Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 28-31.

We see King Saul’s complete desperation leading into his final battle in today’s passage.  One of the first things he had done as king was to drive all of those who communicated with the dead out of Israel.  Now as he faces battle against overwhelming forces he seeks one to consult the spirit of Samuel because he can get no answer from God by any of the means at his disposal.

SIDENOTE:Actually, I find it interesting that the passage tells us King Saul could not no reply from the Urim.  The Urim was to be kept with the Thummim in the high priest’s ephod and we know that Abiathar took the ephod with him when he fled to David.  Further, Abiathar used the ephod to divine God’s will for David.

So, why was King Saul so desperate?  It seems likely that the men following David were not the only potential members of King Saul’s army who had not responded to his call to arms.  Which resulted in King Saul’s army being much smaller than he expected it to be.  In any case, it shows that King Saul had recognized the failure of the path he had chosen, but had no idea how to change direction.  Once again, King Saul makes the wrong decision.  Of course, by this point I am not sure that he had left himself any way to make the right decision, but I do believe that as long as we live we may turn to God and beg His forgiveness.  If King Saul had done that here, he would probably still died in the coming battle, but the people of Israel might have suffered less.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 21-24.

When we compare Ahimelek’s reaction to David arriving in Nob by himself with what happened later when King Saul summoned Ahimelek and his family before him, we get a pretty clear idea that King Saul was comparable to many modern day totalitarians in that he used fear to rule over the people of Israel.  It seems clear that Ahimelek feared that David had come to him under orders from King Saul to kill him.   I want to interject here that I have been struggling with what I wanted to write about this passage for some time now.

The relevance of this passage for us finally hit me when I wrote the previous paragraph.  Despite the fact that King Saul could be viewed as an evil ruler, David refused to kill him when offered the opportunity.  David recognized that King Saul was God’s anointed king over Israel and was therefore unwilling to kill him, even though David himself had been anointed by God to replace King Saul.  David knew that God would remove King Saul in His own time and was willing to wait for God to act.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 18-20.

The stories told here are recounted so as to communicate to us how God was with David, but they tell us some other things about both David and King Saul.  First, reading between the lines we can see that David treated those around him well, leading them to love him.  This led King Saul to be jealous of David, which tells us that King Saul did not treat people similarly.  Both Saul and David were charismatic people who others just naturally liked and looked to for leadership.  But as time went on, people came to fear King Saul, whereas David became ever more beloved (something which we see continue when he became king).  I think I have touched on this before, but I want to point out that King Saul’s behavior towards David (and as we later see towards others) reflects his abandonment of and by God.  Actually, it is even more than that.  King Saul had come to see his leadership of Israel as being about him, not about what was best for the people of Israel.  Leaders who see their position as being about what’s in it for them, hate and fear anyone else who is loved by the people, especially when that person focuses on the best interest of the people.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 16-17.

There is one aspect of the account of David and Goliath that I can not quite decipher.  The account reads to me as if David was trying to shame one of the warriors into fighting Goliath.  Certainly, the account makes it clear that his brother thought that was what he was doing.  Yet, as soon as he was brought before King Saul, he volunteered to fight Goliath himself.  The conclusion I have always reached is that David tried to instigate someone else in to fighting Goliath because, since he was not a member of King Saul’s army, he could not volunteer to do so himself.  Or, perhaps, he felt that, also since he was not a member of King Saul’s army, it would be inappropriate to volunteer himself.  In either case, that changed when King Saul summoned him to an audience.

What is clear from the account is that David did not believe it required a mighty warrior to defeat Goliath.  He was convinced that God would be on the side of whoever confronted Goliath on behalf of Israel.  David was cocky and arrogant, but he was not conceited.  He thought that, with God on his side, he could defeat Goliath, but he also thought that just about anybody else could do so, with the same qualifier.   And he was right.  The lesson here is not that David was a great hero of God, although he was.  David was confident that he could defeat Goliath because Goliath had defied God.  In the same way, we can be confident that we can defeat those who defy God today.

I want to make one more point about David’s confidence.  He was confident that he could defeat Goliath, but he did not depend on doing it with just one stone.  He prepared for the possibility that he might fail on his first attempt, or even on his second, third, or fourth attempt.  When David armed himself to go out against Goliath, he did not just grab one stone.  He gathered five stones.  David planned for this battle. He did not just stand there and sling a stone at Goliath.  He ran towards him.  As I read the story, I imagined David running towards Goliath with the intent of ducking and running past him if the first stone missed.  David had faith in God, but he also had a plan.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 14-15.

I really struggled with what to write today.  I like the story of Jonathan going over and attacking the Philistine outpost accompanied by only his armor bearer.  So I thought I might write about that, but I could not figure out what to say.  I like the account of what happened when Saul commanded that no one in his army eat until they had complete victory and Jonathan did not hear so ate some honey. But again I was not quite sure what to write.  There are a couple of other things in this passage that I thought might be a good focus, but could not figure out how to start from them.

