The Character of Kindness

“…So Mephibosheth ate at David’s table like one of the king’s sons.”
2 Samuel 9:11b

What does kindness truly look like in practice? What acts on the part of humanity best encapsulate the character of compassion? To a world that sees no evidence of God’s love these two questions rise to the surface. Consequently, the negative outlook these questions typically frame help both atheists and agnostics justify their belief that either God does not exist or that He does not care enough to intervene in the affairs of mankind. But nothing could be further from the truth. God is a generous God and He is a holy God. He asks that we mirror His divine disposition and reveal a spirit of kindness in our communities. But in our everyday frenzy of self-centered concerns we often bypass the urgency to exercise compassion towards others. Far too often, we choose to focus solely on our own personal bubble, or we choose to harbor grudges against those who have wronged us. But both of these pursuits prevent us from living out a kind heart in a culture that desperately needs to see it.

God’s followers need Scriptural encouragement to combat the fleshly impulse to repel the application of godly kindness. And one such positive example is presented to believers in 2 Samuel 9. In this biblical account, King David had firmly established his position as the successor to King Saul. As we previously reviewed in prior blog posts, Saul was a man who spent the latter part of his life trying to track down David and murder him in cold blood. Jealousy of God’s anointing on David caused Saul to lose all sense of reason, or accept God’s ultimate plan. But eventually Saul died, which paved the way for David to embrace the call of leadership that God had given him so many years earlier. Many transitional skirmishes and rebellions kept Israel divided for a period of time after Saul’s death, but that was effectively put to rest in 2 Samuel 9.

As King David reflected on his blessing as God’s anointed leader he recalled a promise that he had made to Jonathan, Saul’s son and David’s friend (1 Samuel 20). Sadly, Jonathan perished in battle, but the covenant David established with his former comrade was still very fresh in his mind. The oath between Jonathan and David secured David’s loyalty and grace to Jonathan’s family should Jonathan unexpectedly die before David became king, which obviously came to fruition. So it came about one day that David gathered his royal staff and asked if anyone was alive from Saul’s family, besides Michal, Saul’s daughter, who was married to David. A servant named Ziba, who once worked for King Saul, happened to be in Jerusalem and was called into David’s presence. Ziba informed David that Jonathan had a living son named Mephibosheth, who resided in the region of Lo Debar.  

Shortly thereafter, Mephibosheth was taken from Lo Debar and escorted to Jerusalem. As Mephibosheth was ushered into the throne room of the king he surely must have thought the worst. Would he be given an appointment with an executioner? Would his life be snuffed out after ridicule or torture? After all, what king exercises kindness to a former king’s family when it is perceived publicly as a rivalry of power? But David was a man like no other. He encouraged Mephibosheth not to be frightened and announced that he was restoring all of King Saul’s property rights and fortunes to Mephibosheth. Furthermore, he asked Mephibosheth to relocate to Jerusalem so that he and his family could enjoy a seat daily at King David’s dinner table.

Mephibosheth was instantly elevated from a fugitive to a guest of the king. Overnight, he went from rags to riches. His honor and status was essentially on par with David’s sons, giving him prince-like status. David’s generosity towards Mephibosheth was a promise fulfilled. He made a pact with Jonathan to not harm his family should Jonathan pass away. But David took this promise one step further. He made Mephibosheth a noble and a privileged member in the royal family. The significance of this kindness-laden deed speaks volumes to David’s character. There was no external mandate to engage in such lavish good will per se; it was an internal prompting. David recognized God’s benevolence in his life and he, in turn, longed to share the divine benevolence with others, including the family members of his former would-be assassin: Saul.  

 
There was something rare about David’s heart. It was not cold or calculating; it was considerate and compassionate. It was not distant or dead; it was disciplined and devoted. It was not fake or false; it was faithful and forgiving. The man of God was a man of tremendous kindness. Whatever David did, he did extravagantly and wholeheartedly. Truly, David was a man cut from the same spiritual cloth as God. Bear in mind, Scripture does not indicate that Mephibosheth did anything worthy of David’s kindness. Therefore, David’s generosity was unexpected and unmerited. But that so clearly resembles the grace of God. Humanity collectively did nothing to earn God’s favor, but He chooses to bestow blessings and privilege upon us anyway. Therefore, how can we overlook the urge to share undeserved grace and gentleness to our fellow man? How can we not reveal a character like David’s – a character of kindness?

The Wonder of Worship

“David and the whole house of Israel were celebrating with all their might before the Lord, with songs…”

2 Samuel 6:5a

 

Worship. It can be defined as either the reverence given to a divine being, or the extravagant respect rendered to an object. The subtle wording difference separating the two focal points fundamentally transforms the underlying priorities and pursuits of our lives. Worship should be reserved for humanity’s daily offering to God, but so many times we choose to present our heart’s attention to trinkets, or idols. Clearly, this is not how God intended it to be. Scripture affirms that no obsession should overtake the obsession to know the Lord and be enamored with Him. His love, knowledge, and power merit our undying dedication and admiration. But to engage in an undying, divine dedication and admiration mankind must bring itself to a state of humble submission, and resist the temptation to allow other fixations to divert us from strengthening our relationship with God.

