A Mary Heart

Today's passage:  Luke 2:16-17
     We were given an advent calendar a couple of years ago.  In years past, I have filled it with sweets and treats.  This year I decided to do something a little different.  Behind each door I put in a slip of paper that  I've typed up a verse of the Christmas story.  And then I have included a task or a treat that would connect to that part of the story.  For example, for the verses about Mary and Joseph having to go to Bethlehem to be taxed, I gave them each a dollar explaining that whatever they bought with it, they would need to consider the tax that would be included. If they chose to use it on a vending machine, they would have to pay Mommy and Daddy the tax amount on the item.  When I typed up the verse about the shepherds telling everyone they knew, I put a gospel tract inside the doors and asked them to hand it to somebody that needed to hear about Jesus this week.  Of course there has been a little bit of grumbling that there has not been a treat behind each door, but I have explained to them that Christmas is about Christ.  All this other stuff is fun and exciting, but Christ's birth is the reason for the celebration.

Mary Kept These Things in Her Heart--Taken from Standard Bible Story Readers, Book One
By Lillie A. Faris, Illustrated by O. A. Stemler and Bess Bruce Cleaveland
The Standard Publishing Company, 1925

     As I have been reading and typing up the passage in Luke 2, something occurred to me.  After the shepherds went and told everyone they could find about the Christ child, it stands to reason that at least a few of those people might want to check out their story.  Either they didn't believe when they were told this news and continued on with their business, or they said, "I've got to go see what these guys are talking about."  This could mean only one thing.  Mary and Joseph would not have gotten any sleep that night.  They had journeyed all that day, Mary had just given birth, and from that moment on they had visitors all the night.  They didn't need a room in the inn, because they weren't going to enjoy a cozy bed anyhow.  Now, if I were Mary I would have grumbled and complained about this.  At some point in the night I would have pleaded with Joseph to turn any other visitors away because I was exhausted.  If I had been Mary, I would have been thinking, if we hadn't been stuck in this barn, I could be sleeping right now.  Instead, I have to make small talk with strangers when all I really want to do is sleep.  Maybe Mary had those thoughts, but was too gracious to utter them.  Maybe every visitor that came by, she secretly wished was the last so she could get some rest.  Somehow, I don't think so because she "pondered them in her heart".  Mary understood what it was really all about.  This was not any ordinary baby.  This was not any ordinary birth.  This was the arrival of God Himself. If Mary had any of those selfish thoughts, she was able to fling them aside because it was far more important to allow the world to see who had just made His debut on this earth.
     Physically, she would have been completely depleted.  Of course, it was God coming into the world, maybe she had the easiest labor on record.  If it was, she would be in for a real surprise when she gave birth to her future children.  Just another way for those brothers and sisters to be compared to their perfect big brother.  God knew Mary's heart.  He knew how she would handle the pressure of being ridiculed through the whole pregnancy.  He knew that she would not be thinking about herself when the time came for the baby to be born.  He knew that she had a servant's heart, that she was willing to do what was necessary to see God's plan carried out.  Many faiths give too much credence to Mary.  Some faiths don't give her enough.  This was a remarkable woman.  She really exemplifies selflessness.  The trials of scorn and scoffing when people first learned she was pregnant.  The fear of losing the man she loved, because how was he supposed to understand this?  Traveling on a donkey while probably having contractions, but being willing to finish the journey because God had a particular place in mind when His Son would be born.  She had no idea that particular place would be in a stable.  And now a sleepless night, smiling and chatting with countless people.  Maybe she yawned here and there, it could hardly be helped, but sharing her Child with the world, remembering that this was the One so many had been waiting for their entire lives.  Mary's story started long before an angel's visit.  God was working in this young lady for years before that, and she must have displayed a surrendered heart time and time again for God to select her for this special privilege.  She had no idea the full extent of what she was surrendering to, when she agreed to God's plan.  But she bore it all with such grace and example.  If we could have a smidgen of the fortitude and willingness that was in that young lady's heart, we would get so much more accomplished for the Kingdom.
     It's hard to give ourselves to everything God wants us to do.  It is emotionally and physically exhausting sometimes.  Just yesterday, our pastor reiterated that the ministry is not about us.  Mary really got that.  Was it inconvenient to give birth in a stable?  Absolutely.  Was it a nuisance to have people coming by throughout the night?  I think it must have been.  But the whole reason she said yes to God was for this moment.  And maybe this moment wasn't exactly what she had envisioned, but she knew it was not about her.  It was about this new life she had just brought into the world.  Could God have selected me if I were living during that time?  Highly unlikely.  Mary did not have any supernatural powers that allowed her to have a more willing heart than mine.  She just understood that some of the most important things in life, are the hardest.  And she was willing to put up with some inconvenience to see God's plan through.  If I gripe about not getting a good night's rest, I obviously still don't get it.  And when I see Mary's attitude, I see I still have a lot of work to do on my own.

Generally Speaking

Today's passage:  II Samuel 18: 1-17
     There is no easy explanation for Joab.  He is a warrior with a military mindset.  Often he goes into a situation with a "kill or be killed" attitude.  And why shouldn't he since he has practically led every battle since David has been king? He is King David's nephew and has been his trusted friend and go-to guy.  He doesn't always carry out David's orders as precisely as he should.  Since he was family, he sometimes disregarded David's commands if he thought the ends would justify the means.  Since David was his uncle, he sometimes disobeyed David's orders because it was bad strategy.  As the general, he was in the midst of the conflict and he could see what would be best for the kingdom.  And being related to the king, meant that the king would more than likely show leniency with him as long as the battle turned out in their favor.  Joab hasn't always gone along with the program, but I have no doubts that his motives were pure, that his intentions were sincere.  His ambition was to serve his king, and if that meant defying him sometimes to keep him protected, than he had no qualms about doing that.  He respects David, but he doesn't fear him.  He knows that David values loyalty.  And like his methods or not, Joab is loyal.
     Absalom has decided to take Hushai's advice and go after his father himself.  This leaves David with no other option than to have his men try to subdue him.  This breaks David's heart.  We can see how anguished he is when in verse 5 he says, "Deal gently for my sake with the young man, even with Absalom."  Doesn't sound like a lot of wiggle room in that statement.  It is not a wanted-dead-or-alive command by any means.  So I know Joab does not misinterpret this, he just chooses to forget he heard it.  From Joab's perspective, his cousin Absalom has caused nothing but grief for David for a few years now.  Joab may feel partially responsible for this, since it was at his own bidding that Absalom was invited back to the palace.  Joab thought David and Absalom could mend their relationship, but instead it had become more strained.  And then Absalom decides to rebel against his father in the most despicable way.  I'm sure Joab was not only infuriated by Absalom's actions, but humiliated.  Joab was probably muttering to himself, if he had just stayed out of this family affair, if he had only kept his thoughts to himself, if he had never encouraged David to reach out to Absalom then they would not be in this mess.  Had his heart not been touched by his cousin's despair at being isolated from his father, he might not have to contend with this family war.