Finally, I looked closer at the interaction between Samuel and King Saul after the defeat of the Amalekites and knew that was the place to focus.  When Samuel arrives, Saul greets him by saying that he had done what God had instructed him to do.  I had never noticed before that King Saul actually thought he had done what God had desired.  He believed this despite the fact that Samuel had told him that God wanted him to kill all of the Amalekites and all of their livestock and King Saul had taken their king prisoner and plundered the best of their livestock.  After King Saul had made all of his excuses for not having done so, Samuel tells him the thing which we must always remember: “To obey is better than sacrifice.”  Really this runs directly counter to a saying which is common today.  The saying is, “It is better to beg forgiveness than to ask for permission.”  The point of that latter saying is that, if you know that they will refuse permission, don’t ask for permission, do it anyway and ask for forgiveness afterwards.  King Saul thought that because he was going to sacrifice the animals it was OK that he did not immediately kill them, that he could take advantage of this to further cement his position.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 11-13.

As we read this we see that this Book was a compilation of stories which had been passed down (that does not mean they were not written before they were compiled into this account, merely that they had been told separately).  The most obvious example of this is the fact that Samuel says in his farewell address that the people of Israel asked for a king when they saw Nahash moving against them.  Yet, there is no mention of this before Saul is anointed king.  This does not mean that it did not happen, just that those who told and/or wrote the account of how it came about that Saul became king did not see that it mattered to the events they were describing.

In any case, this actually lets us see in a clearer light both why some people wanted to execute those who initially rejected Saul’s kingship and why King Saul refused to allow that.  As I see it, King Nahash had started threatening the Israelites, primarily those east of the Jordan, but not only those.  The Israelites recognized that Samuel’s sons were inadequate to lead them against the threat, and asked Samuel to appoint a king over them.  The king would maintain the ability to address such threats when they arose, eliminating the need to build such an ability each time a new threat arose.  Not everyone saw the need for such a king (and even those who acknowledged Saul as king saw no reason to change how they acted).  When Nahash threatened Jabesh Gilead, Saul became angry, not just because of Nahash’s threat, but because, even though the people of Israel had recognized the threat he posed, none of them had gathered to provide Saul with a force to do anything about it.  However, when Saul sent out the call to muster, all of Israel responded, even those who initially refused to acknowledge Saul as king.  This is part of why King Saul was unwilling to allow those who initially rejected his kingship to be executed.  When it mattered, they rose to the occasion.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 8-10.

When the people of Israel asked Samuel to appoint a king to lead their nation, Samuel warned them about the negative side of choosing a king.  In a way, Samuel’s warning reminds me of the arguments made by those who opposed the adoption of the U.S. Constitution to replace the Articles of Confederation.  In both cases, the concerns proved to have some basis.  We do not really think of it this way, but what the Israelites were asking for when they asked for a king was a central authority who could unify them, a central government.  In the same way, the U.S. Constitution was intended to establish a central authority who could unify the thirteen states which made up the loose coalition formed by the Articles of Confederation.  I will say that there is one key difference between the two.  The people of Israel were already committed to being unified under a central authority.  That central authority was God.  While the people of the United States had never committed themselves to following God in a unified way.  If the people of Israel had followed through on their commitment to follow God, they would not have needed to appoint a man as king.  If the people of the United States had agreed to commit themselves to following Gog, they would not have needed the Constitution.  People who obey God with their entire being have no need for government of any kind.  Both Ancient Israel and the early United States formed governments in an attempt to overcome their unwillingness to obey God.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 4-7.

Today’s passage begins with the Israelites suffering a defeat at the hands of the Philistines.  Instead of seeking an answer from God as to why He did not give them victory, they chose to force His hand by bringing the Ark of the Covenant to the battlefield.  As a result they suffered a devastating defeat and the Ark was captured by the Philistines.  The Philistines interpreted their victory, and capture of the Ark, as evidence that their gods were more powerful than the God of Israel.  God promptly disabused them of this notion. So, the Philistines sent the Ark back to the Israelites in a way which demonstrated God’s power.  Even with the return of the Ark, some of the Israelites failed to properly respect God.  Finally, the people turned once more to worshiping God, and Samuel was prepared to tell them what to do.  At Samuel’s instruction they did away with their various idols, gathered to confess their sins and worship God.  The Philistines mustered their armies to attack the assembled Israelites.  Rather than rely on their own strength, the Israelites begged Samuel to cry out to God for them.  God caused the Philistines to panic and flee before the Israelites.

Initially, when things went bad for Israel, they looked to God for help, but they did not first turn from their sin.  It was only when they repented and sought to serve God that He rescued them.  Let us learn from this and act accordingly.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.