 

Numerous biblical passages highlight the disastrous ramifications of worshipping anyone or anything but God: Adam and Eve’s desire to chase God-like status (Genesis 3), the Hebrew nation’s desire to craft a visible, false god made of precious metal (Exodus 32), and Achan’s desire to steal unpermitted loot from conquered settlements (Joshua 7). Therefore, the Scriptural moments that underscore peoples’ willingness to elevate praising God over everything else are rare and refreshing. And such a moment is presented in 2 Samuel 6. The past few blog posts have addressed verses in 1 Samuel, which calls attention to David’s hurdle-ridden ascension to the throne of Israel. The would-be king encountered much heartache and pain before he was given the reigns to lead a nation. God removed the relational crutches of David’s life and compelled David to find a revitalized ability to lean on God like never before. David was eventually crowned king of Israel officially in 2 Samuel 5. The long-awaited day had finally arrived. No doubt, this event was met with excitement and relief on David’s part.

 

But the thirty year old king wasted no time in getting civil affairs in order. David relocated from Hebron to Jerusalem, perhaps because the Jerusalem territory provided a more defendable position in the elevated, mountainous terrain. And when the Philistines learned that David had become Israel’s second king they renewed their unending war campaign against the Hebrew people. So David and the Israelite army fought the Philistines on two different occasions, and routed the fearsome foes both times by seeking God’s guidance and counsel. After this, David set out to retrieve the Ark of the Covenant and take it to Jerusalem. In an effort to speed the journey from Baalah to Jerusalem, David condoned the construction of a cart to transport the holy artifact in a more expeditious manner, even though God had specifically instructed the Ark of the Covenant to be hand-carried by use of gold-plated wooden poles (Exodus 25:15). The penalty of ignoring God’s explicit instruction on the matter resulted in the death of Uzzah, who tried to steady the chest as it was shifting in route. After this, David was dismayed and placed the chest in a nearby residence. But shortly thereafter he reignited the fire to have God’s presence close-by symbolically (represented through the proximity of the Ark of the Covenant). David then had the chest removed from its temporary quarters and moved to Jerusalem, presumably according to the proper transport protocol.

 

As the Ark of the Covenant made its way into Jerusalem David was overwhelmed with exuberant praise. He leapt and danced with great enthusiasm. He initiated the presentation of burnt and peace offerings. As he led the people in worship, his wife, Michal, observed David’s lively conduct with contempt. She perceived David’s animated display of enthusiasm to be unbecoming of a king. But David was a man after God’s own heart and his heart longed to unashamedly honor God, even if it entailed an ecstatic spirit and a passionate posture. The king of Israel had a firm grasp on a timeless truth: there is wonder in worshipping God. That the Maker of heaven and earth would so compassionately reach out to His creation is nothing short of astounding. David’s astute hold of this consideration induced him to exercise a jubilant, energetic veneration of God.            

 

Consider the sharp contrast between David and Michael through this account. The king was submerged in a worship-filled attitude of astonishment whereas his wife was submerged in a disdain-filled attitude of anger. In God, David was satisfied and happy. In her husband (and in an incorrect assumption of civil behavior), Michael was scornful and hateful. The opposing focal points generated completely different worldviews. This begs the question, “What is our life engrossed with?” Is it God, or something/someone else? David’s example underscores that God is the goal and purpose in life. To know Him. To respond to Him. To be captivated by Him. To praise Him. To accept His love and reciprocate it to the world. There is an inexhaustible joy that comes from a fellowship and nearness to God. When we feel His presence and we are engrossed in His heavenly message we are wholly placed in an atmosphere of joy, a joy that can overcome past or present pain-filled memories. This was at the heart of David’s dance-filled demonstration of worship. He possessed a joy, a joy that seemed foreign to many others, including Michal, his wife. But this did not deter the king from engaging and exercising the wonder of worship. After all, David was not concerned with how others perceived it; he was only concerned with presenting his wonder-filled worship offering directly to God.

The Blame Game

“David was greatly distressed because the men were talking of stoning him; each one was bitter in spirit because of his sons and daughters. But David found strength in the Lord his God.”

1 Samuel 30:6

 

It always seems that in tragic circumstances mankind looks to find someone or something to blame. After all, clarity often eludes us when we are fighting back tears and fighting back heartache. Somehow cause and effect relationships tend to give us some false sense of understanding in grief-filled times. But no matter how hard we search to lay the liability for discomfort on another we forget that nothing can ever comfort us like God can. Whether in travesty or triumph, maintaining and deepening a relationship with the Lord should be our central pursuit.

 

The last few blogs have focused on the years David lived prior to becoming king over Israel. Scripture highlights some impressive moments in David’s youth: being anointed the next king by Samuel the priest, slaying a fearsome giant named Goliath, and being employed in Samuel’s court to soothe the king when he became vexed with a depressed spirit. But just as quickly as these biblical memories are established we read that David became public enemy number one in Israel. Saul’s jealousy of David’s popularity and his bravery caused the king to desire David’s death. A fugitive existence for the shepherd boy ensued, which led David to zigzag inside and outside surrounding territories for several months. In fact, the entirety of David’s renegade running encompasses some eleven chapters in 1 Samuel, implying that David’s years hiding from Saul were many and treacherous.