Absalom is caught in a tree--Taken from The Boys of the Bible
By Hartwell James
Henry Altemus Company, 1905, 1916

     There is no disputing what David said as Joab departs to fight this battle.  Every one of the soldiers understood this clear order to spare Absalom if it could at all be helped.  When Absalom's abundance of hair (maybe he should have had it cut before riding into the woods) gets caught in some tree branches, donkey surging on ahead without him, he is a pitiful sight.  He must have been really stuck, because I'm sure he must have been flailing about trying to free himself to no avail.  He can not harm any one in this vulnerable position.  Even if he had bow and arrow on him, he is not likely to get off a good shot.  One of David's soldiers reports this situation to Joab.  Joab rebukes the soldier for sparing him.  The soldier is not apologetic for following the king's orders.  He even argues that had he decided upon this action, Joab would have not backed him, but would have left him out to dry.  This soldier does not have the advantage of a familial relationship with the king.  He reminds Joab clearly of David's plea to not kill Absalom.  Joab really has no excuse here, and feels he doesn't need one.  This cousin of his, had more than aggravated his father, he had aggravated him.  This was an embarrassing situation-- to be fighting in the woods trying to regain the throne from the one he had tried to help.  Joab felt that if they were to spare Absalom, this would be a sign of weakness to any other usurper.  If, however, the king's own son were duly punished for his treasonous act, wouldn't it cause future rebels to tread more cautiously?  Joab does not spare Absalom.  And it is not pretty.  He shoots three arrows directly into him, and has ten armorbearers finish him off.  Then they dig a hole and bury the body in the woods, covering it with stones.
     I'm not sure how Joab is going to explain this disobedience because I chose not to finish reading the chapter at this point, but I know there are enough witnesses to make Joab look really bad.  Joab doesn't seem too concerned.  He did what he felt needed to be done.  He knows what the king said, but just as he has done in the past, he also knows that he is trying to keep his king on the throne as long as possible, and he will take any action necessary to achieve that.  Is Joab happy about this deed?  I doubt it.  He just killed his cousin.  That can't be a euphoric feeling, but Joab keeps his feelings on the sidelines when it comes to battle.  He has an almost robotic response when he has a military decision to make.  Disregard feelings, disregard orders, disregard relationships.  What is going to achieve the objective?  Joab was a man of action.  He was decisive.  This is why David keeps him as one of his generals.
     I'm not saying Joab was right or wrong here.  If he allowed Absalom to live, Joab knew David would have forgiven him and he knew Absalom would have probably attempted this same thing again, and possibly succeed the next time.  Do I think Joab should have disregarded David's orders?  Not really.  But I also know, that God was meting out judgement on Absalom and it is unfortunate that this is how it came to pass.  Absalom wasn't exactly merciful towards his brother (not saying he should have been).  And his lack of mercy on Amnon brought about a lack of mercy from Joab.  But I won't be surprised if Joab's lack of mercy is revisited upon himself.

Height of Hypocrisy

Today's passage:  II Samuel 14
     Absalom is a petulant child.  In reality, he is a young man (he has four children already), but he behaves like a petulant child.  "But in all Israel there was none to be so much praised as Absalom for his beauty:  from the sole of his foot even to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him."  Obviously, Absalom is a good looking fellow, not surprising since he has King's David's DNA.  Can I say this?  Be very careful with your beautiful children.  All of our children are beautiful, but sometimes there are stand-outs.  You can tell this, because everywhere they go, they are admired.  People dote on them, talk to them, stare (in a good way) at them, admire them.
     My oldest son and I had a talk about this just the other day. My eight year old and my two year old are best buddies.  Firstborn takes very good care of him, but often spoils Youngest.  Now Youngest happens to be a very beautiful child.  Of course, I say that because I am his mother, but I get compliments everywhere I take him.  People naturally are taken with his blond curls and charming smile.  As nice as it is to have these compliments, Youngest is already learning that being cute can be very rewarding.  And since he is two, the tantrums when he does not get his way have increased.  I was correcting Youngest for this behavior the other day, when Firstborn asked me to be lenient.  "Oh Mom, he's just so cute!"  I explained to Firstborn, that is exactly why he needed correction.  Perhaps he is cute at two, but that behavior will not be cute at five or six.  Firstborn saw the logic in this, and let me proceed.
     I do not want to raise an Absalom.  I'm wondering if Absalom's mother, or perhaps nursemaids gave into his tempers and rewarded him with all that his heart desired--he was such a good-looking boy.  Youngest has already learned that he does not necessarily have to throw a tantrum to get his way, instead, he is learning that people give in when he flashes his sweetest smile and lowers his lashed eyelids.  Maybe that was Absalom's approach.  Parents, be careful you don't fall for that act too much either.  I can't say for sure that Absalom was spoiled as a child, but I'm guessing as handsome as he was, he was probably indulged.  A lot.  Selfish traits don't usually just spring up in adulthood, they have been carefully fostered throughout the years.
     In this passage, we see how Joab has finagled a way to get David to bring Absalom back into the fold.  But David still refuses to see his murdering son.  Joab is responsible for Absalom's return, but quickly sees that he will lose favor with the king if he gives in to any more of the prince's demands.  Absalom wants an audience with his father, and calls for Joab to mediate.  Joab refuses to come.  Absalom calls for Joab again.  Again, Joab does not comply.  So what does Absalom do?  He has his servants burn Joab's field. Are we talking about adult behavior here? I mean, that kind of thing probably worked in the palace nursery as a boy when the governess refused to give him his way, but really?  He's a grown man.  Joab seeks out Absalom (which is exactly what Absalom knew would happen) about this immature behavior.  Absalom simply responds with, "Behold, I sent unto thee, saying, Come hither,"  as if that is a good enough reason to destroy someone's property.  Absalom's action is grossly disproportionate to Joab's conduct.  But what is the most disturbing is that it works.  Joab does exactly what Absalom manipulated him to do.  If Joab had refused, Absalom would have upped the ante and probably burned his home as well, or killed Joab's servants.  The degree of selfishness in Absalom is equal to the weight of his newly shaven hair.

