Alpharic Research Institute

Centre for Research in Philosophy, Theology and

Ethics
Email: alpharicinstitute@gmail.com 09066927954

CHARACTER OF INTEGRITY:
A CHALLENGE FOR PASTORS IN THE LIGHT OF I SAMUEL 12:1-5
BY
GODSWILL OME UFERE
Email: uferegodswillmatthias@gmail.com, godswillmatthias99@gmail.com; __GSM: +2347045155575
MAY, 2020

ABSTRACT

Godly character is lacking in the 21st century church. Integrity which is built on accountability and
transparency is no longer cherished in the Christian body. The virtues are now seen as cankerworms of
goodness and the unfortunate part of the story is that pastors - who should be role models to the church, are
also victims of the menace of the ill characters seen in the Church today. The presence of these ill
characters is evidenced by a number of high-profile pastors who have fallen in the church today and have
been involved in questionable ethical situations. These tremendous character deficits have led to cynicism
toward pastors and ultimately toward the churches they serve. This paper adopts an exegetical study of I
Samuel 12:1-5. Its exegesis has the purpose of application to pastors. The passage challenges the character
of pastors as it concerns integrity and accountability. It states primarily what the character of a pastor in
the church should be. The theological, ethical and ecclesiological focus of this paper will help address this
problem of character among pastors in the church.

Keywords: Integrity, accountability, character, witness, testimony, I Samuel 12:1-5

1
Introduction strong moral and ethical principles and
values” (12). In ethics, integrity is regarded as
A proper consideration of the lives of pastors
the honesty andtruthfulness or accuracy of
today reveals that the character of pastors are
one's actions. Lucaites posits that “integrity
rather discouraging as cases that shows lack of
can stand in opposition to hypocrisy, in that
integrity among them abounds. Pastors have
judging with the standards of integrity
begun to leave aside the Godly character
involves regarding internal consistency as a
which should be embedded on accountability,
virtue, and suggests that parties holding within
transparency and moral uprightness. As a
themselves apparently conflicting values
result,
should account for the discrepancy or alter
their beliefs” (92). This is true according to
Lucaites because Hornby saw integrity as “the
the stories of some pastors carried about by
quality of being honest and having strong
the members are as sour as vinegar. The lack
moral principles” (817).The word integrity
of integrity seen among pastors are also
evolved from the Latin adjective integer,
affecting the behaviours of some of the
meaning whole or complete (McGill 12). In
members – because they wholly believe in
this context, integrity is the inner sense of
their pastors. Some pastors have been alleged
"wholeness" deriving from qualities such as
of embezzling the funds of the church,
honesty and consistency of character. As such,
indulging in secret sexual affairs, practicing
one may judge that others "have integrity" to
homosexuality, being members of secret cult,
the extent that they act according to the
being materialistic and other moral vices.
values, beliefs and principles they claim to
By adopting a hermeneutical analysis of 1st hold (Gerald 34).
Samuel 12:1-5, this paper challenges the
Integrity is one of the most important and oft-
lifestyle and character of pastors. It also try to
cited of virtue terms. It is also perhaps the
promote character of integrity among the
most puzzling. For example, while it is
pastors as a medium of curbing the menace of
sometimes used virtually synonymously with
lack of accountability and transparency seen
‘moral,’ we also at times distinguish acting
among pastors.
morally from acting with integrity. Persons of
Concept of Integrity integrity may in fact act immorally – though

According to McGill Cushing, “integrity is the they would usually not know they are acting

