Saturday, February 27, 2010
Red-Handed
(I Samuel 15:7-15)
When one is caught “red-handed,” it is human nature to quickly make excuses for inexcusable actions. The phrase “caught red-handed” was originally a Scottish legal term for evidence in the prosecution of poachers. Poachers, of course, take wild game out of season or illegally. To be “caught red-handed” meant the poacher was caught with the blood of the slain animal on his hands—thus proving his guilt and assuring his successful prosecution. The phrase has come to refer to one being caught in the act of questionable behavior.
By definition, then, Saul had been caught red-handed by Samuel. Saul knew his responsibility was to completely destroy everything pertaining to the Amalekites. In direct disobedience, Saul spared King Agag and the best of the sheep and oxen (9). Having been informed by the Lord of Saul’s transgression, Samuel arrived just in time to hear the bleating of the Amalekite sheep (14). The old prophet confronted the king, and—once again—Saul blamed others for his sin.
Without hesitation, the mighty king blamed the “people” for sparing the sheep and oxen (15). While they doubtless had a hand in the transgression, the responsibility for carrying out God’s orders rested on Saul’s shoulders alone. He had miserably failed in the area of exacting obedience.
Beyond blaming others, Saul’s second defense is even more creative. His disobedience, he argued, was for the greater good—a sacrifice unto the Lord (15). Dr. Bob Jones, Sr. used to say, “It’s never right to do wrong in order to get a chance to do right.” To that we would add, “When you do wrong, take responsibility; don’t pass the buck!”
Friday, February 19, 2010
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 6
Friday, February 26, 2010
The Baby and the Bathwater
(I Samuel 15:1-6)
I Samuel 15 records Saul’s Amalekite war. The Amalekites were longstanding enemies of Israel, dating back to their resistance of Moses’ entry into the Sinai Peninsula (Exodus 17). They were apparently gaining in strength, residing to the South of Israel; and, apparently, they posed a threat to Israel’s national security. Samuel told Saul to wage war against the Amalekites and to “utterly destroy” them. The words “utterly destroy” meant nothing less than total destruction—what we today call a “scorched earth” policy.
It was Saul’s initial intention to obey Samuel’s instructions explicitly. Saul, however, met with an exceptional case in the tribe of Kenites who were living among the Amalekites. Rather than execute the innocent with the guilty, Saul warned the Kenites to depart from the Amalekites before the battle began (6). In other words, Saul didn’t want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Who were the Kenites? History records that Moses’ father-in-law Jethro was a Kenite (Judges 1:16). He had advised Moses to divide his governing responsibilities among able men (Exodus 18). In addition, Jethro’s son had been helpful to Moses and the fledgling nation (Num. 10:29-32). All in all, the Kenites were good, salt-of-the-earth kind of folks. Scripture always records them as allied with God’s people. In fact, when later faced with the same conundrum, David also spared the Kenites, whose only mistake appears to be neighboring with the Amalekites (I Sam. 27:8-10; 30:29). Like Saul, David didn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Obedience presupposes discernment. Learn to condemn evil and spare good. Ask God to give you the wisdom to discern between the two.
The Baby and the Bathwater
(I Samuel 15:1-6)
I Samuel 15 records Saul’s Amalekite war. The Amalekites were longstanding enemies of Israel, dating back to their resistance of Moses’ entry into the Sinai Peninsula (Exodus 17). They were apparently gaining in strength, residing to the South of Israel; and, apparently, they posed a threat to Israel’s national security. Samuel told Saul to wage war against the Amalekites and to “utterly destroy” them. The words “utterly destroy” meant nothing less than total destruction—what we today call a “scorched earth” policy.
It was Saul’s initial intention to obey Samuel’s instructions explicitly. Saul, however, met with an exceptional case in the tribe of Kenites who were living among the Amalekites. Rather than execute the innocent with the guilty, Saul warned the Kenites to depart from the Amalekites before the battle began (6). In other words, Saul didn’t want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Who were the Kenites? History records that Moses’ father-in-law Jethro was a Kenite (Judges 1:16). He had advised Moses to divide his governing responsibilities among able men (Exodus 18). In addition, Jethro’s son had been helpful to Moses and the fledgling nation (Num. 10:29-32). All in all, the Kenites were good, salt-of-the-earth kind of folks. Scripture always records them as allied with God’s people. In fact, when later faced with the same conundrum, David also spared the Kenites, whose only mistake appears to be neighboring with the Amalekites (I Sam. 27:8-10; 30:29). Like Saul, David didn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Obedience presupposes discernment. Learn to condemn evil and spare good. Ask God to give you the wisdom to discern between the two.
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 5
Thursday, February 25, 2010
How to Double Your Trouble
(I Samuel 14:47-52)
Saul’s troubled reign was a period of great unrest in Israel. Though his military abilities improved, the Israelites faced ever increasing challenges from their age-old enemies, the Philistines. In addition, the Ammonites, Edomites, and a few other “ites” joined in vexing the Jews. One battle led to another; and for every defeated foe, two new ones arose. Was all this trouble mere coincidence? No! As we shall see, Israel’s disobedience led directly to her ongoing conflicts.
God’s plan for the Jewish state was theocratic—a nation ruled by God. The human leaders He had chosen were judges, not monarchs. Though the system of judges seems a less organized, less centralized system, it was sufficient because God’s blessing hand was upon it. In other words, God amply made up for the foibles of the human judges. The Bible emphatically states that “the Lord was against the Philistines all the days of Samuel” (7:13). As long as Samuel functioned as God’s appointed judge, Israel was in safe hands.
Someone has wisely stated that it is better to be in a dangerous place in the will of God than in a safe place outside of His will. Israel learned that lesson the hard way. In demanding a king, they abandoned God’s plan for Israel’s government. The new king centralized government authority, raised a substantial army, and met with some military success. But something had changed. It appears that God’s protective hand was not as obvious under Saul as it had been under Samuel. Indeed, the nation that had known peace now knew ongoing conflict. Simply stated, obedience to God brings His protection and blessing in every endeavor. Disobedience, however, brings conflict—many times with an uncertain outcome. It’s always better to obey God!
How to Double Your Trouble
(I Samuel 14:47-52)
Saul’s troubled reign was a period of great unrest in Israel. Though his military abilities improved, the Israelites faced ever increasing challenges from their age-old enemies, the Philistines. In addition, the Ammonites, Edomites, and a few other “ites” joined in vexing the Jews. One battle led to another; and for every defeated foe, two new ones arose. Was all this trouble mere coincidence? No! As we shall see, Israel’s disobedience led directly to her ongoing conflicts.
God’s plan for the Jewish state was theocratic—a nation ruled by God. The human leaders He had chosen were judges, not monarchs. Though the system of judges seems a less organized, less centralized system, it was sufficient because God’s blessing hand was upon it. In other words, God amply made up for the foibles of the human judges. The Bible emphatically states that “the Lord was against the Philistines all the days of Samuel” (7:13). As long as Samuel functioned as God’s appointed judge, Israel was in safe hands.
Someone has wisely stated that it is better to be in a dangerous place in the will of God than in a safe place outside of His will. Israel learned that lesson the hard way. In demanding a king, they abandoned God’s plan for Israel’s government. The new king centralized government authority, raised a substantial army, and met with some military success. But something had changed. It appears that God’s protective hand was not as obvious under Saul as it had been under Samuel. Indeed, the nation that had known peace now knew ongoing conflict. Simply stated, obedience to God brings His protection and blessing in every endeavor. Disobedience, however, brings conflict—many times with an uncertain outcome. It’s always better to obey God!
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 4
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Going Too Far
(I Samuel 14:35-46)
Saul’s leadership was about to take another embarrassing blow. It appears that Saul, determined to chase down the Philistines, built an altar as a place of worship and inquiry of the Lord (35). Though he was determined to carry out a night raid, one of the priests encouraged him to seek the mind of the God (36). The Lord, however, remained disquietingly silent (37). Saul interpreted God’s silence as the presence of sin in the camp. And what sin could be greater, Saul’s pride reasoned, than one violating his oath?
Complicating matters, Saul dogmatically stated that even if the sin were found in Jonathan, he would be put to death. Can you imagine the somber response of the people? Not only had the Lord failed to answer him, but now the people became uncharacteristically quiet as well (39).
Saul, missing a thousand non-verbal clues, persisted bullishly down his foolish pathway. Lots were drawn, and Saul and Jonathan were chosen. At this point, humility would have admitted the foolishness of the pursuit and would have ended the shenanigans. Saul, not one to let humility get in his way, insisted on another round of lots. When Jonathan was chosen, Saul ploughed right ahead, declaring that his own son must die! Notice the tragic blindness of pride!
Then the people stepped in. Essentially, they declared that Saul was going too far, and that they would protect Jonathan. The Bible records that the “people rescued Jonathan” (45). This time Saul had demonstrated not only his lack of wisdom, but also his lack of common sense. Pride had taken him a complicit captive and would ultimately lead Saul to his death. Let’s learn when to swallow pride, admit mistakes, and seek forgiveness. Let’s not act the fool!
Going Too Far
(I Samuel 14:35-46)
Saul’s leadership was about to take another embarrassing blow. It appears that Saul, determined to chase down the Philistines, built an altar as a place of worship and inquiry of the Lord (35). Though he was determined to carry out a night raid, one of the priests encouraged him to seek the mind of the God (36). The Lord, however, remained disquietingly silent (37). Saul interpreted God’s silence as the presence of sin in the camp. And what sin could be greater, Saul’s pride reasoned, than one violating his oath?
Complicating matters, Saul dogmatically stated that even if the sin were found in Jonathan, he would be put to death. Can you imagine the somber response of the people? Not only had the Lord failed to answer him, but now the people became uncharacteristically quiet as well (39).