David Forgives Absalom--Taken from Treasures of the Bible (United Kingdom)
By Henry Davenport Northrop, D.D.
The International Publishing Company, 1894

     It is probably too late to corral Absalom's selfish ambitions.  He has been a selfish being for too long to be able to mend his ways now.  Of course, God can do that in him, but even then, it would take time.  David was always repentant when he had done wrong, but we don't see that in any of his sons.  I'm sure David taught the boys about the Lord, but unfortunately some of David's actions were so contrary to what he taught, that they saw the hypocrisy and walked away from God.  We all have some degree of hypocrisy in our lives, and our children will see it above all else.  We will never be perfect people, and we will never do everything exactly as we should.  But David's refusal to welcome Absalom back (despite his vengeful act of murder against Amnon) was the height of hypocrisy in Absalom's mind.  Why?  Hadn't David been a murderer?  Hadn't David had a man killed so that it would not be discovered he had been intimate with the man's wife?  In Absalom's mind, David's murder was so much worse.  Absalom reasoned that at least when he had his brother killed, it was retribution for dishonoring his sister.  Where was the nobility in what David had done?  David repented, and I'm sure Absalom refused to do this.  But perhaps the wise thing for David to have done, would be to have this conversation with Absalom and persuade him that his actions were unconscionable.  Maybe Absalom and David had these letters by messenger, but this was David's son--a face-to-face talk should have commenced.  Again, it is easy to sit in my office chair, play Monday-morning quarterback hundreds of years later, and advise David on what would have been a better way.  I'm sure if and when things go wrong in my life, others will do the same of me.  Still, God puts these things in His Word so we can benefit from David's triumphs and his mistakes.  God wants me to glean what I can on how to raise my children (or how not to) so that I don't have to go through the trials and tribulations that he endured.  It is too bad that David had to be the example, but I'm thinking that David had examples he could have watched.  Did he take advantage of that?  Did he have the privilege of talking to his father who had raised eight boys?  I don't know.  I just know that I do have that advantage, and I must grab hold onto any knowledge the Lord will give me.  I don't want to raise a petulant man/child.
   

Regrets

Today's passage:  I Corinthians 7:1-16
     "And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him."
     For most of my childhood, our family was in and out of church.  When we did go, it was always our mother that took us.  I didn't know until I was a little older that men even went to church.  I guess movies I watched, and friends I had only went to church with their moms.  My father was actually the one that encouraged us to try out a Baptist church, when I was in junior high school.  He grew up in an Oklahoma Southern Baptist church.  My mother had been to what she thought was a Baptist church in the deep south and she said they were running up and down the aisles.  It scared her.  She decided to give it another go.  For the first time in our lives, we heard a clear presentation of the gospel.  I'm not saying that the gospel hadn't been presented in some of the other denominational churches we had attended, mostly the base chapel Protestant service, but it never broke through to us like it did in this Baptist church.  Our lives changed.  We were challenged to accept Christ, to attend faithfully, to read His Word, to be involved.  It is where I was grounded in my faith.  My father was glad that we had found a church.  He was still not interested in attending with us.  I don't know what happened when he was younger, but after he left home, I think he stopped going.  In his later years, he would go with us to one service every couple years.  We always thought that was a great milestone, because before, he would always say no.  I used to pray for him each day.  Not so much that he would go to church, but I was very unsure that he was even saved.  I remember before having his second heart surgery, I was already living in Chicago at the time, and talking him on the phone.  I said, "Dad, you know I would be more okay with this, if I knew that you would be in Heaven."  He assured me he had accepted Christ as a young boy.  He told me that had already settled it long ago.  I told him he couldn't blame me for my doubts, given that he never came to church with us.  He understood that too.  He assured us of that fact again right before he died.  I know he wanted us to have that peace of mind.
     My father was a good man.  He was a great father, a faithful husband, a constant provider.  He had more good qualities than bad ones.  Somehow, he never felt convicted to be in church.  I think something happened in the church he attended as a youth that caused him not to go back.  He never talked about it.  My grandparents also, who I learned later  had actually helped plant churches, fell away from going.  I don't know what happened that caused disappointment or discouragement, but it kept them from ever returning.  I have to think that a lot of my behavior as a teenager kept my father away as well.  I have to carry that weight with me.  I claimed to be a Christian, but I did not always behave in Christ-like ways.  I was disrespectful and mouthy.  I wish I could shake every teenager by the shoulders, look them square in the eye, and tell them that every word they utter will linger years after it has been said.  If I could have been a better Christian example, I wonder if my father might have seen the changes in my life and rethink his own spiritual growth.  If there is a teenager out there reading this, let me assure you, how you act can have great effect on bringing your parents to Christ if they do not know Him.  What you say, and most importantly how you say it speaks louder than every church service you attend.  My father would never see the different ministries I was involved in at church.  It little mattered to him that I was a puppeteer, in the choir, taught the mission story in children's church.  He didn't see these activities because he wasn't there.  What would have made a big difference is if I had not complained about every thing I was asked to do around the house, if I had not rolled my eyes, stomped my foot, slammed my door when I was forbidden to go somewhere, if I had not sassed my mother and father about the tiniest of things.  Oh, the regret I have.  My mother is likely to tell me that I wasn't bad as all that, but I remember, and I assure you I was.  I can never take back those words or actions.  I've apologized in years since, to mother and father.  Yet, the memories of those years are imprinted.  If I behaved differently, maybe it would have made a difference.  Maybe my father would have seen the necessity to come with us to church.  Teenagers, be careful what you say, and how you say it.  As dumb as you think mom and dad are right now, you will someday see the wisdom in their words.  Don't live with regret as I do.  Be able to look back on your youth years with the satisfaction that you honored your father and mother.  I knew those verses but chose not to follow them.  Things may have been very different in our household if I had obeyed better.  Not that my father was a drunkard or a sluggard or an abuser.  None of that.  But it would have been wonderful for us all to be trying to manage bathroom time to go to church on Sunday morning.  I would love to have heard my father say a prayer.  It would have been nice to have gone to him for spiritual advice.  I don't know that any of that would have taken place, but I know this, I will never know for sure that I am not partially to blame because it didn't.  And that is something I will take into eternity. 