practice of being honest and showing a immorally. Thus one may acknowledge a

consistent and uncompromising adherence to person to have integrity even though that
2
person may hold what one thinks
importantly mistaken moral views (Stanford
Encyclopedia, n.pg).
According to Muel, Kaptein, integrity is not a
one-dimensional concept. In his book he
presents a multifaceted perspective
integrity. Integrity relates to, for example,
compliance to the rules as well as to social
expectations, with morality as well as ethics,
and with actions as well as attitude (152).
Jowett, B. observed that “integrity is one of
the most important and oft-cited of virtue
terms. It is also perhaps the most puzzling. For
example, while it is sometimes used virtually
synonymously with ‘moral,’ we also at times
distinguish acting morally from acting with
integrity. Persons of integrity may in fact act
immorally—though they would usually not
know they are acting immorally. Thus one
may acknowledge a person to have integrity
even though that person may hold what one
thinks are importantly mistaken moral views”
(123).
Worthy of note is that when used as a virtue
term, ‘integrity’ refers to a quality of a
person’s character; however, there are other
uses of the term. One may speak of the
integrity of a wilderness region or an
ecosystem, a computerized database, a defense
system, a work of art, and so on. When it is
applied to objects, integrity refers to the
wholeness, intactness or purity of a thing—
is meanings that are sometimes carried over
when it is applied to people. A wilderness
region has integrity when it has not been
corrupted by development or by the side-
effects of development, when it remains intact
as wilderness. A database maintains its
of
integrity as long as it remains uncorrupted by
error; a defense system as long as it is not
breached. A musical work might be said to
have integrity when its musical structure has a
certain completeness that is not intruded upon
by uncoordinated, unrelated musical ideas;
that is, when it possesses a kind of musical
wholeness, intactness and purity.
Lucaites maintained that integrity is also
attributed to various parts or aspects of a
person’s life. We speak of attributes such as
professional, intellectual and artistic integrity.
However, the most philosophically important
sense of the term ‘integrity’ relates to general
character. Philosophers have been particularly
concerned to understand what it is for a person
to exhibit integrity throughout life (92).
What is it to be a person of integrity?
Ordinary discourse about integrity involves
two fundamental intuitions: first, that integrity
is primarily a formal relation one has to
oneself, or between parts or aspects of one’s
self; and second, that integrity is connected in
an important way to acting morally, in other
words, there are some substantive or
3
normative constraints on what it is to act with Hermeneutical Study of I Samuel 12:1-5
integrity.
I Samuel 12:1-5 in Context
Lucaites pointed that how these two intuitions
The book of I Samuel has the name “Samuel”
can be incorporated into a consistent theory of
in the title, not because he was the author but
integrity is not obvious, and most accounts of
because the first book begins with a large
integrity tend to focus on one of these
account of him, his birth and childhood, his
intuitions to the detriment of the other. A
life and government, the history of the reigns
number of accounts have been advanced, the
of Saul and David, who were both anointed by
most important of them being: (i) integrity as
him (Henry 281). The book of I Samuel
the integration of self; (ii) integrity as
describes the crucial turning point in Israel's
maintenance of identity; (iii) integrity as
history from that of the judges to the rule of a
standing for something; (iv) integrity as moral
king. The book sets forth the tension between
purpose; and (v) integrity as a virtue (97).
the people's expectation of a king and God's
The findings suggest that the concept of pattern of a theocracy in which he was their
integrity, viewed as a contextualized set of King (Stamps 412). It treats the judgeship of
values, is helpful in articulating the link Prophet Samuel and the reign of Saul, from
between reported values and administrative his election to his rejection (1 Chronicles 8-
practice. It is the consistency of actions, 15), and the decline of his Kingdom during his
values, methods, measures, principles, conflict with David, who the Lord had chosen
expectations, and outcomes. In ethics, to be king of his people in place of Saul (Keil
integrity is regarded as the honesty and and Delitzch, n.pg).
truthfulness or accuracy of one's actions.
In view of statements made in I Samuel 5:5;
Integrity rests on honesty, and truthfulness or
6:18; 27:6, it seems that the book was written
accuracy of one's actions. Integrity is the
after the reign of Solomon but before the
quality that locks in ones values and causes
Babylonian captivity. Thus, the date will be
him/her to live consistently with them.
sometime between 931 BC, the time Israel
Integrity is the foundation of character. A
divided into the Northern and Southern
person who has integrity also has an
Kingdoms after the death of Solomon and 586
unblemished character in every area of his or
BC, the date of the Babylonian captivity of
her life. As Aristotle affirmed, one of the most
Judah, the southern kingdom of Israel
important activities one can engage in, is
(Dickson 314).
developing one’scharacter.