Saul, missing a thousand non-verbal clues, persisted bullishly down his foolish pathway. Lots were drawn, and Saul and Jonathan were chosen. At this point, humility would have admitted the foolishness of the pursuit and would have ended the shenanigans. Saul, not one to let humility get in his way, insisted on another round of lots. When Jonathan was chosen, Saul ploughed right ahead, declaring that his own son must die! Notice the tragic blindness of pride!
Then the people stepped in. Essentially, they declared that Saul was going too far, and that they would protect Jonathan. The Bible records that the “people rescued Jonathan” (45). This time Saul had demonstrated not only his lack of wisdom, but also his lack of common sense. Pride had taken him a complicit captive and would ultimately lead Saul to his death. Let’s learn when to swallow pride, admit mistakes, and seek forgiveness. Let’s not act the fool!
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 3
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Haste Makes Waste
(I Samuel 14:24-34)
Saul had become at best an erratic leader. As one reads of his decline, one is struck by his insecurities. For example, Saul found it necessary to bind the army with an unreasonable oath and threaten any who dared to disobey (24). His insistence that they eat no food (probably so they wouldn’t be distracted from the battle) was both unwise and unreasonable. Threats should not be used for motivation, and they rarely accomplish long-term goals (Eph. 6:9). Rather than focusing the army on the battle, their ensuing hunger became the ultimate distraction. Apparently Saul wasn’t familiar with the truism, “An army marches on its stomach.”
Jonathan unwittingly violated Saul’s oath. When he ate the honey, his “eyes were enlightened,” in other words, he felt physically revived. When informed of his father’s threat, Jonathan answered rather hastily, “My father hath troubled the land.” Though a somewhat disrespectful comment, it was true none the less. Jonathan knew that his father’s threat could have long-term consequences in the morale of the troops.
Saul had indeed “troubled the land.” In fact, the army became so famished that they unrestrainedly gorged themselves upon Philistine spoil—not even bothering to drain the carcasses of their blood as was the lawful Jewish custom (Gen. 9:4; Deut. 15:23). When Saul heard of the spontaneous feast he declared to his army, “Ye have transgressed” (33)!
True, the people had violated the Scripture in eating the blood of the slain animals. But let’s look deeper. In reality, it was Saul’s hasty oath that pushed the people to such intense hunger. It was Saul’s bullish anger that had caused the problem. The lesson: refrain from hasty and rash decisions—especially when they impact others!
Haste Makes Waste
(I Samuel 14:24-34)
Saul had become at best an erratic leader. As one reads of his decline, one is struck by his insecurities. For example, Saul found it necessary to bind the army with an unreasonable oath and threaten any who dared to disobey (24). His insistence that they eat no food (probably so they wouldn’t be distracted from the battle) was both unwise and unreasonable. Threats should not be used for motivation, and they rarely accomplish long-term goals (Eph. 6:9). Rather than focusing the army on the battle, their ensuing hunger became the ultimate distraction. Apparently Saul wasn’t familiar with the truism, “An army marches on its stomach.”
Jonathan unwittingly violated Saul’s oath. When he ate the honey, his “eyes were enlightened,” in other words, he felt physically revived. When informed of his father’s threat, Jonathan answered rather hastily, “My father hath troubled the land.” Though a somewhat disrespectful comment, it was true none the less. Jonathan knew that his father’s threat could have long-term consequences in the morale of the troops.
Saul had indeed “troubled the land.” In fact, the army became so famished that they unrestrainedly gorged themselves upon Philistine spoil—not even bothering to drain the carcasses of their blood as was the lawful Jewish custom (Gen. 9:4; Deut. 15:23). When Saul heard of the spontaneous feast he declared to his army, “Ye have transgressed” (33)!
True, the people had violated the Scripture in eating the blood of the slain animals. But let’s look deeper. In reality, it was Saul’s hasty oath that pushed the people to such intense hunger. It was Saul’s bullish anger that had caused the problem. The lesson: refrain from hasty and rash decisions—especially when they impact others!
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 2
Monday, February 22, 2010
Finding God in Life’s Battles
(I Samuel 14:7-23)
Life comes with its difficulties and daily battles. While not so dramatic as Jonathan’s battle with the Philistines, every day challenges us with Philistines of our own—problems that arise from the mundane tasks of work, family, and life in general. Interestingly, Jonathan’s example provides spiritual lessons when we face Philistines in our own lives.
Notice first that Jonathan desired God’s glory above everything else. Yesterday’s passage revealed Jonathan’s righteous indignation that the “uncircumcised” posed a threat to God’s chosen people (6). His chief concern was not glory for himself, but rather the glory of God. Motive matters in the battles of life.
Secondly, Jonathan sought God’s will regarding the situation. He didn’t just go off “half-cocked” without first seeking God’s specific will. When challenges come, we sometimes react too quickly, not seeking Heaven’s guidance in specific circumstances. Jonathan sought God’s specific will for the battle (8-10).
In addition, Jonathan acted upon God’s leading. Once God had made His will clear, Jonathan engaged the enemy with enthusiasm. Sometimes God makes His plan crystal clear, yet we hesitate to follow His leading. In effect, we second-guess God. Don’t allow the bigness of the task to deter you from God’s revealed will (11-14).
Lastly, Jonathan relied upon God’s power. God expects our obedience, and He also expects us to rely upon Him to accomplish his plan. Paul said, “We are laborers together with God” (I Cor. 3:9). We, like Jonathan, should depend ultimately upon God to empower us to win the battles of life (15-23).
Finding God in Life’s Battles
(I Samuel 14:7-23)
Life comes with its difficulties and daily battles. While not so dramatic as Jonathan’s battle with the Philistines, every day challenges us with Philistines of our own—problems that arise from the mundane tasks of work, family, and life in general. Interestingly, Jonathan’s example provides spiritual lessons when we face Philistines in our own lives.
Notice first that Jonathan desired God’s glory above everything else. Yesterday’s passage revealed Jonathan’s righteous indignation that the “uncircumcised” posed a threat to God’s chosen people (6). His chief concern was not glory for himself, but rather the glory of God. Motive matters in the battles of life.
Secondly, Jonathan sought God’s will regarding the situation. He didn’t just go off “half-cocked” without first seeking God’s specific will. When challenges come, we sometimes react too quickly, not seeking Heaven’s guidance in specific circumstances. Jonathan sought God’s specific will for the battle (8-10).
In addition, Jonathan acted upon God’s leading. Once God had made His will clear, Jonathan engaged the enemy with enthusiasm. Sometimes God makes His plan crystal clear, yet we hesitate to follow His leading. In effect, we second-guess God. Don’t allow the bigness of the task to deter you from God’s revealed will (11-14).
Lastly, Jonathan relied upon God’s power. God expects our obedience, and He also expects us to rely upon Him to accomplish his plan. Paul said, “We are laborers together with God” (I Cor. 3:9). We, like Jonathan, should depend ultimately upon God to empower us to win the battles of life (15-23).
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 1
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Inspirational Faith
(I Samuel 14:1-6)
Saul’s recent failures had greatly demoralized Israel’s fighting men. While some abandoned the army altogether (13:6), others followed hesitantly—with almost no confidence in their impetuous leader (13:7). The enlistment dwindled to around 600 men, and the threat of the Philistines grew with each passing day of Saul’s brooding indecision.
Jonathan, Saul’s honorable son, knew something had to be done. The heroic exploit of which we read in today’s Bible passage was not executed to win Jonathan fame and glory. Rather, Jonathan understood that the Lord’s name was at stake. Doubtless he also held concern for his father’s reputation. And so, without a chance of success from a military perspective, Jonathan planned an attack.
Jonathan’s great faith in the Lord is both instructive and inspirational. Facing dire odds he declared, “…there is no restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few.”
Jonathan’s declaration teaches us much about faith. First, Jonathan exercised faith in trying circumstances. Faith is best demonstrated when the odds are decidedly against us. If God shielded us from all trials, there would be no need for faith.
In addition, Jonathan’s faith resulted in personal boldness. His plan was risky at best and foolhardy at worst. His faith, however, gave him the confidence to proceed with his plan. Timidity is not a mark of faith.
Lastly, his faith inspired his follower to greatness. Rather than deserting, the armor-bearer became a champion—all because of Jonathan’s faith. May our faith in times of trial be an inspiration to others!
Inspirational Faith
(I Samuel 14:1-6)
Saul’s recent failures had greatly demoralized Israel’s fighting men. While some abandoned the army altogether (13:6), others followed hesitantly—with almost no confidence in their impetuous leader (13:7). The enlistment dwindled to around 600 men, and the threat of the Philistines grew with each passing day of Saul’s brooding indecision.
Jonathan, Saul’s honorable son, knew something had to be done. The heroic exploit of which we read in today’s Bible passage was not executed to win Jonathan fame and glory. Rather, Jonathan understood that the Lord’s name was at stake. Doubtless he also held concern for his father’s reputation. And so, without a chance of success from a military perspective, Jonathan planned an attack.
Jonathan’s great faith in the Lord is both instructive and inspirational. Facing dire odds he declared, “…there is no restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few.”
Jonathan’s declaration teaches us much about faith. First, Jonathan exercised faith in trying circumstances. Faith is best demonstrated when the odds are decidedly against us. If God shielded us from all trials, there would be no need for faith.
In addition, Jonathan’s faith resulted in personal boldness. His plan was risky at best and foolhardy at worst. His faith, however, gave him the confidence to proceed with his plan. Timidity is not a mark of faith.
Lastly, his faith inspired his follower to greatness. Rather than deserting, the armor-bearer became a champion—all because of Jonathan’s faith. May our faith in times of trial be an inspiration to others!
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 7
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Turning Point
(I Samuel 13:13-23)
Samuel’s pronouncement against Saul’s assumed dynasty marks a serious turning point in the life of the King. His willful disobedience would cost him his throne, as no descendent of Saul’s would ever reign as king. God, Samuel informed Saul, would seek another king—a man after His own heart. And Saul’s family would quickly sink into a quagmire of oblivion (14).