How Not to be King

Today's passage:  I Samuel 16:14-23
     I have not had my cup of coffee this morning.  Something about sipping my coffee drink (because I load it up with cream and sugar so my husband says it can hardly classify as coffee-he calls it my foo-foo drink) while I am reading my Bible wakes me up and allows my mind to start working.  I settle down into a chair by the computer, switch on a blank blog screen, read, and start typing.  Today, however, along with no coffee, my computer chooses to be disagreeable.  The cursor won't go where I want it to, when I scroll with my mouse, instead of scrolling the page it is behaving like a zoom lens, increasing and decreasing the fonts on the page. When I navigate to a different page, it keeps opening up a new tab.  I think the evil spirit that settled on Saul in the passage this morning settled on me as well.  You see, I have a very small window of alone time in the mornings.  This alone time changes every day.  My kids, who are usually not out of bed until 6:30 or after, switch it up constantly.  This morning, my oldest woke up before 6am.  The older two will watch something on TV in the morning as I'm finishing up, but my littlest guy will not be appeased until Mommy has tended to his every whim.  All this to say, I'm feeling a little out of sorts.  If I had a David around, I might need him to play me some harp music to send the grumpiness away.  I have my routine, and when it gets disrupted, I have difficulty letting go.  This is a little thing.  I know this, so the Holy Spirit is advising me to forge on without the coffee, accomplish what I can with the temperamental computer, and work until youngest starts calling.  Did I also mention that all of these distractions interfere with my focus, so it is hard to really grasp what God is trying to teach me this morning?  No?  Well, there, I said it.  Some mornings I struggle.  I want to get something from God, I read the passage, but all I end up with are crickets.
     As I'm reading the end of Chapter 16, I am feeling a little ornery.  It's the absence of coffee, I'm sure.  Saul's servants have noticed that Saul hasn't been himself lately (like me this morning) and they want to help him.  They want to help themselves too by getting as far away from him as possible.  They say, "Let our lord now command thy servants, which are before thee, to seek out a man, who is a cunning player on an harp..."  In other words, they would be perfectly willing to search the country for this person, if it will allow them to be a good distance from the king.  I'm guessing that having clay pots, javelins, shields, goblets, thrown at them has been tiring.  They will gladly surrender their target practice duties to any of the other servants.  At least Saul is willing to take their recommendation.  At least he is aware that he is not himself, that he needs some help.
      One of the servants recommends David.  He gives David a glowing review.  I'm not sure how he became acquainted with Jesse's youngest son, but he lists to Saul all of David's fine qualities.  David is good with a harp.  Since they were looking for a harpist, probably a pretty important quality to have.  He is a brave warrior (had the servant seen him kill the lion and bear?  how would he have seen this demonstrated?).  David was "prudent in matters" which I gather to mean he would not be a gossip.  If this young man was going to be before the king day in and day out, they needed someone who was not going to divulge all of Saul's moods to the countryside.  The people still needed to have confidence in their king.  I'm sure the country folk would pressure David into revealing the palace's most unbecoming secrets.  The king would need someone who would not succumb to this pressure. 

David Plays for Saul
Public Domain, Source and Illustrator Unknown

     The servant also says that David is a "comely" person.  I'm not sure why the servant sees the necessity in telling Saul how this young man looks, except that it must have been important to Saul.  Maybe Saul only surrounded himself with good-looking people because he felt that was a reflection on him.  In any case, David is handsome, he is easy on the eyes.  But most importantly, but to Saul maybe the least important, is that "the LORD is with him."  This servant understood the importance of not choosing just any good-looking, secret-keeping, young man.  They needed someone who loved the Lord.  They needed someone who could anticipate the changed mood of the king, who would try to overcome it with God's Spirit and God's music.  Saul has David summoned to court, and he is pleased.  He is more than pleased.  He wishes for David to live at the palace so he could be at his beck and call.  Soon, David will be used for target practice, despite all that he tries to do to help his king.  The servants must be relieved that Saul has someone else to rehang the torn down tapestries, or to parchment the broken window through which another chalice was flung, or to covertly confiscate all the sharp objects in the bedchamber. 
     Can you imagine being David, shepherd boy, reporting to the palace for work?  What ideas must he have had before coming to the palace?  This was Israel's first king, and David was going to get to work for him.  Probably the reality of what Saul was really like was jolting for David.  This was their king?  This is how he behaved?  Like a baby who threw tantrums, surrendering his will and being to evil spirits?  The saying goes, "All that glitters, is not gold".  Never assume that people who look like they have it all together, really have it all together.  Never infer that happiness on the outside is happiness on the inside.
     The king of Israel surrounded by luxury, surrounded with aides, was the most miserable man on the planet.  A carefree shepherd boy, probably at times bullied by his older brothers, given the more undesirable tasks of caring for the sheep, on hot days, on rainy days, with little material gain to show for it, may have been the happiest person.  The difference was where God's Spirit rested.  And it rested on David.  Saul's disobedience cost him God's peace.  This peace, especially in a troubled mind, would have been more valuable to Saul than all of his wealth, and even more than his position.  God was training David how not to be king.  And I think, for the most part, David learns the lessons pretty well.  In fact, I think with David's new position as Saul's armor-bearer, he could use a strong cup of coffee.

