
• Samuel does go back with Saul, but he has other reasons than making Saul look good to the elders and the people.  What does Samuel do to Agag?  Look at verse 33 in as many versions as you have.  The NIV is "nicer" but the others are more accurate.  How does this influence your thinking about God?
• In verse 35, God again is said to "repent" or "regret", and it's our same word.  Again, why here, but not in verse 29?  What does Samuel's claim mean in verse 29?
• How does Samuel feel about all this?  Consider verses 11, along with 35.  Keep this in mind, because it comes back around in the next chapter.

That should keep us busy Thursday.  I look forward to studying with you then.