 

As the time for David’s exile came to a close there was one dramatic event that nearly brought about yet another premature death experience for the future king of Israel. The setting for the incident is pretty remarkable. As a last ditch effort to evade Saul’s murderous grasp, David and his brigade sought refuge in Philistine land, which in and of itself is incredible because the Philistines were the most reviled enemy nation of Israel in the Old Testament. To show David’s loyalty to the Philistine people he and his fellow men marched with the Philistines to join them in battle against Israel (although one wonders if David would have found an alternate way of attempting to combat his own brethren had it come to that). But the Philistine rulers did not endorse David joining their ranks and sent David away from the battle staging area. As David and his men returned to their temporary home, Ziklag, the Amalekites attacked the city, likely knowing it was practically defenseless with the Philistines away on a war campaign. The Amalekites burned Ziklag and took the women and children away as their captives.

 

Imagine the emotional upheaval that transpired in David’s heart. Just a few days prior, God had miraculously intervened and released him from a no-win situation by excusing his involvement in the Philistine/Israel battle through the directive of the Philistine rulers. In gratitude and relief he and his men made their way to Ziklag to reunite with their families. But as they neared the town they likely saw smoldering smokestacks filling the sky. In disbelief, they beheld a decimated city. Their world was instantly turned upside-down. Joy became sorrow. Hope became bitterness. Victory became loss. And what happens when our lives are suddenly flooded with sorrow, bitterness, and loss? We look for someone or something to blame. And David’s men pointed accusing fingers at David. 1 Samuel 30:6 denotes that their pain and anger was so great that they openly discussed stoning David on the spot. David had been spared from Saul’s hand on more than one occasion but now he found himself minutes away from a deathly treason from his own fellow fugitives.

 

So how did David respond? He turned to God. How many of us can honestly say that we would do what David did in this situation? David inquired of God rather than in himself or other men. With his emotions screaming out for action, David reacted by seeking God’s will, guidance, and blessing. He was patient and disposed to waiting on God, even though his life literally hung in the balance. David chose God in a moment of utter vulnerability and sadness. The Lord was clearly his rock and refuge. His shelter and source of strength. Through each day and each trial we have opportunities to place our faith and trust in God. Will we submit to God or try to overcome adversity through our own efforts? David revealed his believed in the former. He fortified his spirit in God. We should endeavor to do the same. 

The Chaos of Conflict

“But David thought to himself, ‘One of these days I will be destroyed by the hand of Saul…’”
1 Samuel 27:1
 

Last week’s blog focused on how David, the designated replacement to Saul’s royal throne, was ushered into a gauntlet of trials and tribulations, and yet managed to receive God-ordained encouragement in the midst of strife. The would-be king was a fugitive for many years. David crisscrossed his country and surrounding regions to avoid the murderous grasp of King Saul. But God’s benevolent hand was on the youngest son of Jesse and even when David entered a cave in Adullam in 1 Samuel 22 God revealed Himself in a most unusual and magnificent way. People of desperation and brokenness came from all over to reside with David. The down-and-out opted to share in David’s tragedy. The loner was no longer alone. God’s grace and comfort could still be found, even in a cave-dwelling experience.  

This lesson fast forwards many years past David’s temporary stay at a cave in Adullam. By 1 Samuel 27 David had endured much relocation just to try and stay ahead of Saul’s army. David was likely exhausted, discouraged, and losing hope. In fact, 1 Samuel 27:1 conveys that David started to believe Saul would eventually find him and kill him, thus voiding out God’s promise to establish David as Israel’s second king. But God has never broken a pledge and never will. He is the eternal covenant-keeping God Whose word is bond. But conflict, after all, has a way of defeating the mightiest warriors before the battle has ended, and David was one of the mightiest emotional and spiritual warriors in Scripture. Through the haze of conflict, David probably surveyed the potential outcome and determined that the odds of escaping Saul’s manhunt were heavily stacked against him.

Conflict was a cross that David had to bear for the sum of his life. Conflict with enemies outside Israel. Conflict with enemies within Israel. Conflict with family members. Some of the conflict was self-inflicted through negligence and disobedience. But some of the conflict arose from forces outside David’s sphere of influence or control. All of which speaks to a world that is wrecked relationally. Sadly, the sin of humanity puts God’s followers into conflict with God, with other people, and within ourselves. David’s life shines a spotlight on the relational conflict we continually face. But the once shepherd boy provides us some insightful conduct that modern-day believers should observe and follow.

David, the man after God’s own heart, was a man knit to God’s Word. And thus he found the strength to carry on even when all his future appeared bleak. David led a band of some six-hundred men, along with wives and children, through backwoods, caves, and enemy territories to survive day after day. He understood that each day was enough trouble of its own so it was best to give the one, true God each day, and let the Lord settle future matters in His divine plan. David was presented many opportunities to compromise his standards and abandon God, but, for the most part, he chose to believe in the Lord, no matter how misplaced his confidence seemed on the surface. The underlying message is that we, as God’s followers, need to serve the Lord each day and entrust Him with tomorrow. May the Creator of heaven and earth give us the confidence to carry through our days, and help us joyfully engage the chaos of conflict.  

