King Saul: a case study

I have been reading and meditating on the life of Israel's first legitimate king. Saul is such a tragedy. In his first beginnings he 'ran so well' but stumbled and fell.

His purpose, under God, was to break the power of the Philistines. 1Sam 9:16. His first battle was against Nahash the Ammonite; a man whose name means 'The Serpent'. 1Sam 11:1. The story has an echo of Eden about it. Gen 2:15. Adam was given the role of serving and guarding the garden, but he surrendered to the Serpent and the die was set for the human race.

Carl Marx apparently once said that 'all compromise carries within it the seeds of its own destruction'. That was certainly true for Saul. As his independence developed into outright rebellion we hear a Samuel's clear insight; rebellion is as witchcraft (divination) and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. 1Sam 15:23. These are strong comparisons. The essence of witchcraft and divination is the manipulation of God. Magic seeks to impose the will of man on powers greater than himself. Idolatry is the greatest sin; it maligns the nature and character of God. And yet we often smile at 'stubbornness' and will sometimes confess it with a sense of defiance.

There is an interesting side plot to this story. At some point Saul set his face against witchcraft and divination to the extent of banishing them from the land, 1Sam 28:3 and yet all the time the same seeds were sprouting in his own heart. It is often said that we are most intolerant of our own sins when we see them in others. Saul the zealot set himself against the outward expression of witchcraft and divination and at the same time was nursing the same attitudes of heart. 'the heart' said another prophet 'is deceitful and desperately wicked. Who can know it?' Jer 17:9.

Now all these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall. 1Cor 10:11,12.

Baptism, filling or anointing?

G Campbell Morgan distinguished these biblical concepts with the phrase "one baptism, many fillings, constant anointing." It is a very apt summary of scriptural teaching. This morning I was reading the first couple of chapters of 2 Samuel and noting David's attitude to and experience of 'anointing'. Even though Saul had long lost his communion with God David insists that Saul is the Lord's anointed. 2Sam 1:16. In the lament that follows he says that Saul died 'as though he had not been anointed'. (KJV) In the next chapter David himself is anointed King over the tribe of Judah.

David, in fact, was anointed three times; once by Samuel 1Sam 16:13, once by Judah 2Sam 2:4 and once by the whole of the nation 2Sam 5:3. So what does 'anointing' signify? Pentecostal/charismatic usage is to regard 'an anointing' as a temporary resting of 'power' on a speaker or a singer, but this is not the way the Bible uses the concept. The first Bible anointing is of a 'stone'! Gen 28:18. The stone did not have special powers after this event but had been recognised and set apart from all the other stones with a unique destiny.

This is the true Biblical concept, someone is identified and specifically recognised as having a unique role. In that sense David was 'anointed' by Samuel as God's representative and later that 'anointing' was endorsed by Judah and finally by Israel. However, David was God's 'anointed one' from the day that Samuel consecrated him as such. In the Old Testament the high priests were 'anointed', so were kings. Sometimes prophets were anointed but the central thought is of 'identification' and 'authorisation' rather than an endue of power. Anointings and baptisms are quite different; anointings come 'on' people, baptisms submerge people.

Jesus of Nazareth was 'anointed with the Spirit' at Jordon, not 'baptised with the Spirit', although many confuse the two. In John's first letter we discover a distinctive New Covenant truth; "But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will* abide in Him." 1John 2:27. The anointing, as with all the blessings of the New Covenant, has been internalised. It abides 'within'. God's Spirit bearing witness with our Spirit that we are children of God now instructs us in the manner of our living and believing. It is 'the anointing' now, Christ's own gift to the whole family of God's people, not a sudden flush of eloquence but an abiding Spirit who identifies us as God's 'anointed ones' and leads us out into our destiny.

independence hardening to rebellion

I have just finished rereading 1 Samuel. Tracing Saul's spiral into disaster is a sobering read. This was the man who was uniquely chosen by God to be the leader of His people. He was chosen to take the battle to the Philistines and bring deliverance to Israel. The final chapter tells the tragic outcome of the story; Israel in flight and Saul and this three sons dead; at the hands of those same Philistines. How could such a thing happen to a man who is initially 'tailor made' for God's purpose?

There are at least three key markers to his descent into chaos. The first took place at Gilgal. That itself is significant. Gilgal had a history; it was the place where the people of Israel crossed into the promised land and their first action was to cripple all their soldiers! The temporary crippling was occasioned by the rite of circumcision, a ceremony which has many significances but may be summed up as Paul did in Phil 3:3 "(we) have no confidence in the flesh". I will not retell the story of 1 Samuel 13 but it showed Saul as a man of personal 'resource'. When God did not turn up, in the person of Samuel, he just carried on without Him. Oswald Chambers identified Saul's first sin, like Adam's, as 'independence'. It was an act of 'good, common sense' in the context but it marked Saul as a man who was prepared to innovate and choose his own way. He would do the 'will of God' but in his own way. The seeds of all that follow are found here.

Later in his story, 1 Samuel 15, Saul is given a commission to destroy the ancient enemies of God's purpose. Again Saul 'adapts' the commandment given to him and compromises God's plan. This time Samuel identifies it as 'rebellion' and 'stubbornness'. Independence has hardened into outright rebellion; it always does.

The final key marker finds Saul bereft of God's counsel but still determining to carry on. God has refused to speak to him by dream, or ephod or prophet but Saul is determined to get an answer. For Saul, the end will justify the means. He seeks out a medium, 1 Samuel 28, who summons Samuel from the grave but Samuel has no guiding word for him, only a death sentence.