   

Listening with the Heart

Today's passage:  I Samuel 15:12-35
     Both times when Saul is confronted with his sin of bringing back the Amalekite spoil, he says "they have brought them," and "for the people spared".  He is not willing to take ownership of this deed.  Verse 9 says, "But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them..."    Hmmmm.  Who is telling the truth here?  God or Saul? 
     Then Saul tries to justify "their" actions by saying it was for religious reasons, to sacrifice to God.  Were they going to sacrifice King Agag to God too?  I mean, if you are going to make up a story, make sure all the pieces fit.  The Israelites were not known to give up human sacrifices, they left that to their heathen counterparts.  When Samuel presses him about this disobedience, Saul says, "Yea, I have obeyed the voice of the LORD, and have gone the way which the LORD sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek..." Okay, Saul, stop right there.  That's what I would have said if I had been Samuel.  When God said, "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not..." what part of that sentence meant, and bring the king back to Israel with you?
      Saul further says, "But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the chief of the things which should have been uterly destroyed..."  What he did was only bring back the king, the people are the real violators here because they brought back the livestock, but he adds, "to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God in Gilgal."  So, really, they were thinking about God so its not as bad as that, is it Samuel?  Even if this was all true, even if Saul had only brought back Agag which God said not to do, the people follow their leader.  If King Saul brings something back, it stands to reason that they would too.        
     Only when Samuel pronounces Saul's punishment does Saul come anywhere close to confessing his sin, and even then, I'm not sure he is repentant.  It is like the child who steals the cookie from the cookie jar and once caught, promises never to do that again, and says over and over, "I love you, Mommy, I love you Mommy, I love you Mommy" to avoid his spanking.  In his confession, he tells Samuel that it is because he feared the people that he disobeyed.  So now it is the people's fault?

Saul tears Samuel's Robe--Taken from Treasures of the Bible
By Henry Davenport Northrop
International Publishing Company, 1894

     Then Samuel says something very interesting to Saul which I think prompts a true confession.  Samuel says, "And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent:  for he is not a man, that he should repent."  It is almost as if Samuel has to go back to the basics with Saul.  He has to remind Saul that God is not a man.  God doesn't lie.  God doesn't make a mistake.  It is almost as if Saul had forgotten that God could not be at fault for this.  Being king, he had been used to laying the blame on others.  It had become his habit to allow others to become his scapegoats.  He couldn't do that with God.  He had forgotten that God will not be a scapegoat.  He needed to be reminded that Someone was higher than the king, and that Someone does not make a mistake.  When Saul realizes this, that he is not going to fool the Lord, he comes clean.  It takes a while to get there, but he is at last able to recognize his wrong, without making excuses, and without throwing anyone else under the bus.
     Saul could fool Samuel.  Saul could fool the elders.  Saul could fool the other nations, but God will never be fooled.  He sees the heart, and it is because He sees the heart that Saul will be replaced.  Maybe Saul was genuinely repentant on this occasion, but God knew that it would take reminder after reminder to make Saul the king he ought to be.  God was not interested in continuing that process, at least, not while Saul was on the throne.  God never gives up on us.  He works with us to get us where He wants us to go, but not always in the position we are in.  Sometimes He has to knock us off our thrones so we will listen.  When we are surrounded by all our worldly comforts, we can drown out His Voice.  It takes a lot to hear Him amid all the distractions.  When He takes things away from us, it is so He can get us to a place where we hear Him.  Really hear Him, not the "Yes, dear" kind of hearing that spouses so often give.  He wants us to listen.  Intently. 
    Does that ever happen for Saul?  I can't see that it does.  He doesn't exactly wear earplugs, more like earmuffs.  He hears God, but he never really listens.  God's instructions are like the adult "Wa, wa, wa" in a Peanuts cartoon.  We can listen with our ears, but if we don't listen with our heart too, we haven't really heard anything.  When God tells us something, and we don't respond emotionally to it, I'm not sure we have actually responded.  Going through the motions, not the emotions.  That doesn't mean we have to be a crying mess in everything we do, but doesn't God say to do things "heartily"?  Saul heard with his ears, but he never heard God with his heart.  When I feel that disconnect with God, in my prayer time, in my Bible time, when I am witnessing to someone, I have to ask myself, am I really listening?  My ears are open, is my heart?

Pleading

Today's passage:  I Samuel 15:1-11
     I have wept over my children.  I have prayed for their strength in this wicked world.  I yearn for each of them not to only to accept Christ, but to embrace Him in their lives so that they will give their lives to serve Him.  Crying for my children is not an unusual thing.  It seems natural.  If they were to fall into sin, I would cry again.  I would fall on my knees and plead with God to deliver them from whatever mischief they were involved.

"It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king:  for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments.  And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the LORD all night." 

     Not surprisingly, Saul has again decided to do things his way.  He thinks he is wiser than God.  God gives him the express order to destroy, no annihilate, the Amalekites.  Eradicate them, demolish them, obliterate them.  I think "utterly destroy... and spare them not," seems pretty plain to me.  I don't think there is a lot of wiggle room there.  Yet Saul seems to find a loophole.  Actually, he doesn't find one, he creates one.  He almost does everything that God says.  But almost following an order is not good enough.  If I were a pharmacist and I almost filled the medicine order correctly, I could kill someone.  If I were a banker, and I almost gave back the right amount of change, I would be convicted of cheating people.
      Almost obeying God is not obeying.  In fact, I will even go so far as to say that almost obeying is worse than disobeying.  Why?  Because when I disobey, I have no excuses.  It's pretty black and white.  When I almost obey, I want to excuse myself for why I couldn't obey completely.  I want to offer reasons why my disobedience wasn't disobedience at all.  I want to color it gray.
     I really believe God gives this task to Saul on purpose.  What God asks Saul to do is to fulfill a promise He made back in Deuteronomy 25.  It had always been God's plan to "blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven."  Now, God asks Saul to carry out the task.  His failure to do this will allow Amalek to cause future havoc for Israel.  Remember Haman, the wicked fellow in the book of Esther who persuades King Ahasuerus to enact the law to have the Jews destroyed?  Guess his ancestry.  He was a descendant of the Amalekites.  Saul's failure here, is a failure for generations.  That is a good application to remember.  Sometimes my failures follow me, or follow my children.  I shouldn't look at any situation and think, well, I'll just disobey a little.  There is no such thing.  Saul's almost obedience led to an almost destruction generations later.  God gives Saul the privilege of carrying out His orders.  He gives Saul the opportunity to leave a lasting legacy.  He leaves one, alright, just not one God intended.
     After Saul disobeys, God speaks to Samuel about it.  Samuel is brokenhearted.  He weeps over Saul, as if he is his own son.  The verse says that he cried all night.  This really challenged me.  When is the last time I cried for someone who was not my child, or in my family.  When is the last time I cried for the leaders of my country?  I have had critical spirits over those in authority, I have prayed for them, not really convinced that anything would change.  When have I ever cried for my President and prayed God would help him in his decisions?  I have prayed that way, but I don't think I have ever earnestly pleaded with God as Samuel did here.  I have never stayed awake all night and prayed for him.  Wouldn't that be something?  Wouldn't it be a challenge if all of our churches took a time to have an all-night prayer vigil for the leaders of our country?  Would it change anything?  Samuel was convinced it would.  You might say, but Saul didn't change, if anything, he seemed to get worse.  This is true.  It seemed pointless for Samuel to waste his tears.  It seems sentimental.  But how do we know, that Saul might not have been a worse king if it weren't for Samuel's prayers?  He still wasn't great, but maybe he would have been worse.  Maybe Samuel's crying to God that night actually spared Saul from committing actions which we may never know.  He may not have been the best king, but maybe he was a better king than he ought to have been because of Samuel.
     Maybe our leaders will never change.  But maybe our prayers, earnest, heartfelt prayers will make them better than they ought to be.  I'm committing my time to let God get a hold of my heart for the men and women who are in office and have a serious time of prayer for them.  I want to weep for them as Samuel wept for Saul.  I want to plead that God will do something in their lives to make them better leaders for our country.  And who knows?  Maybe they will actually commit their ways to Him.  Maybe God is just waiting for us to ask.
      