Comfort in Emotional Cave-Dwelling

“David left Gath and escaped to the cave of Adullam. When his brothers and his father’s household heard about it, they went down to him there. All those who were in distress or in debt or discontented gathered around him, and he became their leader. About four hundred were with him.”

1 Samuel 22:1-2

Calamity. Strife. Hardship. Suffering. Life is certainly not without its share of setbacks. At one point or another we are bound to experience a disconcerting series of events that will test our resolve and character. And this is the setting in which we approach 1 Samuel 22. David had recently undergone a pendulum swing of sentiments. At the emotional mountaintop, David had been anointed by Samuel the priest (per God’s supernatural guidance) to replace Saul as Israel’s king (1 Samuel 16). Not long after, David showed immense courage and toppled a fearsome warrior and giant named Goliath (1 Samuel 17). People praised David’s bravery, which sparked a jealous rage in Saul. And shortly thereafter David was ushered into an emotional valley. David was forced to flee for his life because King Saul had determined to kill David. Beginning in 1 Samuel 19 David embarked upon a fugitive lifestyle. He crisscrossed Israel’s landscape, and even went outside to neighboring enemy territories to evade Saul’s vindictive grasp.

In 1 Samuel 22 David came to reside in the cave of Adullam. Interestingly enough, Adullam was not far from where David defeated Goliath. Furthermore, it was only some 13 miles west of Bethlehem, where David was raised. But even though the cave of Adullam was near David’s homeland a cave is still a cave and its cold, dark environment reflected the emotional state David likely was captive to upon his travels to Adullam. Realize that much had been taken away from David because of Saul. David had been stripped of his best friend, Jonathan, Saul’s son. He had been stripped of his wife, Michal, Saul’s daughter. He had been stripped of his service as a musician in Saul’s court. He had been stripped of his dignity and his ability to sleep without fear of dying a sudden, murderous death. All that David had left was a promise from God that he would be the next king of Israel, which contained an implication that he would somehow survive Saul’s homicidal quest. 

 

But nothing on the surface looked hopeful for David. He was not only at odds against his king, a king fully committed to exhausting the country’s resources in order to slay David, but he was at odds with his own countrymen for many were loyal to King Saul and if they discovered David’s whereabouts they would not hesitate to disclose David’s location, knowing it would likely lead to David’s demise. David was effectively on his own, which is a frightening place to find yourself. The giant-slayer swiftly became a cave-dweller. He went from being revered to being a renegade in mere moments. The heir apparent to the throne was reduced to running and hiding in caves just to stay alive. Life can turn upside-down without warning. But notice what transpired after David settled in the cave of Adullam: some four-hundred downtrodden people came to settle there with David too.

Suddenly, the loner was not alone. At first glance, this crowd of debtors and discontents may not seem like the optimal body of people that would provide solace to a crushed, devastated David. But God knew exactly what He was doing and revealed His sovereign hand in this situation. Who could better understand the depth of despair than those who were mired in doubt and disillusionment? Who could better relate to David than those who had lost much? Who could better seek comfort in pain with David than those who were themselves grief-stricken? But here is the underlying message about this chapter in David’s life: our foundation and footing is on God, and not anyone or anything else. Saul’s hunt for David forced David to rely upon God like never before. The Lord had to become the spiritual shelter in which David inhabited. When a person learns to trust God in all things and stand on His holy, everlasting word then he or she can become a mighty agent of God. This was true of David. It should be true of us.

Halfhearted Devotion

“But Samuel replied, ‘Does the Lord delight in burnt offerings as much as in obeying the voice of the Lord? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams.’”

1 Samuel 15:22
 

There is an inherent struggle that humanity grapples with every day: the desire to obscure, or disobey, the expressed will of God. We do not always start out with this unholy objective, but one way or another we usually find ourselves trying to reinterpret and reapply a divine doctrine that God has clearly articulated. This is sometimes referred to as halfhearted devotion. Our initial steps may be God-centered but somewhere along life’s path our heart becomes mired in self-centered pursuits, which causes us to veer away from the straight and narrow, spiritually-speaking. A fitting example of halfhearted devotion is found in the biblical example of King Saul, Israel’s first royal leader.

Last week we reviewed the setting in which the Hebrew people embarked upon the establishment of a civil governance structure. Samuel the priest attempted to dissuade his kinsmen from this danger-filled direction, but his warnings fell on deaf ears. The Israelites were bound and determined to behave and function just like all their neighboring countries. Their fellow nations had kings so the Hebrew people wanted to resemble them. The primary problem is that all the other nations were pagan and displayed no reverence for God. In effect, they were seeking to supplant God’s rule for the reign of man. Therefore, the Israelites were unknowingly charting a course for chaos, catastrophe, and carnality.    