Such a grim prophecy must have cut Saul deeply. In fact, it marks a turning point in Saul’s attitude as king and aptitude as leader. The fair-haired idealist, so easily admired, morphs now into a moody, unpredictable tyrant—the polar opposite of his sunny youth.
What happened? Simply put, Saul needlessly exhausted his resources. He traded faith in God for expedient pragmatism. He exchanged friendship with Samuel for strained estrangement. He bartered the admiration of his army for indulgence of his impatience. And, with each ensuing exchange, Saul further impoverished himself.
Saul needed God back in his life. But Samuel’s pronouncement may have been too much to bear. Perhaps Saul reasoned, “If the Lord won’t help me, I’ll just do it myself.” Whatever his thinking, Samuel’s words—rather than bringing repentance—hardened the King.
In a curious historic note, the Bible tells us that not only had Israel’s armies greatly diminished, but their ability to procure weaponry was hampered by the Philistines’ monopoly of the ironworks. Saul needed the Lord now more than ever! Sadly, Saul would continue to stumble down his lonely path to his ultimate destruction.
Turning Point
(I Samuel 13:13-23)
Samuel’s pronouncement against Saul’s assumed dynasty marks a serious turning point in the life of the King. His willful disobedience would cost him his throne, as no descendent of Saul’s would ever reign as king. God, Samuel informed Saul, would seek another king—a man after His own heart. And Saul’s family would quickly sink into a quagmire of oblivion (14).
Such a grim prophecy must have cut Saul deeply. In fact, it marks a turning point in Saul’s attitude as king and aptitude as leader. The fair-haired idealist, so easily admired, morphs now into a moody, unpredictable tyrant—the polar opposite of his sunny youth.
What happened? Simply put, Saul needlessly exhausted his resources. He traded faith in God for expedient pragmatism. He exchanged friendship with Samuel for strained estrangement. He bartered the admiration of his army for indulgence of his impatience. And, with each ensuing exchange, Saul further impoverished himself.
Saul needed God back in his life. But Samuel’s pronouncement may have been too much to bear. Perhaps Saul reasoned, “If the Lord won’t help me, I’ll just do it myself.” Whatever his thinking, Samuel’s words—rather than bringing repentance—hardened the King.
In a curious historic note, the Bible tells us that not only had Israel’s armies greatly diminished, but their ability to procure weaponry was hampered by the Philistines’ monopoly of the ironworks. Saul needed the Lord now more than ever! Sadly, Saul would continue to stumble down his lonely path to his ultimate destruction.
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 6
Friday, February 19, 2010
Rationalization
(I Samuel 13:8-12)
Sin is not always impulsive. Frequently we devise elaborate reasons for our actions, even though we know they are sinful. Sometimes we make ourselves believe that sin was—in a given set of circumstances—the only viable option. Once we’ve convinced ourselves, we sin—and sometimes face the monumental task of convincing others as well.
Saul was in just such a predicament. Having illegally usurped the priest’s office, Saul—in fear and impatience—sacrificed the animals that were Samuel’s alone to offer. And, in providential poetic justice, Samuel arrived just in time to see the smoke arise.
Saul’s litany of excuses would almost be funny if it weren’t so pathetic. The brave king immediately resorted to the blame game—passing the buck. First, he blamed the troops who had deserted him. He had to act quickly, he reasoned, or face losing them all. Secondly, he blamed Samuel. “If only Samuel had been punctual, I wouldn’t have been forced to sin!” Thirdly, he blamed the Philistines. “The Devil made me do it,” he reasoned. Lastly, he blamed himself while still declaring his innocence: “I forced myself,” he pleaded (11, 12).
Ultimately, none of Saul’s excuses worked with Samuel. A wise old preacher used to say, “An excuse is the skin of a reason stuffed with a lie.” Samuel viewed Saul’s rationalizations the same way.
Perhaps the saddest part of the story is that Saul likely believed his own excuses. It is apparent that he had rehearsed them beforehand—just in case. At any rate, he believed his rationalizations enough to act upon them—and then defend his sorry conduct. Be careful how you justify your actions. You may one day have to convince others; and you will ultimately have to convince God.
Rationalization
(I Samuel 13:8-12)
Sin is not always impulsive. Frequently we devise elaborate reasons for our actions, even though we know they are sinful. Sometimes we make ourselves believe that sin was—in a given set of circumstances—the only viable option. Once we’ve convinced ourselves, we sin—and sometimes face the monumental task of convincing others as well.
Saul was in just such a predicament. Having illegally usurped the priest’s office, Saul—in fear and impatience—sacrificed the animals that were Samuel’s alone to offer. And, in providential poetic justice, Samuel arrived just in time to see the smoke arise.
Saul’s litany of excuses would almost be funny if it weren’t so pathetic. The brave king immediately resorted to the blame game—passing the buck. First, he blamed the troops who had deserted him. He had to act quickly, he reasoned, or face losing them all. Secondly, he blamed Samuel. “If only Samuel had been punctual, I wouldn’t have been forced to sin!” Thirdly, he blamed the Philistines. “The Devil made me do it,” he reasoned. Lastly, he blamed himself while still declaring his innocence: “I forced myself,” he pleaded (11, 12).
Ultimately, none of Saul’s excuses worked with Samuel. A wise old preacher used to say, “An excuse is the skin of a reason stuffed with a lie.” Samuel viewed Saul’s rationalizations the same way.
Perhaps the saddest part of the story is that Saul likely believed his own excuses. It is apparent that he had rehearsed them beforehand—just in case. At any rate, he believed his rationalizations enough to act upon them—and then defend his sorry conduct. Be careful how you justify your actions. You may one day have to convince others; and you will ultimately have to convince God.
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 5
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Trembling
(I Samuel 13:1-7)
Saul had won a decisive battle over the Ammonites, for which he gave the Lord all the glory (11:13). His next challenge would come from Israel’s perennial enemy, the Philistines. Apparently these heathen had heard of Saul’s successes, and they decided to attack before Saul could consolidate his army and fortify the border country.
The text seems to indicate that Saul was doing just that—strengthening his forces. Jonathan, however, had other plans. In a bold stroke he surprised the Philistine garrison at Geba. His courage inspired Saul to action, and the fight was on (3, 4)!
The Philistine army, however, had been secretly amassing a tremendous military force. Saul’s newly enlisted army would be no match against the heathen multitude. In fact, as soon as the Philistine military prowess became apparent, the Israelites literally ran for the hills (6). Saul’s dreams of glory were fading fast.
Saul, still encamped at Gilgal, was able to hold his reluctant army together. The Bible tells us that “all the people followed him [Saul] trembling.” They were fearful, but they followed anyway.
Thus, Saul’s golden opportunity for spiritual and military leadership presented itself. In the face of seemingly insurmountable odds, Saul should have inspired faith in his fearful troops. He should have arisen above the circumstances to demonstrate his unshakable confidence in the Lord. And—most importantly—he should have exercised patience in obeying Samuel’s order to wait.
As we’ll see, pressure pushed Saul to disobey Samuel—with disastrous consequences. Lesson for us: In the moment of trial, pause; and take the opportunity to become a spiritual hero.
Trembling
(I Samuel 13:1-7)
Saul had won a decisive battle over the Ammonites, for which he gave the Lord all the glory (11:13). His next challenge would come from Israel’s perennial enemy, the Philistines. Apparently these heathen had heard of Saul’s successes, and they decided to attack before Saul could consolidate his army and fortify the border country.
The text seems to indicate that Saul was doing just that—strengthening his forces. Jonathan, however, had other plans. In a bold stroke he surprised the Philistine garrison at Geba. His courage inspired Saul to action, and the fight was on (3, 4)!
The Philistine army, however, had been secretly amassing a tremendous military force. Saul’s newly enlisted army would be no match against the heathen multitude. In fact, as soon as the Philistine military prowess became apparent, the Israelites literally ran for the hills (6). Saul’s dreams of glory were fading fast.
Saul, still encamped at Gilgal, was able to hold his reluctant army together. The Bible tells us that “all the people followed him [Saul] trembling.” They were fearful, but they followed anyway.
Thus, Saul’s golden opportunity for spiritual and military leadership presented itself. In the face of seemingly insurmountable odds, Saul should have inspired faith in his fearful troops. He should have arisen above the circumstances to demonstrate his unshakable confidence in the Lord. And—most importantly—he should have exercised patience in obeying Samuel’s order to wait.
As we’ll see, pressure pushed Saul to disobey Samuel—with disastrous consequences. Lesson for us: In the moment of trial, pause; and take the opportunity to become a spiritual hero.
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 4
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
How to Move On
(I Samuel 12:16-25)
Sometimes our struggle with sin is more a matter of moving on from the sin than of confessing it. Let me explain: Most of us understand that the antidote for sin is confession. I John 1:9 is a well-worn pathway in the minds of conscientious Christians. We understand that broken fellowship with the Lord can only be remedied by confession, and we’re usually fairly quick to confess our sins—especially the big ones.
Once confessed, however, sin still has a way of plaguing us. I’m not speaking of habitual sins that are difficult to conquer. I’m talking about sin’s lingering influence upon the conscience. Simply put, sometimes we allow sins that have been confessed to discourage us from zealous service for God. Even though we’ve been forgiven, we hesitate to serve God because we still feel guilty and unworthy.
Samuel knew that Israel faced just such a danger. Having confessed their sin in asking for a king (19), Samuel recognized that their discouragement over the now irreversible situation could result in spiritual apathy. “After all,” they might reason, “if we’ve missed God’s will in such a big matter, what’s the use of trying to serve Him now?”
Samuel’s answer is delightfully straightforward: “Fear not: ye have done all this wickedness: yet turn not aside from following the Lord, but serve the Lord with all your heart” (20). In other words, your sins are real; they can’t be undone. The consequences are real and long-lasting, and they won’t go away. But you can still serve the Lord. How can that be? Because “the Lord will not forsake his people…it hath pleased the Lord to make you his people” (22). The past is the past. Let’s get busy and serve the Lord!
