Vineyard Bible Study blog

ch-ch-ch-changes

2009-11-07T10:12:00.000-08:00

turn and face the change! significant and exciting changes are afoot at the central maryland vineyard. don’t miss this coming Sunday’s family meeting, where we will envision the way forward for our faith community!

(also: don’t forget next Sunday is our celebration of the past for this historic church within the Vineyard movement. we’ll be telling stories of what God has done. it will be a little like that line from the U2 song “window in the skies”: “O can’t you see what Love has done!!”)

see you there!

peace

Currently Delayed

2009-10-14T03:59:00.000-07:00

we are currently delayed in terms of the bible study blog...hopefully we'll see you in a few weeks.

Authentic Faith and (Un)Civil War

2009-10-07T03:47:00.000-07:00

one more week until we dive into 2 Samuel. Until then, you can listen to John Odean from the Central Maryland Vineyard teach on Jonathan and his authentic faith...

see you next week for the next teaching series: (Un)Civil War

Finding God in the Wilderness

2009-09-30T03:02:00.001-07:00

Next week we dive back into our text and enter 2 Samuel...

in the mean time, here is another teaching from Nick Sutton of the Coventry Vineyard in the UK, teaching through Samuel, Nick considers finding God in the wilderness of our lives...

see you next week!

Lego 1 Samuel

2009-09-23T03:12:00.000-07:00

a little first Samuel fun while we are in-between 1 and 2 Samuel:

Mythbusters - 5 of 5

2009-09-09T02:57:00.000-07:00

Welcome to our final study in the current series, Mythbusters. If you missed our previous introduction and first few series, you can go back and start at the beginning:

Introductory guidance
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (4-part series)
National (In)security (6-part series)

If you are just joining the Mythbuster series, here is where we have been thus far:

Today's session should take between 45 minutes to an hour.

So, as usual, find a quiet space. Sit down and take a few breaths.

Ready? Let's begin...

Section one. The Medium and the Message.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 28:1-12, then click back here.

The pace of the narrative picks up here as the gathering of forces for battle casts a shadow across the lives of our characters. Now that David is a vassal of a Philistine chieftain, is he going to fight against Israel in this war? The tension rises for the reader, but we are quickly carried off into the further and final obsessive quest of Saul for divine guidance.

The text introduces Saul's continued quest for divine guidance with a note that Samuel had died, and that previously - although unbeknownst to us - Saul had banished the practice of necromancy and driven mediums "from the land" or in this case, "underground". It's interesting to note that although the Hebrew literally says that "Saul had taken away 'obot and yidde'onim from the land," the translations are usually, "...ghosts and familiar spirits," spooky, huh? Gensenius' Lexicon gives us an understanding of 'obot, which is plainly translated as "container of water" but in context would pertain to one who evokes the dead by power of incantations or magical songs in order to give answers or tell the future. Gensenius specifically says that 'obot "specially, it denotes - (a) a python, or a soothsaying daemon, of which these men were believed to be possessed; Lev. 20:27..."a man or woman when a python is in them;" the picture - like an empty bottle filled with water - is of the person being filled with the daemon spirit and that the spirit enters their soul and unites with it. The yidde'onim were basically the spirits of divination.

Robert Alter explains all this talk of ghosts and spirits: "The two Hebrew terms, 'ovot and yid'onim, are generally paired, and both refer to the spirits of the dead. (The latter is derived from the verbal root y-d-', "to know," and so prepares the way for the reappearance of the theme of [withheld] knowledge that has been stalking Saul from the beginning of his story.) The ghosts and familiar spirits are linked metonymically with the necromancers who call them up - it is the latter who of course would have been the actual object of Saul's purge - but the terms themselves primarily designate the spirits...necromancy in the ancient Hebrew world is conceived not as mere hocus pocus but as a potentially efficacious technology of the realm of spirits which, however, has been prohibited by God, Who wants no human experts interfering in this realm."

Yet Saul is not to be denied this time, as his drought from YHWH even as our text says he inquired of YHWH but was answered...neither by dreams nor by Urim nor by prophets; thus he orders his men to seek out a medium. Notice the leitmotif of clothing again, Saul changes his clothes to disguise himself. Alter notes that this disguise of Saul is the unwitting symbolic gensture in that it is the penultimate instance of Saul divesting himself again of royalty and kingship.