Even though the shameful quest of the Hebrew people likely wounded God, since it was counter to His authoritative design for His followers, He granted the people their request for a king. In 1 Samuel 10:1 Saul, a Benjamite, was anointed by Samuel as king over Israel. While there were some noble qualities that Saul possessed it was his propensity for willingly choosing to reject God’s instruction and replace it with his own that ultimately undid his legacy. For example, in 1 Samuel 13 Saul formally led his army in burnt and fellowship offerings, a right that was reserved for the priests. And in 1 Samuel 15 Saul set up a monument in his own honor, clearly dishonoring God’s command to have no other gods before Him. Offense after offense made a compelling case for Saul’s removal as leader over the Hebrew people. 

And so God did eventually determine that Saul’s ancestors would not retain the privilege of reigning over the Israelites. The rebuke that Samuel gave Saul in 1 Samuel 15:22-24 is a message that resonates to every generation of God’s believers. Sacrifice means nothing without obedience. In other words, ritualistic acts are just that if there is no admiration for God embedded in the heart of the ones engaging in the ritualistic acts. Saul was called out for his continual exhibition of spiritual duplicity. On the surface, he appeared to be praising God by going through the motions of worship. But on the inside his inner thoughts were not focused on the Lord.

Saul sought the respect of the nation, but did not respect the benevolent hand of God. His casual and careless attitude toward worship cost him dearly. It is crucial that the followers of God guard the intentions of the heart. It is not enough to honor God partially, or even mostly. We need to honor Him wholeheartedly. God’s love does not go halfway and neither should our obedience. We need to give an all-out kind of effort.

 
In the end, Saul’s kingly rule reveals that halfhearted devotion is total disobedience. And God deserves better than that. He deserves our best. He deserves everything we can give. Our commitment should be genuine, sincere, and unwavering. Anything less is halfhearted devotion and halfhearted devotion does not bring glory to the God of heaven and earth.

The Danger of Placing Civil Leaders Above God

“So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. They said to him, ‘You are old, and your sons do not walk in your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have.”

1 Samuel 8:4-5

Authority. It is something humanity desperately requires to function and thrive. But is also something that we often reject, rail against, and run from. If mankind were left to its own vices we would wound one another with complete and utter disregard for the sanctity of life. We need boundaries, guidance, and discipline. So the underlying question is: where do we turn for supreme authority? Although many of us would probably boast that we submit to God’s leadership is there any evidential outpouring of that commitment? Is holy doctrine exhibited in our daily conduct? Is God’s commanding word really the framework upon which our plans and pursuits are structured? Is the Lord’s message actively and beautifully displayed in our continual actions?

God is the ultimate authority. He is the definitive source of wisdom and intellect. But the original temptation of humanity, the temptation that was given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:4), is the same temptation that plagues us today: that we can replace God’s authority with our own. So often the deluded rationale flows like this:

·         If we can become like God then there is no need for God’s rule
·         If there is no need for God’s rule then we are free to rule ourselves
·         If we are free to rule ourselves then we are beholden to no higher authority

Whether we admit it or not we are subject to some level of authority in our everyday dealings. Whether in the workplace, home, church, municipal law system, or at an academic institution, authorities exist and affect our lives. But the underlying question still remains: where do we turn for supreme authority? We will find through an Old Testament passage that some choose to place their total trust and confidence in the lives of their fellow man.

In 1 Samuel 7, the Hebrew people were still governed through a theocratic model, meaning the Israelites were guided by the divine leadership of God. There was no human atop a civil institution. Sure there were tribal elders and priests, but even the elders and priests were charged to lead under God’s specific direction and guidance. God was rightly placed above all others. But a major turning point occurred in 1 Samuel 8. The people observed that Samuel’s sons were corrupted men. Like Eli, Samuel’s predecessor, the next generation of priests had fallen short of the godly heritage set before them, and the Hebrew community was disturbed. They were so disturbed that they wanted to upend the entire authority structure, a structure that God had established. Rather than prayerfully approach the matter the people rallied together and devised a self-made scheme, a scheme that would radically alter the spirituality and livelihood of Israel for many years to come.

This was a defining point in Hebrew history. In one weak moment, the people chose to instill their hope in man instead of God. They chose civil government over their Creator. A civil government, by the way, that was devised and practiced by pagan nations. Samuel was distraught with the request for a Hebrew king. He tried to talk the people out of chasing this course. His warnings were stern and accurate. A king’s reign requires much, which comes entirely at the expense of a kingdom’s citizens. Empires have to be continually replenished with land, money, soldiers, and possessions. Such demands are not inexpensive. They come at a steep price, financially and emotionally. Samuel highlighted nothing positive about kings. But the people refused to heed Samuel’s counsel. In essence, God told Samuel that the rejection of Samuel’s advice was not against Samuel – it was against the Lord.

The day that the Israelites asked for a king was a dark day. It set in motion a series of missteps and misguided behavior. Israel itself would later break apart as a unified nation of twelve tribes because of an immature king (1 Kings 12). Idolatry and debauchery would eventually flourish under the rule of numerous immoral Hebrew kings. After all, it is hard to resist imitating the beliefs and practices of a powerful figurehead, which is why God never sought to institute a man-based authoritative composition for His followers.

