1 Samuel 15:20 Meaning: When We Say We Obeyed
Saul said to Samuel, “But I have obeyed Yahweh’s voice, and have gone the way which Yahweh sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.
And Saul said unto Samuel, Yea, I have obeyed the voice of the Lord, and have gone the way which the Lord sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.
And Saul said unto Samuel, Yea, I have obeyed the voice of Jehovah, and have gone the way which Jehovah sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.
And Saul saith unto Samuel, `Because--I have hearkened to the voice of Jehovah, and I go in the way which Jehovah hath sent me, and bring in Agag king of Amalek, and Amalek I have devoted;
And Saul said to Samuel, I have indeed hearkened to the voice of Jehovah, and have gone the way which Jehovah sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.
Meaning in one sentence
In 1 Samuel 15:20, Saul insists he obeyed God even as he holds back. A devotional about the gap between our words and the obedience God requires.
Context
Samuel had just confronted Saul with a simple question: if you destroyed the Amalekites, why do I hear sheep and cattle? God had given clear orders through the prophet: destroy everything, spare nothing. But Saul kept King Agag alive and let the people keep the best livestock. Now, face to face with Samuel, Saul makes his case. He uses words that sound right: obey, go the way the Lord sent, utterly destroy. But the evidence tells a different story. The bleating sheep and lowing oxen behind him contradict every syllable.
Key Words
The Hebrew word Saul uses for obeyed is shama, a word that means more than hearing sounds. It means to listen so closely that you act on what you hear. In the Old Testament, shama is the word used when Israel promises to do everything the Lord has spoken. It implies response, not just awareness. Saul claims he listened in that full sense. But his actions show he stopped short.
Then there is the phrase utterly destroyed, from the Hebrew charam, often translated as devoted to destruction. It carried the idea of something set apart for God alone, removed from human use entirely. You did not keep any of it. You did not bring the king back alive as a trophy. To charam was to give something completely over to God. Saul says he did that. But he brought Agag back. He brought the best of the animals back. The verb and the reality did not match.
And that little word but that opens Saul's speech? In Hebrew it is the particle asher, used here to begin a strong affirmation. It is almost like he is insisting: Yea, I did obey. The stronger his claim, the louder the animals cried out against him.
How Christians Read This Verse
Commentators across the centuries have heard the strain in Saul's voice. The Cambridge Bible notes that Saul still persists in justifying his conduct. He points to what he did, going on the mission, destroying the Amalekites, and holds Agag up as proof of success. But as Gill's Exposition observes, sparing the king was itself a sad proof that he had not obeyed at all. Keil and Delitzsch see Saul's mention of bringing Agag as an attempt to show he had carried out the war. The irony runs deep: the very evidence he thinks proves his obedience actually proves his disobedience. Both Catholic and Protestant readers have seen this as a warning about the human tendency to rationalize partial obedience into full obedience. The lesson sticks across traditions: obedience that picks and chooses is not obedience to God.
A common misunderstanding
Some readers think Saul was mostly obedient and only made a small mistake, that he kept the best animals and the king as part of a normal victory practice. In fact, God had given a very specific command: destroy everything. Sparing anything was not a minor slip; it was a direct refusal to do what God said. Partial obedience is not a weaker form of obedience. It is a different thing entirely.
Living This Out
This week you might find yourself doing the same thing Saul did. You tell God you have done what He asked. You went to church. You prayed. You helped someone. But there is one thing you held back. The honest conversation you have been avoiding. The money you know you should give. The forgiveness you keep for yourself. You bring out all the good you did, hoping it will cover the one thing you kept. Saul's story does not tell you to try harder. It asks you to stop insisting you have obeyed and instead let God show you the sheep still bleating in your life.
Main takeaway: Claiming obedience while holding back what God commands is not obedience at all, no matter how loudly we insist.
For Families
For ages 5, 8
Saul told God he did everything God said. But he kept the best sheep and the king for himself. God sees when we do that. He wants us to do what He says, all the way.
For ages 9, 12
Saul thought he could obey God most of the way and still call it obedience. He said, "I did what you asked," but he had kept the best animals and the enemy king alive as trophies. He pointed at everything he did right so nobody would notice what he left undone. We do the same thing sometimes. We do the parts of obedience that feel easy and then tell ourselves we have been good. But following God means doing what He says, not just what we want to do.
Questions People Ask
Why does Saul claim to have obeyed when he clearly didn't?
Saul seems to believe that partial obedience counts as obedience. He may have convinced himself that bringing Agag back alive was not really disobedience, or he may be trying to save face in front of Samuel. The commenters note that he points to what he did right, destroying the Amalekites, to distract from what he failed to do. His claim is a mix of self-deception and a desperate attempt to justify himself.
What did Saul do wrong in this passage?
God had commanded Saul to utterly destroy the Amalekites and everything they had, including their king. Saul spared Agag and kept the best livestock and goods, supposedly to sacrifice to God. He disobeyed a direct command, and when confronted, he tried to defend rather than repent. Samuel told him that obedience is better than sacrifice.
What does 'utterly destroyed' mean in this context?
The Hebrew word is charam, meaning to devote something to God for destruction. It was a form of total consecration: nothing was to be kept for personal use. Everything was to be given over to God, either through destruction or, in some cases, through the treasury of the sanctuary. By sparing Agag and the best animals, Saul violated the very nature of the command.
Is Saul lying in verse 20?
It is possible Saul has deceived himself into believing he obeyed. He might genuinely think that because he carried out the military campaign and destroyed most of the Amalekites, he fulfilled the command. But the facts do not support him. The best reading is that he is engaged in self-justification, trying to make his partial obedience sound complete. Samuel's response shows that God is not fooled.
Why does God command total destruction of the Amalekites?
This is a difficult part of the Old Testament. The Amalekites had a long history of attacking Israel, and this command was a judgment. Christians have understood it in different ways. Some see it as a unique historical command not repeated today, while others focus on the principle that God judges sin and calls for complete obedience to His word. In this chapter, the focus is not on the morality of the command but on Saul's failure to carry it out.
For pastors & researchers
Hebrew interlinear, 8 commentaries & word study