How to Move On
(I Samuel 12:16-25)
Sometimes our struggle with sin is more a matter of moving on from the sin than of confessing it. Let me explain: Most of us understand that the antidote for sin is confession. I John 1:9 is a well-worn pathway in the minds of conscientious Christians. We understand that broken fellowship with the Lord can only be remedied by confession, and we’re usually fairly quick to confess our sins—especially the big ones.
Once confessed, however, sin still has a way of plaguing us. I’m not speaking of habitual sins that are difficult to conquer. I’m talking about sin’s lingering influence upon the conscience. Simply put, sometimes we allow sins that have been confessed to discourage us from zealous service for God. Even though we’ve been forgiven, we hesitate to serve God because we still feel guilty and unworthy.
Samuel knew that Israel faced just such a danger. Having confessed their sin in asking for a king (19), Samuel recognized that their discouragement over the now irreversible situation could result in spiritual apathy. “After all,” they might reason, “if we’ve missed God’s will in such a big matter, what’s the use of trying to serve Him now?”
Samuel’s answer is delightfully straightforward: “Fear not: ye have done all this wickedness: yet turn not aside from following the Lord, but serve the Lord with all your heart” (20). In other words, your sins are real; they can’t be undone. The consequences are real and long-lasting, and they won’t go away. But you can still serve the Lord. How can that be? Because “the Lord will not forsake his people…it hath pleased the Lord to make you his people” (22). The past is the past. Let’s get busy and serve the Lord!
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 3
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
God of the Second Chance
(I Samuel 12:6-15)
Israel, Samuel reminded the assembled crowd, was God’s peculiar people. As such, He had faithfully led them, protecting them from their enemies and chastening them in their backslidings. When the nation repented of her sins, God graciously forgave them. He also provided able judges to lead the people in battle against their enemies. God had given everything His people needed. God Himself was their king (12).
As we have already seen, the people’s request for a king was—in reality—rebellion against God. In effect, the people were insisting that their concept of a monarchy was superior to God’s plan of a theocracy. And, as previously emphasized, God allowed the people to get their way—even though it meant forsaking His.
One could easily conclude that Israel’s rejection of God would naturally result in His rejection of them. We’re perhaps a little surprised to read that Samuel gave them a second chance (14). In effect, Samuel told the people that even though they had been willful and rebellious, God would honor their repentance and desire to serve Him. Though they had rebelled in asking for a king, they could still see God’s hand of blessing. In other words, God would give them a second chance!
It’s never too late to be obedient. Even if we’ve made decisions that alter irrevocably the course of our lives, God can still forgive and ultimately bless our renewed obedience to Him. The key to God’s blessing is not unobtainable perfection. The key is a contrite heart, a willing spirit, and obedient actions. There’s life after bad choices, because God is the God of the second chance.
God of the Second Chance
(I Samuel 12:6-15)
Israel, Samuel reminded the assembled crowd, was God’s peculiar people. As such, He had faithfully led them, protecting them from their enemies and chastening them in their backslidings. When the nation repented of her sins, God graciously forgave them. He also provided able judges to lead the people in battle against their enemies. God had given everything His people needed. God Himself was their king (12).
As we have already seen, the people’s request for a king was—in reality—rebellion against God. In effect, the people were insisting that their concept of a monarchy was superior to God’s plan of a theocracy. And, as previously emphasized, God allowed the people to get their way—even though it meant forsaking His.
One could easily conclude that Israel’s rejection of God would naturally result in His rejection of them. We’re perhaps a little surprised to read that Samuel gave them a second chance (14). In effect, Samuel told the people that even though they had been willful and rebellious, God would honor their repentance and desire to serve Him. Though they had rebelled in asking for a king, they could still see God’s hand of blessing. In other words, God would give them a second chance!
It’s never too late to be obedient. Even if we’ve made decisions that alter irrevocably the course of our lives, God can still forgive and ultimately bless our renewed obedience to Him. The key to God’s blessing is not unobtainable perfection. The key is a contrite heart, a willing spirit, and obedient actions. There’s life after bad choices, because God is the God of the second chance.
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 2
Monday, February 15, 2010
Integrity
(I Samuel 12:1-5)
Samuel was getting on in age and— with the crowning of a king—his ministry as judge in Israel was through. He wasn’t exactly retiring; he would still conduct a powerful ministry as a prophet. He was, however, stepping aside to allow the new monarch free reign.
In his little speech to the nation, Samuel made an interesting appeal in relation to his leadership. He appealed directly to his integrity. With America in the grips of an integrity crisis, such bold rhetoric is rarely heard. In fact a new philosophy has arisen in America: personal integrity doesn’t matter; public integrity does. Of course, such thinking undermines the whole concept of integrity. One of the fundamental definitions of integrity is undivided. In other words, men of integrity are the same in public and private. The public face and the private face are one.
Samuel’s appeal to integrity centered on his fair dealing. He challenged anyone to charge him with ministering for money. He asked for any who had successfully bribed him to step forward. No one moved. Samuel’s motives were pristine in the sight of the people. Simply put, Samuel was a preacher; not a politician. Too many Christian leaders put popularity and peer-group acceptance above principle. Some, sadly, are willing to sell truth down the river for financial gain or popular standing. Samuel was not one of these. His actions reflected heart integrity. He said what he meant and he meant what he said. He was indeed a man among men!
All of this begs the question: Could we as individuals make such a challenge to our friends and acquaintances? Would they, like Samuel’s of old, unanimously testify to our integrity? If not, why not?
Integrity
(I Samuel 12:1-5)
Samuel was getting on in age and— with the crowning of a king—his ministry as judge in Israel was through. He wasn’t exactly retiring; he would still conduct a powerful ministry as a prophet. He was, however, stepping aside to allow the new monarch free reign.
In his little speech to the nation, Samuel made an interesting appeal in relation to his leadership. He appealed directly to his integrity. With America in the grips of an integrity crisis, such bold rhetoric is rarely heard. In fact a new philosophy has arisen in America: personal integrity doesn’t matter; public integrity does. Of course, such thinking undermines the whole concept of integrity. One of the fundamental definitions of integrity is undivided. In other words, men of integrity are the same in public and private. The public face and the private face are one.
Samuel’s appeal to integrity centered on his fair dealing. He challenged anyone to charge him with ministering for money. He asked for any who had successfully bribed him to step forward. No one moved. Samuel’s motives were pristine in the sight of the people. Simply put, Samuel was a preacher; not a politician. Too many Christian leaders put popularity and peer-group acceptance above principle. Some, sadly, are willing to sell truth down the river for financial gain or popular standing. Samuel was not one of these. His actions reflected heart integrity. He said what he meant and he meant what he said. He was indeed a man among men!
All of this begs the question: Could we as individuals make such a challenge to our friends and acquaintances? Would they, like Samuel’s of old, unanimously testify to our integrity? If not, why not?
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 1
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Magnanimity
(I Samuel 11:12-15)
Once again we find the young King Saul acting nobly. And it’s hard to dislike a guy who displays such sterling character traits. It was nothing for oriental kings to eliminate their opponents. Saul, however, appears to be cut out of different cloth. Rather than finish off his critics when he had the chance, Saul chose to demonstrate magnanimity—to act on a higher level and from purer impulses (13). When given revenge on the proverbial silver platter, Saul refused; choosing rather to overlook the hasty words of his early critics.
In addition, Saul purposely deflected credit for the military victory. The people saw only the glory of their new leader (12). Saul knew better. He recognized that it was the Lord who “wrought salvation in Israel.” Again, Saul’s likability stock has risen!
So, the people—falling in love with their new King—went to Gilgal to “renew the kingdom.” Saul’s monarchy was publicly and formally established, and his esteem among the people bolstered his authority. Though his initial coronation had been awkward, the “king thing” was turning out O.K.
It’s too bad that Saul later lost the traits that made him great in the eyes of the people. When youthful ideals are surrendered to cynicism and bitterness, something in a man dies. Once surrendered, positive traits give way to dark passions, faith yields to suspicion, and loyalty to principle dies on the altar of pragmatism. In the end, the starry-eyed idealist so admired by common folks may become a fierce tyrant—at once feared and hated by his former supporters. Never abandon your ideals, simple faith, and love for people! Never let magnanimity die!
Happy Valentines Day!
Magnanimity
(I Samuel 11:12-15)
Once again we find the young King Saul acting nobly. And it’s hard to dislike a guy who displays such sterling character traits. It was nothing for oriental kings to eliminate their opponents. Saul, however, appears to be cut out of different cloth. Rather than finish off his critics when he had the chance, Saul chose to demonstrate magnanimity—to act on a higher level and from purer impulses (13). When given revenge on the proverbial silver platter, Saul refused; choosing rather to overlook the hasty words of his early critics.
In addition, Saul purposely deflected credit for the military victory. The people saw only the glory of their new leader (12). Saul knew better. He recognized that it was the Lord who “wrought salvation in Israel.” Again, Saul’s likability stock has risen!
So, the people—falling in love with their new King—went to Gilgal to “renew the kingdom.” Saul’s monarchy was publicly and formally established, and his esteem among the people bolstered his authority. Though his initial coronation had been awkward, the “king thing” was turning out O.K.
It’s too bad that Saul later lost the traits that made him great in the eyes of the people. When youthful ideals are surrendered to cynicism and bitterness, something in a man dies. Once surrendered, positive traits give way to dark passions, faith yields to suspicion, and loyalty to principle dies on the altar of pragmatism. In the end, the starry-eyed idealist so admired by common folks may become a fierce tyrant—at once feared and hated by his former supporters. Never abandon your ideals, simple faith, and love for people! Never let magnanimity die!
Happy Valentines Day!
Friday, February 5, 2010
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 7
Saturday, February 13, 2010
An Early Test
(I Samuel 11:1-11)
The first major test of Saul’s leadership came shortly after his awkward coronation. The good folks of Jabesh found themselves bullied by Nahash the Ammonite. Though tempted to make a covenant with the pagan—and suffer humiliating consequences, the men of Jabesh sought reprieve—in the hope that help would soon arrive (1-3).