In summary, humanity should never seek to view any man above God. The Lord should be our decisive authority. He should be the One in Who we turn to for direction, guidance, counsel, and hope. It is in God that we trust. Let His followers be a people that know and show that God’s authority is the authority that truly matters. After all, God is the real King – the eternal King. No man-based authority can ever overturn God’s sovereign, all-powerful reign. To Him be the glory forever and ever.     

The Positive (and Negative) Influence of Parenthood

 

“Eli’s sons were wicked men; they had no regard for the Lord.”

1 Samuel 2:12

 

One of the most profound and sobering privileges in life is found in parenthood. It produces incredible, reciprocating blessings. But the parental blessing also demands intense commitment and resolve in order to be fully realized. Guardianship is not for the faint of heart for it requires a taxing disposition, a disposition that should include discipline, patience, compassion, grace, love, conviction, spiritual intensity and consistency, a kingdom-oriented focus, and an unyielding desire to model, and instruct, godly virtues day-in and day-out. Parenthood is clearly more than supplying food and clothing needs to children; it is about dispensing wisdom and guiding impressionable, tender minds in the ways and Word of God. Unfortunately, history is littered with many examples of individuals who failed to accept, or cherish, the call of parenthood. In the process, they squandered precious opportunities to nobly lead receptive souls into a redemptive, God-glorifying existence.

 

And such is the case study captured in the latter half of 1 Samuel 2. In this passage, the text focuses on three key characters: Eli and his two sons (Hophni and Phinehas). Eli was a high priest stationed in Shiloh, where the Ark of the Covenant was at the time. In 1 Samuel 2:12, Eli’s sons were old enough to have assumed some of the priestly duties. But Scripture offers a rebuke of Eli’s sons. In short, they were wicked. They utilized their ministry positions to extract additional food offerings from the Hebrew people for their own pleasure, or profit perhaps. Plus, they participated in non-marital sexual acts with women assigned to be helpers in the ceremonial worship tasks. Clearly, Eli’s sons did not appreciate the tremendous and influential responsibilities they had been given. The Bible states in 1 Samuel 2:17 that the sins of the young priests were great, indicating the offenses they were committing were not trivial. Furthermore, there appeared to be no remorse on the part of Hophni and Phinehas. It would seem that this lewd behavior went on for many years. God’s Word mentions the sins of Eli’s sons began when Samuel was a young boy, but it was only when Samuel had grown up that Scripture makes note of Eli’s rebuke of the immoral conduct of his sons, confirming that this was a pattern that had long been practiced.

 

Although the demeanor of Hophni and Phinehas is deplorable and inexcusable, it is Eli’s absentee fatherly authority that is of particular interest for this analysis. By this I mean Eli likely had numerous opportunities to condemn the actions of his sons, but apparently chose not to say anything until the corrupted morality had been firmly entrenched in Hophni and Phinehas. Eli’s extended silence essentially communicated approval. Presented several windows of influence, the high priest opted to abandon his paternal role. Eli withdrew when he desperately needed to engage. He retreated when he needed to confront. He condoned when he needed to chastise. He willingly chose not to exercise His God-given position of guidance. As a result, untold scores of Israelites were hurt, frustrated, and confused by the ministry negligence ushered in through Eli’s sons. And somehow Eli was content with allowing the worship carelessness to continue during his watch.

 

To abuse the platform of ministry is a most horrid thought, and God does not view it favorably. Religious leaders are charged to motivate others through biblically-based integrity, not self-centered intentions. Eli lost sight of this godly pursuit. In fact, 1 Samuel 2:29 implies that Eli himself partook in the excess food offerings, the shameful practice that his sons had helped establish. Instead of a father positively influencing his sons, the sons were negatively influencing their father. This was completely backwards. Eli should have inspired his sons through a humble and sacrificial lifestyle. He should not have succumbed to the appalling values that Hophni and Phinehas held. But when our spiritual vision veers away from God and becomes fixated on ourselves then the holy boundaries Scripture defines are quickly and routinely discarded.

 

In the end, Eli’s legacy was marred by the shameful etiquette of his sons. He could have said corrective words earlier. He could have prayed earnestly for divine intercession. He could have stood opposed to the path of fraud and publicly reprimanded Hophni and Phinehas. But Eli apparently did none of the above. And thus the positive, or negative, influence of parenthood calls parents of every generation to embrace and rightly lead children in the ways and Word of God. It is an ultra-critical issue because the decency, or depravity, of family, and thereby society, hangs in the balance.

A Vow to Cherish

“In bitterness of soul Hannah wept much and prayed to the Lord. And she made a vow…”

1 Samuel 1:10-11a

 

Vows. We tend to view them within the context of marriage ceremonies, in which brides and grooms exchange beautifully emotional declarations to one another. Many modern-day wedding services incorporate vows into their programs, and articulate a desire to exhibit an enduring love, a love that prevails in all circumstances, through the best of health and the worst of sickness. How tragic then that so many marriages fail to live up to the promise vocalized during the ceremonial vows? Divorce is rationalized and justified in some cases with little-to-no plausible pretext, and certainly no visible expression of an enduring, compassionate love. An enduring, compassionate love, by the way, that is often formally pledged to be unconditionally rendered, no matter what hardships arise. And even for the marriages that do not encounter divorce how many spouses can wholeheartedly say they enjoy a marital environment that daily yields spiritually rich blessings, including love, laughter, meaningful companionship, and deep communication? All of which are referenced, or alluded to, in wedding vows.     