A Test of True Character

Today's passage:  I Samuel 13:13-I Samuel 14:23
     "And Jonathan said to the young man that bare his armour, Come, and let us go over unto the garrison of these uncircumcised:  it may be that the LORD will work for us:  for there is no restraint to the LORD to save by many or by few."
     For all of Saul's faults, he must have been a good father.  Either that, or Jonathan had great character despite his father.  That happens sometimes.  Although parents are important figures in children's lives, not everybody is blessed with Godly parents who teach their children from the Bible.  Yet, some children can overcome this by finding the Lord themselves and living for Him despite the opposition in their home.  I find these young people remarkable.  That can't be an easy task.  It shows something though.  It shows that despite the odds, God can overcome any situation.
     In the last several verses of Chapter 13, Samuel tells Saul that his disobedience has cost him the throne for future generations.  Now, I'm guessing Jonathan would have heard about this.  I'm thinking he was none too pleased with his father's willfullness, because his disobedience had actually brought the punishment more on Jonathan than on Saul himself.  Maybe Jonathan wonders if he can change God's mind?  I'm not saying he is trying to, but maybe he wants to prove to God that he would be a worthy king.  And he most definitely would. Jonathan has so many good qualities, you kind of have to wonder how he came by them.  Not saying Saul did not have any, but this young man is just brimming with possibilities.  Jonathan has a pure heart, free of vengeance or jealousy (we see that when he befriends the future king who will take his place).  He has a confidence without pride.  He has a heart to serve God, and has faith that God will deliver him.  After Jonathan enlists his armor bearer alone to go and fight the Philistines, God allows him to defeat hundreds of men.  Who would go on a mission like that?  The armor bearer tells Jonathan, "Whatever you think, I'm with you."  What?  Jonathan had charisma (like his father).  But he had something his father did not have, he had a conviction that they were God's people and that God would deliver them.  Jonathan did have a plan first, a testing of the waters to see if God wanted them to do this thing.  He didn't just assume God was on their side, because after all, God had not been exactly pleased with Saul's actions as of late.  He told his armor bearer that once they showed themselves to the Philistines, if the Philistines said to wait for them to come over and fight, he would know that God was not in this.  But if they said, "Come over here." then that would be their cue that God wanted them to fight.  Sounds completely opposite from what I would have determined.  I would think, "If they say they are coming over, then I have backup with the Israelite soldiers.  If they say, you come over here, I'm doomed."  Jonathan's bravery allowed him to convince this lone armor bearer to go with him and engage the Philistines in a one-sided battle that led to an Israelite victory.  That's amazing!

Jonathan and his armorbearer attack the Philistines--Taken from Standard Bible Readers, Book Four
By Lillie A. Faris, Illustrated by O.A. Stemler and Bess Bruce Cleaveland
 The Standard Publishing Company, 1927

  Was Jonathan trying to win God's favor?  Maybe.  I can imagine that Jonathan wanted God to know that he was on His side, even if his father proved not to be.  I can guess Jonathan would have wanted to be the next king.  It is what he had been training to do.  Have you ever tried to convince God of something?  Have you ever tried to convince God that really, if You rethink this plan, it would work out better?   Jonathan would have made an excellent king.  Why would God not have allowed the punishment to fall squarely on Saul, and allow Jonathan to have the throne?  Here's the thing.  I think we see more of Jonathan's character because he would not be the next king, more than if he had been.  I see a young man who responds with graciousness to David, who should have been his enemy.  I see a young man who does not plot and scheme to get around God's will, but accepts it.  Now, maybe he doesn't at first, and that may be why he takes on this daredevil attack with the Philistines, to convince God, but when that doesn't work, he doesn't respond with, "Well, what did I do that for?"  Every thing has a purpose in our lives.  That promotion I wanted?  It went to someone else, how did I respond?  The new house I put a bid on, but was not accepted?  What was my attitude?  The paper I deserved an A on but the teacher gave me a C instead?  Did I grumble about it?  God develops character in us, and these situations in our life fully displays it.  Jonathan did not become king because God wanted to show us how to react when we don't get something we think we deserve (by the way, we don't deserve anything, that is another part of God's grace, that He allows us to have anything).  He put someone in the Bible to be the example of a gracious loser.  He put someone in the Bible to help us see that our first response is not always the right one, that we can be a better example when we lose out.  I'm just glad God didn't start with letting Jonathan lose this particular battle.  God uses Jonathan, not because he was a king, but because he didn't get to be.
      What situations have I grumbled about, what opportunities have I lost that I thought I deserved?  My real character shows when I lose.