4
In chapter 8 of I Samuel, there was a transition
in the history of Israel. It was fiction from
direct theocratic rule of God to his role to a
king with the exhortation of the prophets.
Because Samuel was old and his sons did not
follow after the tradition of his spiritual
leadership, the people sought for a king to
whom they could transfer their allegiance and
a centralized leader like other nations around
them (Dickson 322). It could be said at this
point that the Israelites shifted their sense of
security from God to Man. God dealt with
Israel in reference to many of the Israelites
desires and send to Samuel to anoint a king for
them called Saul, the son of Kish.
In chapter 12 of I Samuel, Samuel organizes a
coronation service for the new king of Israel at
Gilgal. At this point his life of accountability
and integrity was brought to light to which the
children of Israel were witness to. In this
situation, Samuel was reading having
completed his life work, to abdicate that the
new leader might take over. He addressed the
assembly of the nation at Gilgal with his own
defense of his life’s work (Porter 362).
He challenged the nation to show that he had
been oppressive or unjust; offering to restore
what he had robbed them of. The people Paul
testified that he had been righteous. He
invoked The witness of God himself and of
His anointed and the people agreed (Porter
362).
The Text: I Samuel 12:1-5(Michigan –
Claremont: Leningrad Codex, Firkovoch
BI9A)
1 Samuel 12:1-5
‫ וַֹּיאמֶר ְׁש מּואֵ ל אֶל־ָּכל־י ְִׂש ָראֵ ל הִֵּנה ָׁש מַ עְִּת י ב ְֽק ֹ ְלכֶם לְכ ֹל‬1
‫אֲֶׁש ר־ ֲאמ ְַרֶּת ם לִי וַָאמְ לִיְך ֲעלֵיכֶם מֶ ֽלְֶך׃‬
‫ ְועַָּת ה הִֵּנה הֶַּמ לְֶך ׀ מִ תְ הֵַּלְך ִל ְפנֵיכֶם וַאֲ נִי ז ָקַ נְִּת י וַָׂש בְִּת י‬2
‫ּו ָבנַי הִָּנם ִאְּת כֶם וַאֲ נִי הִתְ הַַּל כְִּת י ִל ְפנֵיכֶם מִ ְּנע ַֻרי עַד־הַֹּיום‬
‫הֶַּז ֽה׃‬
‫ ִהנְנִי עֲנּו בִי נֶגֶד יְהוָה ְונֶגֶד מְִׁש יח ֹו אֶת־ֹׁשור ׀ מִ י לָקַ חְִּת י‬3
‫ירֹּצותִ יּומִ ַּיד־מִ י‬
ַ ִ‫ַוחֲמ ֹור מִי לָקַ חְִּת י וְאֶת־מִ י עַָׁש קְ ִּת י אֶת־מ‬
‫ָל ַקחְִּת י כֹפֶר וְַא ְעלִים עֵינַי ֹּבו ְואִָׁש יב לָכֶ ֽם׃‬
‫ וַֹּיאמְרּו ֹלא עֲַׁש קְ ָּת נּו וְֹלא ַרֹּצותָ נּו ְוֹלֽא־לָקַ חְָּת ִמַּיד־אִ יׁש‬4
‫ְמאּֽומָה׃‬
‫ וַֹּיאמֶר ֲאלֵיהֶם עֵד י ְהוָה ָּב כֶם ְועֵד מְִׁש יח ֹו הַֹּיום הֶַּזה ִּכי‬5
‫ֹלא ְמצָאתֶ ם ְּב י ָדִ י מְ אּומָה וַֹּיאמֶ ר ֵעֽד׃‬
The Researcher's Translation of I Samuel
12:1-5 (New English Translation - NET)
1 And said Samuel to all Israel, indeed I have
heeded your voice in all that you said to me
and have made over you a king.
2 Now here is the king walking before you
and I am old and gray headed and my sons are
with you and I have walked before you from
my childhood to this day.
3 Here I am, witness against me before
Yahweh and before His anointed. The ox of
whom have I taken? or the donkey of whom
have I taken? or whom have I cheated? or
5
whom have I oppressed? or from or of whom
have I received any bribe and to blind my eyes
with which I will restore it to you.
4 And they said you have not cheated us or
oppressed us or have you taken anything from
the hand of any man.
5 And he said to them Yahweh is witness
against you and His witness is witness this day
that you have not found in my hand anything
and they answered He is witness.
Exegesis of the Text, I Samuel 12:1-5
 The Day of Accountability (v.1-2)
After the victory of Saul over the Ammonites
in I Samuel 11, Samuel knows the nation will
now begin to look to this king for leadership.
Here, in this chapter, he is helping Israel to
make the transition from his leadership to
Saul's leadership. Samuel makes this clear
when he says, "Now here is the king" and "I
am old and gray headed." Samuel is telling
Israel that his day is over, and Saul's day is
beginning (Guzik, n.pg). Here, Samuel gives
the people of Israel an account of the last
revolution and of the present posture of their
government. For him, he had spent his days in
their office; he began betimes to be used for
among them and had continued long, so he
declared to them, “I have walked before you,
from the time of my youth to the present
day.” (NET). He had been a long, steady and
immaculate servant of the public (Clark,n.pg).
Samuel said, “Indeed I have heeded your
voice in all that you have said to me”: Samuel
noted it clearly known that it was not his idea
to appoint a king over Israel. This idea began
in the hearts of Israel, not in the heart and
mind of God. God allowed it and directed its
execution, but it was the voice of the people
that prompted it (Guzik, n.pg). He was old,
and therefore the more able to advice them
(Henry 402). Though he was personally hurt
by their desire for a king and disagreed with it
as a policy, he did not simply dismiss it. He
took it to God, and then agreed to do what the
people wanted (Akanni 345). Samuel also
presented his sons before the people for them