Upon hearing of the plight of Jabesh, Saul was determined to make a stand. Interestingly, the Bible attributes Saul’s courage to the “Spirit of God,” not his inherent self-confidence. In fact, the Bible says that the Spirit of God fueled Saul’s righteous indignation and steeled his determination to deliver Jabesh from her enemies.
What transpired next fulfilled Samuel’s dire predictions of a monarchy: Saul instituted forced military enlistment on the spot, complete with the threat of death for objectors and deserters (7). The “fear of the Lord fell on the people,” and Saul raised an enormous army—easily enough to decimate the Ammonite threat.
After a brief and decisive battle, Jabesh was delivered and the Ammonite forces were scattered (11). Saul had won the day, and his confidence in God grew exponentially. The early test had proved both a battle ground and a classroom. And young Saul abandoned his fears while strengthening his faith.
His attitude of dependence, however, was short-lived. Eventually Saul’s rebellion and self-will would emerge—twin demons that would possess his soul and destroy his life. Easy lesson: Never abandon your dependence upon God!
An Early Test
(I Samuel 11:1-11)
The first major test of Saul’s leadership came shortly after his awkward coronation. The good folks of Jabesh found themselves bullied by Nahash the Ammonite. Though tempted to make a covenant with the pagan—and suffer humiliating consequences, the men of Jabesh sought reprieve—in the hope that help would soon arrive (1-3).
Upon hearing of the plight of Jabesh, Saul was determined to make a stand. Interestingly, the Bible attributes Saul’s courage to the “Spirit of God,” not his inherent self-confidence. In fact, the Bible says that the Spirit of God fueled Saul’s righteous indignation and steeled his determination to deliver Jabesh from her enemies.
What transpired next fulfilled Samuel’s dire predictions of a monarchy: Saul instituted forced military enlistment on the spot, complete with the threat of death for objectors and deserters (7). The “fear of the Lord fell on the people,” and Saul raised an enormous army—easily enough to decimate the Ammonite threat.
After a brief and decisive battle, Jabesh was delivered and the Ammonite forces were scattered (11). Saul had won the day, and his confidence in God grew exponentially. The early test had proved both a battle ground and a classroom. And young Saul abandoned his fears while strengthening his faith.
His attitude of dependence, however, was short-lived. Eventually Saul’s rebellion and self-will would emerge—twin demons that would possess his soul and destroy his life. Easy lesson: Never abandon your dependence upon God!
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 6
Friday, February 12, 2010
An Awkward Beginning
(I Samuel 10:14-27)
Initially Saul was a reluctant king. Though Samuel had outlined to him in private the nature of the kingdom and his prominent position, Saul even hesitated to tell his closest family members the exciting news (16). When the moment came for Saul’s public recognition before the nation, he was conspicuously absent (21). In fact, Samuel had to pray him out of hiding (22)! Apparently Saul harbored serious doubts about his abilities, if not his calling altogether.
There’s something popularly appealing about a reluctant leader. Too often our sensibilities are accosted by men who shamelessly promote themselves to public office. It’s unabashed egotism for a man to portray himself as having all the answers. What’s worse, it’s insanity for a man to actually believe in such a self-portrayal. Certainly Saul’s reluctance made for an appealing, if not an awkward, beginning.
Perhaps Saul’s reluctance sprang from an inner dread of failure. Most coronations pompously predict the future success of the monarch. This was not the case with Saul’s ascent to the throne. In fact, Samuel declared that Saul’s coronation marked Israel’s departure from God’s will. “Ye have this day rejected your God,” Samuel declared (19). Maybe Saul viewed Samuel’s words as a portent of coming failure. Perhaps Saul recognized the futility of heading a state that had rejected God.
Saul that day became king, and—almost immediately—critics arose who questioned his abilities (27). The awkward coronation set in motion a series of events that would eventually stain Saul’s reputation with infamy.
An Awkward Beginning
(I Samuel 10:14-27)
Initially Saul was a reluctant king. Though Samuel had outlined to him in private the nature of the kingdom and his prominent position, Saul even hesitated to tell his closest family members the exciting news (16). When the moment came for Saul’s public recognition before the nation, he was conspicuously absent (21). In fact, Samuel had to pray him out of hiding (22)! Apparently Saul harbored serious doubts about his abilities, if not his calling altogether.
There’s something popularly appealing about a reluctant leader. Too often our sensibilities are accosted by men who shamelessly promote themselves to public office. It’s unabashed egotism for a man to portray himself as having all the answers. What’s worse, it’s insanity for a man to actually believe in such a self-portrayal. Certainly Saul’s reluctance made for an appealing, if not an awkward, beginning.
Perhaps Saul’s reluctance sprang from an inner dread of failure. Most coronations pompously predict the future success of the monarch. This was not the case with Saul’s ascent to the throne. In fact, Samuel declared that Saul’s coronation marked Israel’s departure from God’s will. “Ye have this day rejected your God,” Samuel declared (19). Maybe Saul viewed Samuel’s words as a portent of coming failure. Perhaps Saul recognized the futility of heading a state that had rejected God.
Saul that day became king, and—almost immediately—critics arose who questioned his abilities (27). The awkward coronation set in motion a series of events that would eventually stain Saul’s reputation with infamy.
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 5
Thursday, February 11, 2010
From the Critic’s Corner
(I Samuel 10:9-13)
The change in Saul was both dramatic and immediate. Though we have no indication that young Saul had been a rabble rouser, it is obvious by the surprised reaction of onlookers that Saul had shown no propensity for the ministry (11). In fact, Saul’s uncharacteristic behavior became fodder for the idle gossips of his day (12). They simply couldn’t believe Saul’s change of heart, attitude, and actions.
In essence, the folks who took such a sudden interest in Saul were mere critics. As long as Saul remained mired in mediocrity and obscurity, he avoided the lashing of their tongues. But when he changed, when he rose above the crowd, when he exhibited an interest in the things of God, the pressure was on! And, so, Saul became the object of a derisive taunt, “Is Saul also among the prophets?”
Critics share several notable characteristics. First, they’re generally anonymous to history. In other words, history never records their names because they don’t matter—they never make a real difference.
Secondly, critics always arise against success. Had Saul just remained “Saul of Kish,” no one would have had a negative word to say. But let a young man rise to the top, and his success will earn the critics’ rage! Success always garners more critics than failure.
Thirdly, critics can inflict untold damage. Their taunt may seem insignificant; but it was another insignificant taunt spoken by idle women years later that led to Saul’s jealousy of David and ultimately to his ignominious death (I Sam. 18:7). Perhaps these early critics bent Saul’s nature toward the cynicism that later became his undoing. Whatever the case, let’s avoid the critics’ corner!
From the Critic’s Corner
(I Samuel 10:9-13)
The change in Saul was both dramatic and immediate. Though we have no indication that young Saul had been a rabble rouser, it is obvious by the surprised reaction of onlookers that Saul had shown no propensity for the ministry (11). In fact, Saul’s uncharacteristic behavior became fodder for the idle gossips of his day (12). They simply couldn’t believe Saul’s change of heart, attitude, and actions.
In essence, the folks who took such a sudden interest in Saul were mere critics. As long as Saul remained mired in mediocrity and obscurity, he avoided the lashing of their tongues. But when he changed, when he rose above the crowd, when he exhibited an interest in the things of God, the pressure was on! And, so, Saul became the object of a derisive taunt, “Is Saul also among the prophets?”
Critics share several notable characteristics. First, they’re generally anonymous to history. In other words, history never records their names because they don’t matter—they never make a real difference.
Secondly, critics always arise against success. Had Saul just remained “Saul of Kish,” no one would have had a negative word to say. But let a young man rise to the top, and his success will earn the critics’ rage! Success always garners more critics than failure.
Thirdly, critics can inflict untold damage. Their taunt may seem insignificant; but it was another insignificant taunt spoken by idle women years later that led to Saul’s jealousy of David and ultimately to his ignominious death (I Sam. 18:7). Perhaps these early critics bent Saul’s nature toward the cynicism that later became his undoing. Whatever the case, let’s avoid the critics’ corner!
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 4
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Power for Service
(I Samuel 10:1-8)
At the behest of the Lord, Samuel anointed Saul to be “captain” over the Lord’s inheritance, the nation of Israel. Anointing with oil pictured God’s special selection of an individual and God’s enabling that individual to fulfill His purposes. The anointing was merely symbolic—the reality would come later.
In confirmation of his words, Samuel gave Saul several signs: (1) that the lost donkeys would be recovered, (2) that he would meet three men headed to Bethel, and (3) that he would encounter some young prophets (2-5). Samuel indicated that after the signs had been fulfilled, the Spirit of the Lord would come upon Saul, changing him into “another man” (6).
The change was not so much of inner character as it was in leadership ability. God’s Spirit would empower Saul to carry out his responsibilities. Though Saul possessed certain natural abilities, these would be magnified and multiplied by the Spirit’s resting upon him. God’s work must be done God’s way and with God’s power.
In the New Testament we read that the disciples were commanded to “tarry” in Jerusalem until they were empowered by God for divine service (Lk. 24:49). Though they had been given the responsibility of world evangelization, the Lord knew they would fail without the Spirit’s enabling. The disciples tarried, awaiting the mighty outpouring of the Spirit of God. The book of Acts records that on the Day of Pentecost the disciples were “filled with the Spirit” (Acts 2:4), finally prepared to successfully carry out their responsibilities. Like Saul and the disciples of old, we need God’s power if we’re to do His work. Pray today to be filled with the Holy Spirit (Eph. 5:18).
Power for Service
(I Samuel 10:1-8)
At the behest of the Lord, Samuel anointed Saul to be “captain” over the Lord’s inheritance, the nation of Israel. Anointing with oil pictured God’s special selection of an individual and God’s enabling that individual to fulfill His purposes. The anointing was merely symbolic—the reality would come later.