Red Lights

Today's passage:  I Samuel 13:1-13
     My husband is the antithesis of patience.  His greatest weakness is Chicago traffic.  Why he allows it to still frustrate him so, frustrates me.  Many of our biggest arguments have been about his driving as he manuevers through a gridlocked city.  I'm getting better at keeping the criticisms to a minimum, but I still have a long way to go.  It seems that a dark cloud of negativity hovers over his head as soon as he is settled in the driver's seat.  The drive hasn't begun, but he is already anticipating the worst.  I have tried to convince him that those pessimistic expectations will most certainly come to pass, if he begins the trip this way.  I have needled him that Chicago traffic is like the weather, you can't control it, so don't get upset about it.  I have learned to keep my mouth shut, mostly.  I still voice my opinion rather loudly when he passes a car on the right at breakneck speed, or pretends he didn't see the red light.  Yes, this is my police officer husband.  He is human too.  Now, instead of losing my cool as well, or arguing how he might not need blood pressure medicine if he would just give this little matter over to God, I try to whisper little prayers for him.  Not out loud, that would probably irritate him more.  I am really trying to help him, not aggravate him, but I've learned my "friendly" advice is not a help.  Praying works much better.
     Saul shows his impatience in this passage.  The first verse says that Saul had only been reigning for two years.  Several commentaries I read said that it didn't really mean two years.  I tuned out everything they said after that, I don't see any need to correct the Bible.  If the Bible says he reigned two years, I'm going to take it to mean that he was only reigning two years.  I'm not sure how much time has passed between Chapter 10, when Samuel first tells Saul he will be king, and Chapter 13, but I think perhaps there was a maturing time before God actually established Saul as king.  David went through the same process.  He was anointed years before he actually sat on the throne.  Now the reason I think this (and I could well be wrong) is because Saul met Samuel on an errand for his father, fetching the donkeys.  That seems like a young man's job.  That seems like a job that a young man still living at home would do (of course customs in Biblical Israel may have been very different).  By Chapter 13, Saul already has a son old enough to head up a regiment of soldiers.  Considerable time has passed, or Saul was not as young as I thought when he was anointed.
     Saul and Jonathan establish soldiers in three cities that surround a garrison of Philistines in Geba.  If you look at a map of Israel, these three cities form a triangle around Geba, so if those soldiers tried to go anywhere, they would be captured by Israelis.  Obviously, Saul was using military strategy here, but what is not strategic is when he sends several men back to camp.  Why he would not use every soldier at his disposal when he was about to launch an attack on the enemy is puzzling to me.  Jonathan is given the order to attack, which he does.  This brings every Philistine soldier on the planet to the garrison's aid.  It looks as if Saul and his army retreat a little because they go north to Gilgal, actually, he has gone here to wait for Samuel.  This is where Saul's trouble will really begin.  He thinks he has a problem when he scans the hills and as far as he can see there are Philistine soldiers.  That is nothing compared to the hole he will dig for himself a few verses later. 
     Saul waits.  Patience does not appear to be Saul's strong suit, and as a king now, he has not had to wait for much.  By now, he is used to snapping his fingers and it is done.  He has had the power of his will being fulfilled in seconds and has not had to wait for anything for at least two years, but probably before too, since people knew he was going to be king.  Now he has waited an entire week on Samuel.  He doesn't like it.  He doesn't like to be subjected to somebody else's timetable.    The people are getting restless, and it seems that they are ready to go home.  He needs every body present to fight these Philistines (especially when he made the foolish decision earlier to send a bunch home).  He knows he needs to get this battle started and he needs to do something to keep the people there.  So, he starts without Samuel.  He takes the matter into his own hands.  He offers the sacrifice to the Lord himself.   Either Saul really does not care about having God's blessing, he is just doing this to appease the crowd (because it was a tradition and they might not think God was on their side without the sacrifice) or his ego has grown to such a size that he thought he could do no wrong.  Saul has made a costly mistake.  His bad judgement here will follow him into the rest of his reign.  Finally, Samuel arrives.  Probably part of the reason it took so long for Samuel to get to Gilgal is that the land is crawling with Philistines.  He may have had to take various routes to get to his destination and avoid being captured.  Had Saul considered this?  No.  He was a leader.  He made a decision, which is really what we want leaders to do, but leadership without Godly counsel is dangerous.  Saul did not seek God on this matter, he let his impatience decide.  Making a decision when we are tired of waiting for an answer or an action is not wise.  When God gives us a yellow or red light in life, that does not mean proceed through the intersection anyway.  It means wait, sometimes for a little while, sometimes for a long while.  Who knows what God would have allowed Saul to do, if he had been willing to wait a little longer?  What would God allow me to do if I am willing to wait on Him?
     When my husband is in his patrol car, he doesn't have to wait a lot.  I think perhaps this is why he gets so frustrated outside of work.  He doesn't flip on his lights to get through the intersection, to get around traffic, he wouldn't abuse his powers like that.  But people see a police car, and they have a habit of getting out of the way, lights on or off.  In his civilian clothes and civilian car, he does not have that luxury.  Also, he drives all the time for his job, so he deals with traffic non-stop.  I understand why he gets so aggravated, but I'm not as sympathetic as I sometimes should be.  However, having the power to get people out of your way, and then not having that power would probably be pretty frustrating.
      Saul had absolute power in Israel.  He was the king.  Why shouldn't he be allowed to offer the sacrifices?  Why should a little law God established hundreds of years before interfere?  Because if I really want God's blessing, I need to wait on Him.  And when I am tired of waiting, I need to wait some more.  God will give me a green light when He is ready for me to get through the intersection.  Until then, I'm safer at the red light.