The Hebrew word for medium is interesting: 'eset 'ob, which is translted by some as ghostwife. This marriage/relational language goes back to the Hebrew word-picture of being filled and united in your soul with this spirit; thus the relational language of marriage is used to tease out the depths at which she has joined herself with the spirits.

Thus, Saul is so desperate and has sunk to such depths that he disguises himself and by night rendevous he seeks out the shade of Samuel.

Now, let's read 1 Samuel 28:13-25, then return here.

Check out this dramatic "witch of endor" scene from a movie:

[did you notice that the voice of Samuel was that of Leonard Nimoy of Star Trek fame?]

I think Gleason Archer's comments on this episode are helpful for us, when asked what took place here, Archer says: "There is little doubt that satanic powers are able to produce illusionary images and communicate with the living by this means. Such "lying wonders" (2 Thess. 2:9) are part of the Devil's stock in trade. On the other hand, it certainly lies within God's power as well to present an appearance for the purpose of conveying His message by a special revelation. The oracle delivered by this shade or apparition sounded like an authentic message from God, with its announcement of doom on the guilty, unfaithful king. It even sounded like something Samuel himself would have said, had he remained alive after the massacre of Ahimelech and the priests of Nob (1 Sam. 22:11-19). Therefore, it is entirely possible that this appraition was the actual shade of Samuel himself...it should be observed that the witch herself was quite startled by this ghost visitor, as she said, "I see god [Heb. 'elohim] coming up from the earth" (v.13). This clearly implies that this authentic appearance of the dead (if such it was) was no result of her own witchcraft; rather, it was an act of God Himself that terrified her and that she had in no sense brought about in her own power...No scriptural basis for spiritism is furnished by this episode, nor for necromancy - both of which are sternly condemned as abominations before the Lord (Deut. 18:9-12; cf. Exod. 22:18; Lev. 19:26, 31; 20:6,27; Jer. 27:9-10)."

Commentators have been divided on the tone or attitude of Samuel's message. Certainly, he seems a bit disturbed to be called up like this, but then are his words biting toward Saul or do in fact they comfort Saul, knowing that he will be with his friend and mentor Samuel? Keith Bodner asks: "Is the prophet smug? If so, does he have a right to be? Or is he speaking more benevolently to the fearful king? According to the prophet, is it "Saul's own fault" that he is in this mess? What are the reasons Samuel provides for Saul's plight? Are Samuel's words "tomorrow you and your sons will be with me" designed to be comforting to Saul?"

One of the most interesting and poignant points to me in all this - although qualified in that we understand that necromancy and witchcraft are not to be dabbled with - Saul does indeed finally get his divine guidance via Samuel again. Samuel tells him exactly what will happen. Ironic, no? Of course from the theological perspective of the Chronicler (1 Chronicles 10:13) this is regarded as the most heinous of Saul's offenses.

One last comment on this episode toward the end. Do you think the medium is being kind to Saul by serving him a meal after she witnesses him being so weak and distraught? Is Saul weak and in shock? It takes quite a while to prepare this meal, as she slaughters the calf and makes bread and cooks the meal. Is Saul in shock and catatonic during this whole time? Bodner again asks: "Is she a wicked witch? Compare her speech with the prophet; is there a deliberate contrast, or is she simply acting out of self-preservation? After all, she is guilty of a serious legal violation. But is it not possible to construe the woman as having mercy on Saul, as she serves him his "last meal" with some dignity?"

Section two. Desperate Times, Despterate Measures

Let's read 1 Samuel 29:1-11, then return here.

The scene opens again focusing on the impending battle between the Philistines and the Israelites. The attention thus far has been with what is happening with Saul and the Israelites. Now we get a look into what is brewing on the Philistine side. Immediately the text gives us the sense that what is coming is big and this sense builds toward the actual battle and its immediate after-effect. In massing of the armies of the Philistines at Aphek, the text emphasises "all of the armies" of the 5 great cities of the Philstines have gathered, and one of them belongs to Achish of Gath, who in his retinue and employ is the anointed David and David's fighting men.

David and his men are stationed to the rear of Achish's men, in a particularly important place or guarding the rear from surprise attack, but possibly also in an attempt byu Achish to sort of hide them back there out of sight from the other Philistine chieftains and captains. Can we even imagine what is going through David's mind, and his men's, as they approach? They are gathering with the Philistines to battle their own people. Are they thinking "this will be the last step to truly become a traitor?" Or perhaps they are praying, asking for a way out, any way out of this terrible mess.