The story of Saul covers about 40 years and has been preserved in the scriptures as a solemn warning and admonition. Single acts of independence can produce devastating harvests if they are not checked by genuine repentance and a willingness, in the disciple, to listen and obey his master's voice.

which yoke?

I suppose of all the 'comforting words' of scripture Matthew 11:28 would have to come high on the list. "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." but I trust we are learning to read beyond the confines of a single verse. This is a conditional promise and we cannot expect the fulfilment of the promise if we do not fulfil its conditions.

The picture of the yoke is frequently used in the NT as a metaphor for the Law. The way in which the Law had been applied by the Pharisees had made it literally 'unbearable'; Acts 15:10 The rulers of the day used the Law as as a 'one size fits all' and would not lift a finger to help those who were being crushed by it. To such 'weary and heavy laden' Christ offered a different yoke. Do note that he did not offer a 'yoke-less' option but a 'different yoke'; this was no 'off the peg' 'one size fits all' but a 'tailor made' union which bound the disciple to his master.

The full promise with its necessary conditions reads; "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke [is] easy, and my burden is light."

Taken together the whole passage makes the issues very plain. We find our 'rest' by coming under Christ's personal 'yoke' for our lives. What a 'rest' it is to come out from under every other 'yoke' and to come under the 'yoke' of Jesus Christ! This lifts from our shoulders every other obligation other than to 'learn of me'. It binds the disciple and his master into an exclusive relationship, and in that union and no other we find rest for our souls. In this union alone we discover that his yoke is easy and his burden is light or as John later testified..."For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome." 1John 5:3.

but will the truth set you free?

Apparently, according to the Bourne finale, the marble walls of the CIA are adorned with the words "and ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free" John 8:32

This is one of those verses which seems very encouraging until you look a little closer. I recall a wayward definition of a parable as 'one of those stories which, just as you are beginning to enjoy it, grips you by the throat". This is one of those 'just when you are beginning to enjoy it' moments.

We don't quote the Bible now we just quote texts and often without context. The full quotation begins with some words of Jesus to some who had become 'believers'. He warned them of the danger of brief lived faith. "If you continue in my word then you are genuinely my disciples, and you shall know the truth and the truth will make you free". Apparently there are both 'disciples' and 'genuine disciples', otherwise there would be no need for that qualifying word 'genuine' or 'authentic'.

So how can we distinguish between the two? Those who 'continue' in the word that Christ has spoken to them are the genuine article; people who suddenly believe may not be. It is not a high moment of faith that defines a genuine disciple but that steady adherence and obedience to Christ himself.

And it is only those who are in that present tense relationship of master/disciple with Christ who will know the truth and THEN, and not before then, the truth will make them free. There is nothing magical about data, it is the relationship to the one who speaks the truth that makes the difference.

Bank Holidays and Thanksgiving

I recall an American remarking on the fact that in the US national holidays celebrated key historic events while in the UK they seemed to celebrate the closure of the banks! It is not quite that simple but the idea of a Thanksgiving Holiday is very attractive. What do atheists do on this day? I recall another friend saying the saddest sight in all the world was a thankful atheist! What does he do with that upsurge? When he sees a sunset or the sweep of the milky way or the nails on a new born baby's hands, what does he do with that emotion?

Paul showed that there was an integral link between unthankfulness and idolatry in his letter to the Romans. Marking the beginning of the deadly spiral away from God's destiny for mankind he declares; "because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened." Rom 1:21 Apparently, idolatry starts right there with a refusal to recognise what we know to be true and a refusal to be 'thankful'.

I have observed something in Christians of many different persuasions throughout the world; it is almost impossible to keep a thankful man down and almost impossible to keep an ungrateful man up! If that is where the rot began that is the place we can begin the recovery. How do I get back on the flight path? Give God his rightful place and lift your heart to him in thanksgiving.

a jealous God?

For those taught to regard 'jealousy' as a sin, this self description of God is often a challenge: Ex 20:4-6. It comes in the passage which refers to idolatry and explains that God's particular hatred of idolatry stems from the fact that he is a 'jealous God'. How so?

It is almost impossible now for us to separate out aspects of God's character which seem contradictory. Is he a God of justice or a God of love? Yes! He is a God who exhibits his holy love in anger against the rebel. The two are not contradictory but complementary. It is because we hardly ever see 'anger' without 'temper' that we are tempted to consider God as being inconsistent. Christ was angry... often, but he never lost his temper.

When human beings exhibit jealousy it is a manifestation of self-defence and part of the philosophy that attack is the best from of defence. With God however, there is no self-centredness of this kind and God's jealousy does not stem from fear of loss of reputation. So where does it come from?

The context shows us plainly. Idolatry is a redefinition of God and inevitably a slander of his character. This is why the revelation of God in Christ is so necessary. Even the revelation of God in creation and scripture is partial but in Christ God is seen plainly. If we change this revelation we redefine God and that is idolatry.

God is 'jealous' of his character partly because to malign that character will result in inevitable loss for those who believe the lie. It is usually accepted that to defile the character of mother or wife is bound to provoke strong anger from the one who knows and loves 'mother' or 'wife'. The love of the Godhead cannot ignore the slander perpetrated in idolatry and the right word for this is 'jealousy' but it is jealousy without self-centredness and anger without temper.