 

So what are we to glean from the aforementioned considerations? And what are we to better understand about vows? To fully appreciate the significance of these questions we must look to a biblical example of a woman, Hannah, who made an unforgettable vow. 1 Samuel 1 introduces us to Hannah, and the difficult situation she found herself submerged in. The narrative that identifies her trying condition is brief, but packed with ample information. 1 Samuel 1:2 says Hannah was one of two wives married to Elkanah. Elkanah’s other wife had several children, “but Hannah had none.” Four short words tell us so much about the immense adversity Hannah constantly battled.

 

Hannah’s barrenness probably sparked feelings of discouragement, jealously, pain, and despair. There were children running throughout her house, but none of them were ushered into this world through her body. She knew what it meant to tend to children’s needs as a surrogate mother, but she never knew the joy of carrying a child in her womb. Even though she probably performed her share of the maternal responsibilities with much diligence and tenderness, the likelihood that she herself would never conceive a child had to feel like an emotional dagger, a dagger that continually widened an open wound. She had never experienced the incredible privilege of pregnancy and longed for the opportunity to be divinely entrusted with a life in her care. She was so close, and yet seemingly so far away.

 

How did Hannah respond to her grief? How did she react to her dismay? She rightly took her plight to the throne of God, the appropriate source for matters that burden the heart. Hannah stated her case and pleaded for holy benevolence. She did not insist that the Lord meet her demands; she inquired for God to hear her out. She did not list stipulations to God; she spoke supplications. And the root cause of Hannah’s desire to bear a child was clearly communicated in the vow she proclaimed in 1 Samuel 1:11. Her singular desire to bear a child was so that her offspring might be a noble instrument of God. And she proved this by conveying her willingness to turn over the child to the ministry if God would see fit to answer her prayer and vow. Dwell on the impact of this. That which Hannah so yearned for, a child, she was willing to relinquish to God.

 

There is almost nothing harder in this world to imagine than a mother releasing her child, especially at so young an age. But that is exactly what Hannah professed, and eventually did. She understood that vows are honorable, and should be cherished and kept. Hannah did not seek to elevate her social status in the eyes of others or herself. She sought to glorify God in all matters, including her barrenness. As Hannah confirmed, vows are intensely solemn commitments. They are meant to be unbreakable oaths, oaths that cannot be recanted or retracted. Hannah handled her life matters with spiritual strength, courage, and gratitude. In the end, Hannah did not lose a son, she gained three boys and two girls (1 Samuel 2:21). It is remarkable how God can return and multiply even small seeds of faith and trust. God responded in abundant fashion to Hannah’s need. Her vow ignited a testimony that has inspired many generations past her lifetime. What vows will we make that might do the same?

The Prevailing Provision of God

“The women said to Naomi, ‘Praise be to the Lord, who this day has not left you without a kinsman-redeemer. May he become famous throughout Israel.’”

Ruth 4:14   

 

Last week we reviewed the opening chapter of Ruth – a touching account of a widowed daughter-in-law (Ruth) who chose to intertwine her destiny with her widowed mother-in-law (Naomi). This was a cherished commitment, and one that Ruth could have opted out of. But even though Ruth had a spiritually pagan upbringing she possessed a noble quality of faith and believed in the one true God who Naomi worshipped. Therefore, Ruth willingly and bravely left her Moabite homeland and journeyed with Naomi to reside in Bethlehem. In the process, Ruth became a believer in the Lord and would soon come to discover how a kernel of faith can be richly blessed by God.  

 

The closing verses of Ruth paint a stirring picture of the prevailing provision of God. But before we consider God’s hand of blessing we must briefly assess two ancient customs inherent in this text, two ancient customs that appear unorthodox to a modern-day audience:

1) The divine instruction allowing the monetarily destitute to glean from fallen crops

and

2) The observance of kinsmen-redeemers to restore widowed family members

 

The divine instruction allowing the financially destitute to glean from fallen crops is a commandment which originates from Leviticus 23:22. In this passage, God provided a mechanism to help provide food for the poor and needy, and not just the lowly within the Hebrew community, but those outside it as well. This became a custom honored by Jewish households for many generations, including the estate of Boaz, which is where Ruth went to glean crops so that she could help feed herself and Naomi. This action illustrates the incredible humility of Ruth. Gleaning the crops of others was essentially the last-ditch effort performed by starving and wholly penniless individuals. It was a sign of total poverty and often a social stigma for those who were seen gathering leftover harvested crops. But Ruth cared little for pretense or personal perception on the part of strangers. She possessed a modest spirit and was more concerned with attending to her mother-in-law than virtually anything else.