In confirmation of his words, Samuel gave Saul several signs: (1) that the lost donkeys would be recovered, (2) that he would meet three men headed to Bethel, and (3) that he would encounter some young prophets (2-5). Samuel indicated that after the signs had been fulfilled, the Spirit of the Lord would come upon Saul, changing him into “another man” (6).
The change was not so much of inner character as it was in leadership ability. God’s Spirit would empower Saul to carry out his responsibilities. Though Saul possessed certain natural abilities, these would be magnified and multiplied by the Spirit’s resting upon him. God’s work must be done God’s way and with God’s power.
In the New Testament we read that the disciples were commanded to “tarry” in Jerusalem until they were empowered by God for divine service (Lk. 24:49). Though they had been given the responsibility of world evangelization, the Lord knew they would fail without the Spirit’s enabling. The disciples tarried, awaiting the mighty outpouring of the Spirit of God. The book of Acts records that on the Day of Pentecost the disciples were “filled with the Spirit” (Acts 2:4), finally prepared to successfully carry out their responsibilities. Like Saul and the disciples of old, we need God’s power if we’re to do His work. Pray today to be filled with the Holy Spirit (Eph. 5:18).
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 3
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
When Wildest Dreams Come True
(I Samuel 9:18-27)
Every young man dreams of that sudden course of events that will change his life forever. A letter, a phone call, a chance meeting—and, almost instantaneously, fame and fortune are his. Dream as they will, for the vast majority it never happens. For Saul, however, it did.
Saul had sought the “seer” regarding his father’s lost donkeys. For Saul, the prophet was probably his last hope. If the “seer” could not locate the donkeys, Saul would return to his father empty-handed. With apprehension rising in his heart, Saul met Samuel (19).
The donkeys, it turns out, were secure. Samuel would see to their safe return. But that moment held more pressing concerns. Out of the clear blue, Samuel invited Saul to sit with him at the feast. He revealed to Saul that God had a special purpose for his life. He gave Saul the place of honor and the choicest cut of meat. In a whirlwind of surprises, Saul rose instantly from obscurity to national prominence. What, Saul’s eager heart wondered, could it all mean?
The humility of Saul’s response is at once refreshing and reassuring. His words to Samuel even hint at a deeper Scriptural knowledge—the knowledge that Israel would not forever be ruled by a Benjamite (Genesis 49:10). As we witness Saul’s youthful wonder at his good fortune, we’re strangely drawn to this man among men. Maybe, just maybe, things will turn out right—despite the prophet’s previous dire warning.
Don’t bet on it! As we shall see, behind Saul’s youthful, good natured temperament there lurked a darker side. And, as that darker side emerged, Saul’s wildest dreams vanished without a trace; and dark days settled upon Israel.
When Wildest Dreams Come True
(I Samuel 9:18-27)
Every young man dreams of that sudden course of events that will change his life forever. A letter, a phone call, a chance meeting—and, almost instantaneously, fame and fortune are his. Dream as they will, for the vast majority it never happens. For Saul, however, it did.
Saul had sought the “seer” regarding his father’s lost donkeys. For Saul, the prophet was probably his last hope. If the “seer” could not locate the donkeys, Saul would return to his father empty-handed. With apprehension rising in his heart, Saul met Samuel (19).
The donkeys, it turns out, were secure. Samuel would see to their safe return. But that moment held more pressing concerns. Out of the clear blue, Samuel invited Saul to sit with him at the feast. He revealed to Saul that God had a special purpose for his life. He gave Saul the place of honor and the choicest cut of meat. In a whirlwind of surprises, Saul rose instantly from obscurity to national prominence. What, Saul’s eager heart wondered, could it all mean?
The humility of Saul’s response is at once refreshing and reassuring. His words to Samuel even hint at a deeper Scriptural knowledge—the knowledge that Israel would not forever be ruled by a Benjamite (Genesis 49:10). As we witness Saul’s youthful wonder at his good fortune, we’re strangely drawn to this man among men. Maybe, just maybe, things will turn out right—despite the prophet’s previous dire warning.
Don’t bet on it! As we shall see, behind Saul’s youthful, good natured temperament there lurked a darker side. And, as that darker side emerged, Saul’s wildest dreams vanished without a trace; and dark days settled upon Israel.
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 2
Monday, February 8, 2010
Divine Whispers
(I Samuel 9:11-17)
God speaks in a still, small voice (I Kings 19:12). Those who would listen to God must be attentive to His gentle approach. Too often the din of this world and the inner cacophony of crisis conspire to mute the whisperings of God. Samuel, however, kept his ear acutely attuned to God’s subtle voice.
Saul, seeking his father’s donkeys, had decided to engage the help of a “seer,” a prophet. He had no idea that, in meeting Samuel, the course of his life would be altered forever. As he walked through the crowd of worshippers, he did not sense the leading of sovereign providence; he did not understand the significance of each step. But Samuel knew.
The Lord had whispered in Samuel’s ear the importance of the day’s events—down to the moment he would meet Saul (15). Upon seeing the imposing visitor, the Lord assured Samuel with the words, “Behold, the man whom I spake to thee of” (17 ). Samuel, ever attentive to the whisperings of God, knew Saul was the man—Israel’s first king!
We, too, should be sensitive to the whisperings of the Lord. Scripture is the inspired whispering of God. And, as we read its pages, the Holy Spirit impresses upon our hearts precise instructions for the need of the hour. The answers we need are always just a whisper away; but we must take the time to listen.
Too many things vie for our immediate attention. Cell phones beep, ring, sing and alert; computers incessantly inform us, “You have new mail.” Background noise sometimes eliminates God’s still, small voice. Perhaps it’s time to pull the plug, get alone with your Bible, and listen for the whisperings of God.
Divine Whispers
(I Samuel 9:11-17)
God speaks in a still, small voice (I Kings 19:12). Those who would listen to God must be attentive to His gentle approach. Too often the din of this world and the inner cacophony of crisis conspire to mute the whisperings of God. Samuel, however, kept his ear acutely attuned to God’s subtle voice.
Saul, seeking his father’s donkeys, had decided to engage the help of a “seer,” a prophet. He had no idea that, in meeting Samuel, the course of his life would be altered forever. As he walked through the crowd of worshippers, he did not sense the leading of sovereign providence; he did not understand the significance of each step. But Samuel knew.
The Lord had whispered in Samuel’s ear the importance of the day’s events—down to the moment he would meet Saul (15). Upon seeing the imposing visitor, the Lord assured Samuel with the words, “Behold, the man whom I spake to thee of” (17 ). Samuel, ever attentive to the whisperings of God, knew Saul was the man—Israel’s first king!
We, too, should be sensitive to the whisperings of the Lord. Scripture is the inspired whispering of God. And, as we read its pages, the Holy Spirit impresses upon our hearts precise instructions for the need of the hour. The answers we need are always just a whisper away; but we must take the time to listen.
Too many things vie for our immediate attention. Cell phones beep, ring, sing and alert; computers incessantly inform us, “You have new mail.” Background noise sometimes eliminates God’s still, small voice. Perhaps it’s time to pull the plug, get alone with your Bible, and listen for the whisperings of God.
The Epic Tragedy: King Saul I Samuel – 1
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Real Potential
(I Samuel 9:1-10)
Little is more tragic than wasted potential. From time to time we meet with someone who seemingly has the proverbial world by the tail. He’s smart, handsome, athletic, personable, and winsome. He is liked by all, admired by his competitors, and imitated by the young. In short, he’s got all the potential in the world.
Years pass, and we wonder what ever happened to so-and-so. Perhaps a chance meeting with a mutual acquaintance tells the story: “It sure seemed like he’d be a success, but he’s never really done anything with his life.” And so the story goes—real potential, tragically wasted.
In today’s Scripture reading we meet the young man Saul, a youth of real potential. Even his physical bearing was impressive (2). Reading the simple story of his pursuing his father’s lost donkeys, we find a young man of budding character. Note, for example, how thorough Saul was in seeking the lost animals (3, 4). When he did not find them in one location, he travelled farther. He simply wouldn’t accept easy defeat.
Notice also that Saul was thoughtful. Not only did he consider the importance of the task at hand, but he considered his father’s possible concern at his long absence (5). When contemplating a visit to the man of God, Saul’s generous heart thought about an appropriate gift (6, 7).
Lastly, take note that young Saul was thankful. His servant had the boldness to suggest a solution to their dilemma, and Saul gratefully accepted the idea, giving credit where credit was due (10). How sad that these noble traits of youth eventually faded, and all of Saul’s early potential never met with fruition! l
Real Potential
(I Samuel 9:1-10)
Little is more tragic than wasted potential. From time to time we meet with someone who seemingly has the proverbial world by the tail. He’s smart, handsome, athletic, personable, and winsome. He is liked by all, admired by his competitors, and imitated by the young. In short, he’s got all the potential in the world.
Years pass, and we wonder what ever happened to so-and-so. Perhaps a chance meeting with a mutual acquaintance tells the story: “It sure seemed like he’d be a success, but he’s never really done anything with his life.” And so the story goes—real potential, tragically wasted.
In today’s Scripture reading we meet the young man Saul, a youth of real potential. Even his physical bearing was impressive (2). Reading the simple story of his pursuing his father’s lost donkeys, we find a young man of budding character. Note, for example, how thorough Saul was in seeking the lost animals (3, 4). When he did not find them in one location, he travelled farther. He simply wouldn’t accept easy defeat.
Notice also that Saul was thoughtful. Not only did he consider the importance of the task at hand, but he considered his father’s possible concern at his long absence (5). When contemplating a visit to the man of God, Saul’s generous heart thought about an appropriate gift (6, 7).