to call his sons to an account for anything they
have done amiss (Henry 402). Samuel
presented them before the people so that if
they are proven guilty of any wrong, they will
be prosecuted by a due course of law, punish
them and oblige them to make restitution.
Nothing is said of their earlier complaint about
his two sons in 8:1-5; but the reference to his
sons here in v. 2 may imply that he had
dismissed them from their posts in Beersheba
and brought them back home (Payne 308).
On the part of his children, Samuel might have
pardoned his own sons, who have acted
improperly before he quitted the government;
but though he was the most tender of parents,
he would not, but abandoned them to national
justice, with only a tacit solicitation of mercy:
Behold, my sons are with you! They have
6
acted improperly; I deprived them of their
authority; they are amenable to you for their
past conduct; I have walked uprightly and
disinteresting among you; they have not
followed my steps: but can you forgive them
for their father’s sake? (Clarke, n.pg). Also, it
is generally agreed that these words of Samuel
intimate that he had deprived them of public
employ, and reduced them to a level with the
common people (Barnes, n.pg).
 Samuel’s Testimony of his Integrity
(v. 3)
In verse 3 of the text, Samuel is seen clearing
himself from all suspicion or imputation of
mismanagement, while the administration was
in his hand. He solemnly appeals to them
concerning his integrity while in office (Henry
402). For he said, “Here I am, testify against
me before the Lord and before his anointed.
Whose ox have I taken?...” (NRSV). By
asking this question, Samuel intended to first
convince them of the injury they have done
him in setting him aside even when they had
nothing amiss to charge him. Samuel
preserved his own reputation (Henry 402).
There is emphasis on the fact that Samuel had
taken nothing unjustly from anyone. This
description of Samuel makes a strong contrast
with his own description of Kings in 8:11 –
18, which shows them taking one thing after
another from their subjects (Payne 308).
Henry asserts that those that heard of
Samuel’s being rejected as he was would be
ready to suspect that certainly he had done
some evil thing, or he would never have been
ill treated (402). He was opening his life up
for everyone to scrutinize. Samuel knew that it
is God's measurement of our lives and
ministries that counts most, but listening to the
way the people see him will make him more
free among them (Akanni 345). Samuel
designed to leave a good name behind him, so
he designed to leave his successor a good
example before him so that the successor can
write after his copy and write fair (Henry
402). He begins with a vindication of himself
for he that will, with confidence, tell area of
wrong so that he too can see to it that he
himself be clear.
Samuel in this appeal acquits himself from,
firstly, that he had never, under any protest
whatsoever, taking back which was not his
own, ox or ass, he had never detained their
cattle for tribute, files or forfeitures, now used
their service without paying for it. Secondly,
he had never before did roughly with those he
dealt, nor oppressed those that were under his
power. Also, he have never taken bribes to
pervert justice, nor was ever biased by favour
for affection to give judgement in a cause
against his conscience (Henry 402). He calls
upon does that hurts my head to bear witness
concerning his conduct, for he says, “Here I
am, bring a charge against me.” (NET).
7
  The Testimony of Others (v. 4-5)
Upon his appeal, Samuel is honorably
acquitted. he did not expect that they will do
him honour at parting, though he well
deserved it, and therefore mentioned not any
of the good services he had done them, for
which they ought to have applauded him and
returned him the thanks of the house; all he
desired was that they should do him justice,
and that they did (Henry 403).
The people readily owning stated that he had
not made his term of oppressive to them nor
used his power to their wrong; he have not
made it expensive to them; for they said, “…
you have not defrauded us or oppressed us or
taken anything from the hand of anyone.”
(NRSV). This means that he have not only
been righteous, but generous. He have not
defrauded anyone. He had not oppressed
anyone or denied anyone a fair hearing of his
or her case (McKane 84). The people's
response to Samuel’s challenge is testimony to
a life of dignity and transparent holiness
(Akanni 345).
Samuel set the seal on his accountability by
calling on the lord and Saul to be his
witnesses. Samuel knew that people might be
afraid to speak up but god knows what no one
else may know. God is the righteous judge
and the one who will make the final
judgement on the integrity with which Samuel
has worked. Samuel was acting as a role
model for Saul – a young man just coming