Excuse Me

Today's passage:  I Samuel 6
     Probably one of the biggest excuses policemen hear from people they have pulled over is, "Oh, I didn't know."  And more than likely they are telling the truth.  People are not aware of many laws.  Do you know what?  That doesn't mean you will not necessarily still get a ticket for it.  Now sometimes, policemen will be merciful and only give out a warning.  But people should not expect this, and should not complain against the policemen for enforcing what the general public should already know.  Ignorance is not an excuse.  If I don't know, it is my responsibility to find out.  Sometimes the best way of finding out, is suffering the consequences.
     After seven months, the Philistines finally devise a plan for getting rid of that wretched Ark.  I'm not sure why it took so long.  Even if the Ark had resided in each of Philistia's five major cities for a month, that still leaves two months left over.  Maybe it took them that long to decide what to do with the thing.  In the meantime, they are suffering from the boils until it leaves their country.  After consulting their wise men, they melt down gold and dip some of their emerods and field mice in it to send as a trespass offering with the ark.  Now when the wise men first propose this plan they say, "If ye send away the ark of the God of Israel, send it not empty," which sends alarm bells ringing in my head, "Uh-oh, they aren't going to open that box, are they?"  But do you know what? They had sense enough not to do this.  They do put it on a cart (which was a no-no), but I don't think God expected them to have enough knowledge about His Ark not to do this, and he does not dole out punishment for it.
     They hitch up some milk cows to the cart, secure the ark on it along with a chest of the gold items, and send it on its way back to Israel.  Some of the Philistines follow behind, just to make sure it reaches its destination, and doesn't get waylaid somewhere in their country.  As it reaches one of the borderlands, a field in Beth-shemesh, the Israelis of course are thrilled to see their beloved symbol back on their soil.  They immediately take it down from the cart (they knew it should not be on there) and offer the milk cows as a sacrifice.  Many people had gathered by this time.  All of Israel was rejoicing that the Ark of the Covenant had been returned.  Then they did something that even the Philistines knew not to do.  They looked in the Ark.  Why would they do such a thing?  Did they think they could get away with such behavior?  Were they that ignorant, when people from another land, who worshipped other gods, knew not to do this?  The Philistines had more respect for God's Ark, than its own people did. God smites them.  And the number is pretty astounding.  Over 50,000 people are killed.  Does that mean 50,000 people took turns looking into the Ark?  I'm guessing no.  I'm guessing several hundred may have, but several thousand more stood by to watch without giving any warning, without trying to stop them.
     What does this tell me?  The people had lost any respect for God and His ways.  This could be because Eli had been an ineffective priest.  He was nearly 100 years old at his death, which would mean he had been a priest in Israel for a very long time.  Beth-shemesh is only about 30 miles from Shiloh, the religious capital at the time.  That doesn't seem so far a distance for these field-hands not to know what God's Word taught.  But chapter 2 already told us, that because of the corruption of Eli and his sons, many people had stopped coming to the tabernacle to offer sacrifices.  If they were not going there to offer sacrifices, they were probably not going there for much of anything else.  When they fell away from this, they more than likely fell away from studying the Scriptures on their own.  When they fell away from that, they started to drift from revering God as He should be revered.  Little step by little step produces big consequences.
     So why would God not punish the Philistines for their ignorance in putting the Ark on a cart, and not spare His own people for looking into it?  Forgive the worldly quip here, but as Uncle Ben in Spider-Man said, "With great power, comes great responsibility".  The more knowledge we have, the more we are accountable.  If the Beth-shemites were ignorant, it would be their own fault, for neglecting to worship at the tabernacle (even with the corrupt priests) and then neglecting to study God's Word on their own.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think God excuses us from our responsibility just because someone else is not living up to his.  God still expects us to be faithful.  He still expects us to follow through.  He will hold those doing wrong accountable for their actions, but He will also hold us accountable for our wrongdoing.  The Israelites should have known that they were not to look in the Ark.  The Philistines were not God's chosen people.  He did not expect them to behave as if they were.  He did not expect them to know all the details of how to treat His Ark.  They obviously knew the big one which was not to look inside.  But He wasn't going to hold a heathen nation responsible for the details they did not know.  The Israelites had been given this information thoroughly, and still had it in His Word to reference.  They would be held responsible for what they did or did not know, because if they didn't know, they could find out.
     How does this apply to me?  God expects me to know what His Word says.  He expects me to go to His house to find out, and He expects me to go to His Word to find out.  If I am not doing either of those two things, I can not expect God to excuse my bad behavior because I claim ignorance.  I should know, and if I don't know, I should take the opportunity to find out.  If I make a decision without consulting His Word first, and believe it or not, He can direct me through it, even today, I have no excuses when my plans go awry.  If I make plans and do not pray to Him about them, I shouldn't complain when my expectations are thwarted.  Just because I don't do those things, doesn't mean God is going to be merciful to me, although He may choose to be.  But I can only blame myself if He chooses to allow me to suffer the consequences. 
     God might be like the policeman who gives only the warning, but if He chooses to give me the ticket or send me to jail, ignorance will never be an excuse.

Bruised

Today's passage:  Isaiah 53
     I don't enjoy correcting my children.  It is probably the least favorite thing I like to do in life.  If I had my way, my children would never fight, they would always respond with the right attitude, they would always obey immediately.  That is not usually what happens, without a little persuasion.
     Speaking of Christ's suffering, verse 10 says, "Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him..."  It pleased God that His Son was suffering?  That seems contrary to God's nature.  Why would He be pleased with the torment of His Child?  Perhaps, when the bruising brings about a result.  When I have disciplined my children, I find no pleasure in it, but when their fighting has ceased, when their attitude has sweetened, when they do what they are told, I am pleased.  Unfortunately, sometimes it takes unpleasantness to accomplish the goal.  When Jesus Christ's body was badly beaten, when it was nailed to the cross, when it had no life left in it, it accomplished it's purpose.  It redeemed me.  The result of the bruising was pleasing to the Lord.  In verse 11 it says, "He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied..."  God knew what the end result would be, and that was to purchase the salvation of all the people He loved.

The Suffering Savior--Taken from The Bible in Pictures:The New Bible Symbols
By M. Bihn and J. Bealings
The John A. Hertel Company, 1922

     It doesn't please God to bruise me.  Sometimes it is necessary to achieve what is necessary in my life.  He doesn't enjoy the process, but He likes the product He gets. If I try to live a life where I don't fight, I keep the right attitude, I obey God immediately, He will have fewer reasons to give me bruises.  If He can get the result without the persuasion, wouldn't that makes things pleasant for both of us?  For Christ, there was no choice but to offer His body.  There was no other way.  He satisfied and pleased the Lord with His sacrifice.  He took my lumps so that I can live without bruises.