Lastly, take note that young Saul was thankful. His servant had the boldness to suggest a solution to their dilemma, and Saul gratefully accepted the idea, giving credit where credit was due (10). How sad that these noble traits of youth eventually faded, and all of Saul’s early potential never met with fruition! l
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
The Prophet Comes of Age: I Samuel – 1
Sunday, January 31, 2010
True Repentance
(I Samuel 7:1-4)
God’s judgment relating to the Ark of the Covenant made this important religious artifact somewhat of a pariah among God’s people. We’re told that the ark was moved from Bethshemesh to Kirjathjearim where it was held in storage for about twenty years (2). Though the symbol of God’s presence had returned, the people had not returned with whole-hearted repentance to God.
The twenty years the ark was in storage saw Israel sink to serious spiritual lows. Despite the preaching of Samuel, Israel became conversant in Canaanite customs, especially Canaanite religion. They had begun to worship Baal and Ashtaroth, both pagan fertility gods (4). Samuel’s preaching was a clarion call to repentance.
First, Samuel commanded them to put away false gods. Repentance that does not fundamentally change actions is not genuine. Sincerity is discerned by change, not words.
Secondly, genuine repentance is a matter of the heart. Samuel commanded the people, “…prepare your hearts unto the Lord” (3). While outward display may be convincing to man, God looks on the heart. Anything short of inner transformation is something less than genuine repentance.
Thirdly, true repentance results in renewed service for the Lord. It is not merely a matter of giving up a vice. Repentance involves enthusiastic dedication for the Lord. In repentance, one serves the Lord as energetically as he had formerly served sin.
Shallow repentance never lasts long. In making spiritual changes, be mindful that genuine change is substantive—not merely an outward show.
True Repentance
(I Samuel 7:1-4)
God’s judgment relating to the Ark of the Covenant made this important religious artifact somewhat of a pariah among God’s people. We’re told that the ark was moved from Bethshemesh to Kirjathjearim where it was held in storage for about twenty years (2). Though the symbol of God’s presence had returned, the people had not returned with whole-hearted repentance to God.
The twenty years the ark was in storage saw Israel sink to serious spiritual lows. Despite the preaching of Samuel, Israel became conversant in Canaanite customs, especially Canaanite religion. They had begun to worship Baal and Ashtaroth, both pagan fertility gods (4). Samuel’s preaching was a clarion call to repentance.
First, Samuel commanded them to put away false gods. Repentance that does not fundamentally change actions is not genuine. Sincerity is discerned by change, not words.
Secondly, genuine repentance is a matter of the heart. Samuel commanded the people, “…prepare your hearts unto the Lord” (3). While outward display may be convincing to man, God looks on the heart. Anything short of inner transformation is something less than genuine repentance.
Thirdly, true repentance results in renewed service for the Lord. It is not merely a matter of giving up a vice. Repentance involves enthusiastic dedication for the Lord. In repentance, one serves the Lord as energetically as he had formerly served sin.
Shallow repentance never lasts long. In making spiritual changes, be mindful that genuine change is substantive—not merely an outward show.
The Prophet Comes of Age I Samuel – 2
Monday, February 1, 2010
Elements of Revival
(I Samuel 7:5-11)
Having reviewed with Israel the nature of genuine repentance, Samuel watched as significant, necessary changes took place. The Canaanite fertility gods, so long embraced by Israel, were “put away;” and the nation once again returned to the Lord—serving Him exclusively (4).
Upon seeing the initial indications of national revival, Samuel called the people to Mizpeh for a prayer meeting. Notice that revival involved both Samuel’s preaching and his prayers. Preaching alone can not meet the need of the hour. To be effective, preaching must be bathed in prayer—both public and private. And so, Samuel prayed (5).
Israel’s renewed spiritual sensitivity called for a striking public demonstration of inner remorse. In a ceremony of repentance and consecration, the people “drew water, and poured it out before the Lord.” The water was meant to symbolize Israel’s sorrowful repentance (II Sam. 23:16). It was also meant to symbolize national renewal.
In addition to public ceremony, the people fasted. Theirs was not a contrived ritual aimed at gaining the attention of the Deity. Rather, their concern for spiritual matters overshadowed their concern for the physical. Genuine fasting, whether spontaneous or planned, forsakes physical satisfaction because spiritual hunger is far more pressing.
Ultimately, confession (“we have sinned against the Lord”—vs. 3) led to victory. Samuel prayed, “and the Lord heard him” (9). And, once His people were right with Him, the Lord gave them stunning victory over their enemies (10, 11). And He will do the same today!
Elements of Revival
(I Samuel 7:5-11)
Having reviewed with Israel the nature of genuine repentance, Samuel watched as significant, necessary changes took place. The Canaanite fertility gods, so long embraced by Israel, were “put away;” and the nation once again returned to the Lord—serving Him exclusively (4).
Upon seeing the initial indications of national revival, Samuel called the people to Mizpeh for a prayer meeting. Notice that revival involved both Samuel’s preaching and his prayers. Preaching alone can not meet the need of the hour. To be effective, preaching must be bathed in prayer—both public and private. And so, Samuel prayed (5).
Israel’s renewed spiritual sensitivity called for a striking public demonstration of inner remorse. In a ceremony of repentance and consecration, the people “drew water, and poured it out before the Lord.” The water was meant to symbolize Israel’s sorrowful repentance (II Sam. 23:16). It was also meant to symbolize national renewal.
In addition to public ceremony, the people fasted. Theirs was not a contrived ritual aimed at gaining the attention of the Deity. Rather, their concern for spiritual matters overshadowed their concern for the physical. Genuine fasting, whether spontaneous or planned, forsakes physical satisfaction because spiritual hunger is far more pressing.
Ultimately, confession (“we have sinned against the Lord”—vs. 3) led to victory. Samuel prayed, “and the Lord heard him” (9). And, once His people were right with Him, the Lord gave them stunning victory over their enemies (10, 11). And He will do the same today!
The Prophet Comes of Age I Samuel – 3
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Ebenezer
(I Samuel 7:12-17)
The familiar hymn Come Thou Fount contains the words, “Here I raise mine Ebenezer; hither by Thy help I come.” Even some seasoned saints raise their eyebrows at these words, dutifully singing them without having a clue what they mean. Well, today’s passage comprises the source of the hymn writer’s inspiration.
Having won a stunning victory over the Philistines, the prophet Samuel erected a stone monument—similar to a war memorial (12). It was intended to be a permanent reminder to Israel that the Lord had helped them. The word Ebenezer literally means “stone of help.” On seeing the monument, the nation was to recall their inability and the Lord’s gracious assistance.
Samuel’s godly influence was, however, far more powerful than his monument. We’re told that “the Lord was against the Philistines all the days of Samuel.” In other words, God blessed a man, not a monument. Too many church folks view fancy buildings as an indication of God’s blessing. In reality, God blesses people, and the monuments are merely byproducts. The focus, then, must never become the physical.
God used Samuel to call His people back into vital relationship with Him. Based on their repentance and Samuel’s ongoing prayers, God granted victory to His people. Ground that had long ago been lost to the Philistines was regained, (14) and the nation entered a period of peace.
Was the blessing due to Samuel’s monument? No! The blessing continued because Samuel remained faithful (15-17). In fact, the aging judge and prophet continued his preaching circuit and faithfully maintained “an altar unto the Lord” (17). God blesses faithful men!
Ebenezer
(I Samuel 7:12-17)
The familiar hymn Come Thou Fount contains the words, “Here I raise mine Ebenezer; hither by Thy help I come.” Even some seasoned saints raise their eyebrows at these words, dutifully singing them without having a clue what they mean. Well, today’s passage comprises the source of the hymn writer’s inspiration.
Having won a stunning victory over the Philistines, the prophet Samuel erected a stone monument—similar to a war memorial (12). It was intended to be a permanent reminder to Israel that the Lord had helped them. The word Ebenezer literally means “stone of help.” On seeing the monument, the nation was to recall their inability and the Lord’s gracious assistance.
Samuel’s godly influence was, however, far more powerful than his monument. We’re told that “the Lord was against the Philistines all the days of Samuel.” In other words, God blessed a man, not a monument. Too many church folks view fancy buildings as an indication of God’s blessing. In reality, God blesses people, and the monuments are merely byproducts. The focus, then, must never become the physical.
God used Samuel to call His people back into vital relationship with Him. Based on their repentance and Samuel’s ongoing prayers, God granted victory to His people. Ground that had long ago been lost to the Philistines was regained, (14) and the nation entered a period of peace.
Was the blessing due to Samuel’s monument? No! The blessing continued because Samuel remained faithful (15-17). In fact, the aging judge and prophet continued his preaching circuit and faithfully maintained “an altar unto the Lord” (17). God blesses faithful men!
The Prophet Comes of Age I Samuel – 4
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
When Godly Parenting Fails
(I Samuel 8:1-6)
Without a doubt, Samuel was a godly man. Though not perfect, the Scriptures uniformly view him as a hero of the faith, one who stood faithfully for God throughout his ministry. When we read of his sons’ shortcomings, therefore, we find ourselves perplexed. How could it be that Samuel’s sons “walked not in his ways” (3)? What went wrong?
Scripture gives no indications as to Samuel’s parenting style. Pure conjecture could surmise that Samuel gave too much time to the ministry and not enough time to his family; but the Bible doesn’t say. Maybe Samuel’s relationship with his wife was strained; but the Bible doesn’t say. What the Bible does tell us is that Samuel, a godly prophet, experienced disappointment in his sons.
It is entirely possible for parents to do everything right and yet see their children do wrong—especially when they’re young. Just like adults, children possess both a sin nature and a free will. Proper child rearing can restrain the sin nature, but it can’t eradicate it. Discipline and training can bend the child’s will in the right direction, but it can’t insure that children will always make right choices. The scary truth for parents is that sometimes even well-trained children make foolish and sinful decisions.
Like any parent, Samuel took initial offense to the suggestion of replacing his sons with a king. But, unlike the average parent, Samuel took the matter to the Lord in prayer (6). Even when deeply offended by the elders, Samuel had the spiritual insight to seek God’s will, not his own. Consistency counts. And God will bless and direct when we faithfully acknowledge Him—even when things don’t turn out like we had hoped (Prov. 3:5-6).