into leadership. He was setting the standard
that’s all should maintain (Akanni 346). This
honorable testimony borne to Samuel’s
integrity is left upon record to his honour.
“The Lord is witness, ‘who searcheth the
heart and his anointed is witness, who trieth
overt acts; and the people agrees to it: He is
witness” (Henry 405). Israel knew Samuel had
been a good, Godly leader. He had not led
them for what he can get from them, but what
he could give to them (Guzik, n.pg).
Exegetical Conclusion
Samuel, in this text, not only cleared his own
character, but set an example before Saul,
while he showed the people their ingratitude
to God and to himself. There is a just debt
which all men must pay to their own good
name, especially men in public stations (like
the pastors), which is, to guard it against
unjust blame and suspicions, that they may
finish their course with honour, as well as with
joy. And that they have in their places lived
honestly will be there comforted, under any
slights and contempt that may be put upon
them.
Challenges of Integrity in the light of I
Samuel 12:1-5 for the Pastors
Means James, remarks that, “Effectiveness
relate to individual character and competence
not too spectacular gifts or advantageous
circumstances” (17). The integrity of the
8
pastor must be unwavering and solid in every
area of life. And as Stephen Olford said that
God is far more concerned with whom we are
that what we do, toss if what a pastor does not
satisfy his holy standards or demands, then
what the pastor is doing is virtually worthless
(32).
One cannot overestimate the importance of
integrity in the life of the pastor. He cannot
minister from a position of authority without
it. God himself testifies for anyone that has
good character: accountable and upright.
The pastors hereby are challenged by the life
of Samuel in I Samuel 12:1-5. The pastors
must follow after the footstep of Samuel if
they must achieve excellence in their pastoral
calling.
To begin with, the pastors are challenged to be
aware that there is need for them to possess
good character. They must be accountable and
morally upright as people called by God for a
divine purpose. When a pastor is serving a
Church, it is observed that the parishioners do
not always talk about the character of the
pastor until he has been transferred or on the
day of his sent-off. So many pastors make the
situation more devastating as they can show
nothing for the office that they had been in
charge of over the years. The mobilization all
the persons or the one who is to take over
from him will get is being cemented with the
accountable and upright life of the pastor.
Character is never overlooked at the last day
neither is it abandoned during one’s time of
leadership. Pastors and leaders should not
behave the way they want to knowing that
they are role models to their followers. A slip
off of the leader in character may have
devastating effects on the followers. Again,
the pastor has a divine appointment of
ministering to the Church of God; so, a pastor
must keep his life on check in order not to
deviate from the right path.
As Hayford Jack puts it, “The effective
servant of God will leave and lead from a
foundation of godly character and integrity,
within a fallen culture” (VIII). Godly
character do not only affect the life of the
pastor but goes a long way to affect the lives
of the people he is ministering to. “In the
calling of every pastor, character has a place”
(Oswald 24). The biblical standards for the
pastor’s character must not be overemphasized
because it formulates his life and ministry and
influence those around him especially in the
faith community –the Church.
Secondly, the pastors also, are challenged to
be aware of the fact that churches and God
Himself cherish people of godly character.
They must have the mindset that all they do
should be to the glory of God. This idea will
help the pastors to know that the service they
render to man is not only to man but to God.
Many pastors are so secretive about their
affairs that members of the church finds it
9
difficult to make any comment on about their
lives while in office. Olford remarks, “Lack of
integrity and Godly character can be hidden
only but for a season” (34). Consequently,
God do not have anything to do with a pastor
who indulges in secrecy; and unmistakably
true that that which goes on in the secret is
evil. The Bible declares that the darkness fears
the light because it does not want its deeds to
be exposed. So are some pastors who fear that
the knowledge of their deeds are known by
others. Such deeds are always evil. The
pastors must not too secretive so that the
members of the church will be able to give
good testimonies about them.
Some other pastors are not secretive but open
in their bad characters that reveals lack of
integrity. Stories abound about pastor who
