[The following was one of my exam. question which I found very interesting]

Was Saul a victim or a villain?

We may say that Saul was a victim because in the beginning it was he who wanted to be a king but he was in a sense being put into the centre of struggle between God and His people. Moreover, he wasn't the most wicked person in Israel nor was he the most wicked king but he got a very severe punishment from God. However, he certainly deserved what he got if we agree with the view point of the Dueteronomist that "who doesn't obey God wholeheartedly does not fit for kingship" as well as the general message of the whole Bible that "who do not repent will die with their sin".

The beginning of the story

In the beginning, no body wanted to make him king. Saul himself certainly didn't think of being a king of Israel. Initially, God didn't want to give His people a king, at least at that stage (1Sam 8:7-9). Eventually, He chose Saul as their first king (which could be the best choice at that time). Some people in Israel didn't think that Saul could be their king (1Sam 10:27). It was strange that after being officially elected as king, Saul went back to work in his field. Some may say the overlordship of the Philistine at that time prevent Saul from openly acting as king. However, wasn't the breaking free from the Philistine one of the main reason for having a king? Moreover, it was recorded that Saul was actually working in the field himself instead of his servants worked for him (even if he could openly act as a king, there is nothing to prevent him from just acting a sort of local ruler or judge).

It sounds like that Saul was being caught in the centre of struggle between God and His people. Both sides want Saul to follow their will. It was really a hard job for Saul.

However, the picture wasn't completely negative. At least, God sent his spirit to help Saul to act as a king (1Sam 10:10, 1Sam 11:6, 1Sam 16:14). Some Israelites (inspired by Holy Spirit) follow Saul as well (1Sam 1:26).

The Character of Saul

We can see from the response of Saul to Samuel in 1Sam 9:21 and his hiding behind the baggage when he was elected as king (1Sam 10:22) that he seemingly had a bit low self-esteem and was shy. This sort people usually also carry a fatal character: INSECURE (in fact, I found myself easily to understand Saul because I am also an insecure person).

It is easy to see that an insecure person when being put in power will try very hard to please those who put him/her in power (at least, in the beginning when their status wasn't very rigid) -- in this case, God and His people. It is especially the case when the beginning was very discouraging for him (as stated above). Therefore, it explains why Saul decided to offer scarifies himself when he saw that the people were leaving him during his first battle with the Philistines (1Sam 13:8-9). It explains why he tried to prove himself by making his own decision to spare the life of the king of Amalak (1Sam 15:7-9) -- of course, the influence of the people was also there (1Sam 15:24). It also explains why Saul was so angry with him heard people praise David more than himself and try to kill David when he realised that David could be the one chosen by God to replace him. Moreover, it explains why Saul asked a medium to call "Samuel" before his final battle with the Philistines.

Sometimes, an insecure person looks very much like a humble person when they are not in power. Actually, most people are nice in nice environment. It is sad that sometimes, it is difficult to distinguish the two and the wrong person may be put in power resulting in damage to them as well as the society.

On the other hand, we also see that Saul seemingly did not have a strong faith in God (there wasn't any indication that Saul had a sort of personal faith to God). Whenever a struggle occurred and he needed to choose between obeying God or the Israelites, he made no difficult to please the Israelites even with the risk of making God angry. This is a very serious thing in the eye of the Dueteronomist.

Of course, Saul may have some good characters (as suggested by some people) but since this didn't relate to his fall, we will not go into details.

Saul's mistakes and wrong doings

The first mistake he made was to offer scarifies himself when he clearly knew that only priests can offer scarifies (note that Samuel being a Levi -- see 1Chron 6 -- and a disciple of Eli was probably a priest as well as a prophet). As noted above, it was done because he didn't trust God enough when his people depart him.

His second mistake was made again during his first battle with the Philistines. During the battle, he asked his people to make an oath that no one should eat anything before sunset (1Sam 14:24). His son Jonathan didn't know that the people made such oath (1Sam 14:27) and he ate some honey (1Sam 14:27). In this case, Jonathan shouldn't be punished but Saul wanted to kill him (1Sam 14:44) without really judging the case in clarity (1Sam 14:43-44). Later on, he changed his mind because of the plead of his people (1Sam 14:45). In the whole event, we saw that "justice" wasn't something that in the mind of Saul. What he concerned with was the pressure from God (the lot fell on Jonathan -- 1Sam 14:42) as well as the pressure from the Israelites (1Sam 14:45). Again, we see that the Israelites were on the wining side.

His third mistake was to jealous David and later on trying to kill him (1Sam 18:6-26:15). This reminds me of the event of Cain and Able. His first rejection from God concerning his offering wasn't the direct cause for his final punishment. It was his killing of his innocence brother Able that leaded to his totally rejection from God. The same reappear here (but this time it was the priests being killed). Note that although God didn't like Saul or his family to be king any more, God didn't actively plan a miserable end for him directly. One can imagine what would happen if Saul didn't persecute David but on the contrary, pave the way for David to succeed him. Saul's daughter would be the next queen of Israel, his son would be the prime minister of king David and he would probably die a good death with honour as the king's father in law. We can see what a different it would make if Saul submit to God.

His fourth (and fifth) mistake was the killing of a whole city of priests (1Sam 22:1-19) as well as the visit to a medium (1Sam 28:3-25). This means his total apostasy to God.

Now, we see that his biggest mistake which leaded to his tragic death was not his initial disobedience to God during the two battles (probably under the pressure from his people) but his unrepentant heart (note that admitting verbal repentance as in 1Sam 15:14-15 is not the same as real repentance -- a repentant person will submit to punishment and try to correct his mistake as far as he can). We can compare his response with that of Ahab (another bad king of Israel; 1King 21:27-29) as well as that of David (2Sam 12:1-15). We can also compare the two types of unrepentance of Eli and Saul (one is passive -- not willing to correct his mistake and the other is active -- not even submit to God's punishment).

Conclusion

It could be said that Saul was a victim of circumstances but so was a lot of people probably including Hitler. On the other hand, he certainly did a lot of wicked things (see his fourth mistake above) that deserve what he got.