 

Regarding the kinsman-redeemer practice this model was established by God in the latter part of Leviticus 25. God designed a system by which family members could reinstate the property and legacy of widowed and impoverished relatives. And it would come to pass that Ruth would realize that Naomi had a close genealogical connection to Boaz. Eventually, this seemingly happenstance set of events would be revealed as the majestic working of God. Boaz claimed his right as kinsman-redeemer to Naomi, and thereby gladly welcomed the opportunity to enter into marriage with Naomi’s daughter-in-law (Ruth). The tale of tragedy transformed into one of the most amazing stories of love and restoration in Scripture. It is remarkable how God can take ashes and turn them into something beautiful.

 

The final analysis of Ruth reveals that God’s prevailing provision can reign down no matter how bleak our circumstances may be. Ruth and Naomi were deluged by disheartening conditions. But Ruth chose not to dwell on the state of affairs. She chose to press ahead and see what each new day held. This story speaks to the unmistakably good nature of God. All things are possible with Him. No cave is too dark. No valley is too low. No mountain is too high. No wind is too strong. No storm is too great. In everything, God can overcome. All He requires of us is faith and trust. Let us serve Him and find significance and relevance in the biblical tale of Ruth. Clearly, God works. God saves. God heals. God provides. In short, God is God and delights in caring for His people.

The Splendor of Sacrifice

“But Ruth replied, ‘Don’t urge me to leave you or to turn back from you. Where you will go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there I will be buried. May the Lord deal with me, be it ever so severely, if anything but death separates you and me.’ When Naomi realized that Ruth was determined to go with her, she stopped urging her.” 

Ruth 1:16-18

Many of us can recall past defining moments, moments in which we were at an emotional crossroads. Emotional crossroads provide significant alternatives. And each alternative has a subsequent ripple effect that can either mend a heart, or agonize it. There are numerous emotional crossroads that people face every day. Seeking marital counseling or seeking a divorce. Entertaining a job change or sticking it out in a seemingly unfulfilling environment. Accepting a ministry calling or declining it. Confronting a family member/friend about a relational transgression or allowing the relational burden to continue to afflict without hope of resolution. Such decisions carry a great weight for internally we know that the end result of our wise, or unwise, choices will likely affect the remaining years of our earthly pilgrimage.

Obviously, emotional crossroads contain paths that led to very different directions. And in order to forge ahead a path must be chosen. And it is in this atmosphere that we encounter the biblical text captured in Ruth 1. Ruth, a Moabite, and an outsider to the Jewish community, had experienced the death of her husband. Ruth’s mother-in-law, Naomi, a Hebrew, had experienced the death of her husband too, as well as the death of her two sons, one of whom had been married to Ruth. It would seem that Naomi’s family had made a bold, and perhaps hasty, decision many years prior to leave Israel (Bethlehem specifically) for Moab because of a severe famine. As they learned to acclimate to life in Moab Naomi’s sons determined to marry local women, a practice that was discouraged in the Old Testament because of the vast spiritual divide that existed between the Jewish people and the rest of the world. Realize that ancient eastern civilizations engaged in polytheism, the worship of many false gods. But the Hebrew people recognized there was but one God, Who was the Creator of life, and is the Sustainer of life.      

When Naomi learned that people in Judah were once again beginning to see a positive yield in their agricultural produce she set out to return to her homeland. But she realized the fate of her daughters-in-law was obligated to her because of the commitment two young women had made to her family by marrying her sons. There was an inherent vow that was established and observed in this society, and it was a pledge that was not easily broken. Since Naomi knew her daughters-in-law were not originally of the Jewish faith-set, nor native to Israel, she relinquished them of their promise and informed them they were free to continue to reside in Moab. One daughter-in-law (Orpah) took the offer, but not Ruth. She surveyed the emotional crossroads and devoted her life to her mother-in-law. Naomi’s destiny would be Ruth’s destiny.

Consider the depth of Ruth’s actions and response in Ruth 1:16-17. She was leaving everything she knew behind in order to journey to a foreign land and dwell with a foreign people. Her entire existence rested in Moab. It was where she grew up. It was the only culture and theology she had ever known in her youth. But Ruth was ready to let it all go so that she could provide comfort and encouragement to her mother-in-law. And she was ready and willing to embrace the monotheistic worship of God, a belief system that was completely alien to the Moabites. Even though the family connection to Naomi had practically been severed with the death of Naomi’s son and Ruth’s husband, Ruth still perceived Naomi to be her primary family, and to Ruth families stay together, no matter what. This passage beautifully illustrates the splendor of sacrifice.

Ruth exhibited a sense of allegiance to Naomi, and could not bear to see Naomi live out her remaining years alone. So she chose to go with Naomi. To support her. To serve her. This disposition is rare and precious indeed. Ruth could have sought self-preservation and prosperity in her native country. But she abandoned the road of familiarity and took the unknown path, revealing an exorbitant amount of faith on her part. Such loyalty and selfless acts are truly special and God-honoring, which partially explains the endearing and powerful qualities of this story. May our heart, like Ruth’s, be willing to expose the splendor of sacrifice, no matter where the sacrificial path leads us.