derive joy in exploiting and impoverishing the
poor members of the Church using various
means such as acclaimed spiritual instructions,
sale of spiritual items- olive oil, handkerchief,
etc. Through an interview, the researcher
heard one of such stories: a pastor
impregnated one of his female members and
when he was called to explain to the elders of
the church how it happened told the elders that
taking care of a woman is not his problem.
This implies that he was not even showing
remorse about his wrong action. In other
occasions, the pastor threatens the life of the
victim of his evil indulgence. All these reveals
that some pastors are not even sorry about
their bad conducts.
Thirdly, the pastors are challenged to know
that there is need for them to guard against
unjust aspersions and suspicions, so that they
may finish their course with honour as well as
with joy. Gibbs Alfred writes that, “ A
preacher [pastor] is like a tower clock –seen
by all, heard by all and conscious of by all”
(n.pg). The pastor is not an individualistic
individual, according to Halvord, but a group
individual (13). In this, the pastor should be
able to overcome any form of ungodliness in
character and in words so as to maintain his
place as a role model to others. Pastors must
leave out good examples to their successors.
10
This will make it difficult for the successor to
choose a wrong path. However, a false or
misleading charge will do no good to the
reputation of a pastor; the feeling of the
members of a church against their pastor to
have committed or guilty of a crime will end
up daunting the image of the pastor. Thus,
pastor should try his possible best to run away
from every appearances of evil.
Also, Pastors should have the knowledge that
even as God is the final judge of all, the
testimonies of people speaks volume about
them. There have been many cases where
pastors claim that only God has the right to
judge them, even when they are politely
corrected of the wrong they have done. To
such pastors, correction over ill character is
judgement. But the question is, “will God
come down from heaven to the earth to bear
testimonies to our actions? Not at all, God
works through man whom he created in his
own image. Though, the judgment of man
may not be perfect, but it has much to say
about the actions of people.
William Barclay posits, “Words are not
enough for defense but character is; even in
actions, a fellow is needed to bear witness to
them” (n.pg). Pastors must not selfishly
defend themselves. They should not only look
forward to the judgement of God but should
also have time to listen to the testimonies
borne by others about them. Such is also
applicable to pastors: they must learn to listen
to the way the members of the church – as
fellow workers in God's vineyard – see them.
It will help make them more effective in their
ministry among the people. And at same time,
know that God is the final judge and he knows
what others do not know. Generally, the study
challenges the pastors to live uprightly and to
be accountable in the office they serve in
because God judges all things and that without
integrity the pastoral ministry is doomed to
fail.
Conclusion
Integrity is an indispensable virtue in the life
of a pastor as well as his ministry. Reason to
this is that one day each of us will stand to
give account of our actions to God as declared
by Ecclesiastes 12:14, “For God will bring
every deed into judgment, including every
secret thing, whether good or evil.” (NRSV).
No church will want to accommodate any
pastor who has the story of a questionable
character in this 21st century. Questionable
character breeds rejection and lack of trust.
Integrity is a key to a successful life and
ministry; pastors must maintain live of
integrity in order to sustain their ministry.
They must be consistent in their Godly
character.
11
It is also worthy of note that the Godly Gibbs, Alfred. The Preacher and His
character of the pastors should be emulated by Preaching (revd. ed.) Nashville: Thomas
the members of the church. Also, the Godly Nelson Publishers, 2011. Electronic Database.
character should be practiced by the pastor
Guzik, David. Study Guide for 1 Samuel 12.
both in the secret and in the open. As a
Michigan: Blue Letter Bible Ministry, 2001.
preacher pointed, “Obedience is really
Electronic Database.
obedience when you obey at the time you
have the opportunity to disobey.” Pastors Halvord, L. Authentic Preaching. USA:
should not do anything for mere recognition or Augsburg Publishing House, 1982. Print.
selfish sake but rather do it for the glory of
Hayford, Jack. The Leading Edge. Lake Mary,
God and see it as spirituality to pleasing God
Florida: Charisma House, 2001. Print.
as a goal.
Hebrew Study Tools. Hebrew Text.
Westminster Leningrad: Codex. 2020
Updated. Electronic Database.