When Godly Parenting Fails
(I Samuel 8:1-6)
Without a doubt, Samuel was a godly man. Though not perfect, the Scriptures uniformly view him as a hero of the faith, one who stood faithfully for God throughout his ministry. When we read of his sons’ shortcomings, therefore, we find ourselves perplexed. How could it be that Samuel’s sons “walked not in his ways” (3)? What went wrong?
Scripture gives no indications as to Samuel’s parenting style. Pure conjecture could surmise that Samuel gave too much time to the ministry and not enough time to his family; but the Bible doesn’t say. Maybe Samuel’s relationship with his wife was strained; but the Bible doesn’t say. What the Bible does tell us is that Samuel, a godly prophet, experienced disappointment in his sons.
It is entirely possible for parents to do everything right and yet see their children do wrong—especially when they’re young. Just like adults, children possess both a sin nature and a free will. Proper child rearing can restrain the sin nature, but it can’t eradicate it. Discipline and training can bend the child’s will in the right direction, but it can’t insure that children will always make right choices. The scary truth for parents is that sometimes even well-trained children make foolish and sinful decisions.
Like any parent, Samuel took initial offense to the suggestion of replacing his sons with a king. But, unlike the average parent, Samuel took the matter to the Lord in prayer (6). Even when deeply offended by the elders, Samuel had the spiritual insight to seek God’s will, not his own. Consistency counts. And God will bless and direct when we faithfully acknowledge Him—even when things don’t turn out like we had hoped (Prov. 3:5-6).
The Prophet Comes of Age I Samuel – 5
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Don’t Take it Personally
(I Samuel 8:7-9)
Admittedly, Samuel’s sons had not taken after their godly father. Their behavior had become so notorious as to garner the censure of the elders. The elders’ request to Samuel was simple: Replace the judgeships of your sons with a king. Though their request was a personal offense to Samuel, he determined to bring the matter to the Lord in prayer—rather than just reject their suggestion out of hand.
Both the Lord’s response and rationale probably surprised Samuel. God told Samuel to do as the people requested (7). And then He gave Samuel His rationale: “…they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me.” In other words, the Lord told Samuel not to take the elders’ request personally. God revealed that their request sprang from a rejection of Him, not a rejection of Samuel or his unworthy sons.
At first glance, the request of the elders appears reasonable. After all, Samuel’s sons weren’t exactly paragons of virtue. The elders’ motives, however, were not so easily discerned by Samuel. God, who knows the hearts, understood that the elders viewed the failure of Samuel’s sons as an opportunity to forward their own agenda—the crowning of a king. And without so much as a prayer for divine guidance, the elders pressed their agenda upon Samuel in an hour of personal crisis.
God assured Samuel that their request was, in reality, a rejection of His divine authority—not Samuel’s ministry nor his sons, per se. Their rebellion surfaced when opportunity arose, and God saw through the entire debacle. Lesson: Be careful about taking criticism personally. Don’t worry so much about what folks say; just make sure you’re on God’s side!
Don’t Take it Personally
(I Samuel 8:7-9)
Admittedly, Samuel’s sons had not taken after their godly father. Their behavior had become so notorious as to garner the censure of the elders. The elders’ request to Samuel was simple: Replace the judgeships of your sons with a king. Though their request was a personal offense to Samuel, he determined to bring the matter to the Lord in prayer—rather than just reject their suggestion out of hand.
Both the Lord’s response and rationale probably surprised Samuel. God told Samuel to do as the people requested (7). And then He gave Samuel His rationale: “…they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me.” In other words, the Lord told Samuel not to take the elders’ request personally. God revealed that their request sprang from a rejection of Him, not a rejection of Samuel or his unworthy sons.
At first glance, the request of the elders appears reasonable. After all, Samuel’s sons weren’t exactly paragons of virtue. The elders’ motives, however, were not so easily discerned by Samuel. God, who knows the hearts, understood that the elders viewed the failure of Samuel’s sons as an opportunity to forward their own agenda—the crowning of a king. And without so much as a prayer for divine guidance, the elders pressed their agenda upon Samuel in an hour of personal crisis.
God assured Samuel that their request was, in reality, a rejection of His divine authority—not Samuel’s ministry nor his sons, per se. Their rebellion surfaced when opportunity arose, and God saw through the entire debacle. Lesson: Be careful about taking criticism personally. Don’t worry so much about what folks say; just make sure you’re on God’s side!
The Prophet Comes of Age I Samuel – 6
Friday, February 5, 2010
Be Careful What You Wish For
(I Samuel 8:10-17)
It was not God’s perfect will for Israel to have a king at this juncture in their history. The elders’ insistence that Samuel anoint a king amounted to nothing more than self-willed rebellion against God. Israel had been founded by God as a theocracy, but they wanted to change to a monarchy. Though it was not God’s perfect plan, He allowed His people to “have it their way.” And, so, Israel would conform to the pattern of the nations around her—with a king “and everything!”
Notice that in insisting on a king, Israel abandoned God’s perfect plan. Her willful rejection of God did not come as a surprise to Him, neither did it thwart His ultimate purposes for the nation. God has given man a free will to chose God’s way or to reject it. Rejection of God’s way only results in human suffering; it never results in the thwarting of God’s ultimate goals. God is sovereign—never surprised. Even when man fails to meet God’s expectations, God’s ultimate purposes will be accomplished; because God’s sovereignty is not dependent on man’s cooperation. God doesn’t need man’s participation to accomplish His will. In short, He will accomplish His purposes with or without you.
By opting to crown a king, Israel would get exactly what she deserved: taxation and increased servitude. Whenever human government expands, the populace ultimately suffers. Even good government is a taskmaster.
Be careful what you wish for. God may allow you to get exactly what you want—and, sometimes tragically, what you deserve.
Be Careful What You Wish For
(I Samuel 8:10-17)
It was not God’s perfect will for Israel to have a king at this juncture in their history. The elders’ insistence that Samuel anoint a king amounted to nothing more than self-willed rebellion against God. Israel had been founded by God as a theocracy, but they wanted to change to a monarchy. Though it was not God’s perfect plan, He allowed His people to “have it their way.” And, so, Israel would conform to the pattern of the nations around her—with a king “and everything!”
Notice that in insisting on a king, Israel abandoned God’s perfect plan. Her willful rejection of God did not come as a surprise to Him, neither did it thwart His ultimate purposes for the nation. God has given man a free will to chose God’s way or to reject it. Rejection of God’s way only results in human suffering; it never results in the thwarting of God’s ultimate goals. God is sovereign—never surprised. Even when man fails to meet God’s expectations, God’s ultimate purposes will be accomplished; because God’s sovereignty is not dependent on man’s cooperation. God doesn’t need man’s participation to accomplish His will. In short, He will accomplish His purposes with or without you.
By opting to crown a king, Israel would get exactly what she deserved: taxation and increased servitude. Whenever human government expands, the populace ultimately suffers. Even good government is a taskmaster.
Be careful what you wish for. God may allow you to get exactly what you want—and, sometimes tragically, what you deserve.
The Prophet Comes of Age I Samuel – 7
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Left to Your Own Devices
(I Samuel 8:18-22)
Some folks are their own worst enemy. The damage their worst foe couldn’t do, they do to themselves by unspiritual, willful decisions. Israel’s desire for a king was just such a case. Attitude frequently leads to undoing, and sometimes the most poignant chastisement comes when we face the consequences of our own actions.
Israel’s attitude toward Samuel was one of outright contradiction—“Nay, but we will have a king over us” (19). The voice of the prophet failed to get their attention. Perhaps the younger generation viewed Samuel’s adherence to the old ways as anachronistic. Whatever the reason, though Samuel argued vigorously against a monarchy, the people persisted until they got their own way.
The elder’s revealed their motive for desiring a king in verse 20. Their frustration was not so much with Samuel’s failed sons as it was from envy of other nations. Rather than fulfill their calling as God’s unique people ruled directly by Him, Israel desired to conform to the standard of the heathen nations encircling her. Whenever God’s people use cultural conformity as a motive for decision making, the results are wholly and tragically unbiblical.
To his credit, Samuel would not bow to the people’s pressure until God instructed him to do so (22). When instructed by God to relent, Samuel agreed to acquiesce to the people’s wishes, knowing full well that the nation’s future would be bleak indeed.
When warnings don’t work, chastisement begins. And sometimes the most powerful chastisement comes when God simply leaves us to suffer the consequences of our own poor choices.
Left to Your Own Devices
(I Samuel 8:18-22)
Some folks are their own worst enemy. The damage their worst foe couldn’t do, they do to themselves by unspiritual, willful decisions. Israel’s desire for a king was just such a case. Attitude frequently leads to undoing, and sometimes the most poignant chastisement comes when we face the consequences of our own actions.
Israel’s attitude toward Samuel was one of outright contradiction—“Nay, but we will have a king over us” (19). The voice of the prophet failed to get their attention. Perhaps the younger generation viewed Samuel’s adherence to the old ways as anachronistic. Whatever the reason, though Samuel argued vigorously against a monarchy, the people persisted until they got their own way.
The elder’s revealed their motive for desiring a king in verse 20. Their frustration was not so much with Samuel’s failed sons as it was from envy of other nations. Rather than fulfill their calling as God’s unique people ruled directly by Him, Israel desired to conform to the standard of the heathen nations encircling her. Whenever God’s people use cultural conformity as a motive for decision making, the results are wholly and tragically unbiblical.
To his credit, Samuel would not bow to the people’s pressure until God instructed him to do so (22). When instructed by God to relent, Samuel agreed to acquiesce to the people’s wishes, knowing full well that the nation’s future would be bleak indeed.
When warnings don’t work, chastisement begins. And sometimes the most powerful chastisement comes when God simply leaves us to suffer the consequences of our own poor choices.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)