WORKS CITED Henry, Matthew. Matthew Henry’s

Commentary on the Whole Bible. USA:
Akanni, Gbile, “1 Samuel” Africa Bible
Hendrickson Publisher, 2005. Print.
Commentary. Adeyemo, Tokumbo. Nairobi,
Kenya WorldAlive Publishers, 2006. Print. Hornby, A. S.“Integrity”. Oxford Advanced
Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. 9th
Bible Hub. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia.
ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
Philadelphia: Westminster Hebrew Institute,
Print.
1987. Print.
Jowett, B. “Politics”Aristotle on the Political.
Clarke, Adam. Adam Clarke’s Commentary
New York: Dover Publishers, 2000. Print.
on the Bible. 1831. Electronic Database.
Delitzsch F. and Keil, C. Commentary on the
Dickson, Roger E. Dickson Teacher’s Bible.
Old Testament 10 volumes. Edinburgh:
Oklahoma: Africa International Missions,
Hendrickson Publishers, 1991. Electronic
2011. Print.
Database.
Gerald, MacCullum. Essence of a Manager.
Laurence, Urdang ed. “Integrity”, The
Florida: Springer Science and Business
Random House College Dictionary. USA:
Media. 2014. Print.
Randon House, Inc. 1988. Print.

12
Lucaites, John Louis. Contemporary
Rhetorical Theory: A Reader. England: Olford, Stephen F. The Leadership in Christ.
Guilford Press, 2007. Print. Bromley, England: STL Books, 1985. Print.

Means, James E. Effective Pastors for a New Oswald, J. Smith. The Man God Uses.
Century. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1968.
Print. Print.

McGill, Cushing. Integrity: Doing the Right Payne, Daid F. “1 and 2 Samuel” New Bible
Thing for the Right Reason. Nashville: McGill Commentary. Carson D. A. ed. Et al.
Press, 2012. Nottingham: Inter – Varsity Press, 2011. Print.

McKanee, William. I and II Samuel Porter, Laurence E. “I and II Samuel” The

Introduction and Commentary. Bloomsbury, International Bible Commentary. Bruce, F. F.
London: SCM Press Ltd, 1963. Print. Grand Rapids. Michigan: Zondrvan
Publishing House, 1979. Print.
Muel, Kaptein. The Servant of the People: On
the Power of integrity in Politics and Stamps, C. Donald. Life in the Spirit Study
Government. Massachusetts: Harvard School Bible. Michigan: Zondervan Publishers, 2003.
of Business, 2014. Print. Print.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Tommy, Yessick. Building Blocks for Longer

“Integrity and Leadership” Centre of Study of Life and Ministry. Nashville: Convention
Language and Information. Stanford: Stanford Press, 1997. Print.
University. Updated 2020. Retrieved
26/03/2020.

Strong, James. Strong’s Exhaustive

Concordance of the Bible. Nashville, London:
Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984. Print.

13
14