Yet, the Philstine chaieftains do notice this famous Israelite warrior among them, repeating the famous song that made Saiul so jealous: "Saul has slain his thousands and David his tens of thousands!" Again, the irony is not lost on us. Yet God intervenes to save David and his men from having to commit to this treasonous way in the battle. It is interesting to note that when Achish gives David the "bad news" that he can't partake in the battle and that the other Philistine leaders do not trust him, Achish, the foreign, uncircumsized Philistine, swears to David by YHWH. Was he just being politically-sensitive to David or is there more going on in that little telltale sign?

Peter Miscall notes a parallel with the scenes switching back-and-forth from what is happening with saul and the Israelites to what is happening with David and the Philistines: "Empasis is on departure at morning's first light. Does David's departure coincide with Saul's departure from Endor?"

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 30:1-31, then click back here.

It's always something with David, isn't it? Just when he is in the clear from having to battle the Israelites on the side of the Philistines, he gets word that Ziklag has been raided. Some see David as the ultimate survivor because things tend to turn out for the best when it comes to him, but trouble seems to follow him, and here - although it "excuses" him from the pending battle between the Philistines and Israelites - his wives and children are taken captive after the Amalekites attack Ziklag. I like what Peter Leithart has to say at this point: "When Jesus promises to send the Spirit, he describes the Spirit as the "Paraclete." This word is often translated as "Comforter," but the Greek word has a legal connotation and is actually closer to "Advocate" or even "Defense Attorney." A Paraclete doesn't "soothe" so much as "defend." That's a good thing, because everyone who receives the Spirit in Scripture needs a good bit of defending. The Spirit clothes judges like Gideon and Samson so they can slaughter Midianites and Philistines. When the Spirit comes upon Saul, He takes his army to deliver Jabesh-gilead from the Ammonites. In our sermon text, the Spirit comes on David and begins a lifetime of persecution, struggle, battle, and hardship. It's the Spirit-filled David who fights Goliath, dodges Saul's spear, and runs around the country just out of Saul's reach. It's the Spirit-filled David who fights Saul's son Ish-Bosheth and who has to deal with the bloodthirsty sons of Zeruiah. It's the Spirit-filled David who repeatedly cries out in the Psalms for deliverance from His enemies. Some of David's troubles are the result of His own sin. Still, as soon as the Spirit touches him, he's in for it. And so are we. This pattern doesn't change in the New Testament. As soon as the Spirit comes on Jesus, Satan shows up to tempt Him; just after Pentecost, the Jewish leaders are dragging Peter and John before the Sanhedrin and stoning Stephen. The Spirit is our Defender. But He also ensures that we need defense, because He impels us into the wilderness and pushes us into battle."

Another parallel can be seen here that contrasts Saul and David. When David gets the news he calls forth Abiathar and the ephod to consult YHWH on his next move. Again, he receives an abundat and quick answer to his questions, whereas Saul, having sought by dream, urim and prophet with only silence from YHWH, eventually pursued the medium at Endor. Even with an answer from God, the text is clear that David is stressed out by all this and races back to Ziklag as fast as he can; even to the point of exhausting his men. The Hebrew verb there is piger, related to peger or "corpse", which would render this word "dead tired".

Out of the frying pan and into the fire, huh? David escaped having to battle his own people, but then disaster seems to loom. This highlights David's precarious predicament, not just as being viewed by the public-at-large as a traitor, but by his leadership of his own men. David weeps with them, but as Robert Alter notes: "This moment is also a vivid reminder, as are others in the Saul-David story, of how precarious political power is: David, the charismatic and brilliant commander who has led his men through a host of dangers, suddenly discovers that those hard-bitten warriors are ready to kill jim because of the disastrous turn of events. It was he, after all, who drew them to the north with the Philistine army, leaving Ziklag exposed....[yet] he finds encouragement in the face of mortal despair - specifically, as the next verse explains, by calling for the oracle. In this fashion, he staves off the assault his men are contemplating by dramatically showing that they still have means of redress against the Amalekites, and that he has a special channel of communication with God."

Yet, despite overwhelming circumstances against him, David - and his men - overcome. I'm sure there is some sort of lesson there for us.

Lastly, note that the text gives us a clue what has been happening while David has been in Ziklag all this time. He has been sharing his plunder with the elders of Judah, building support and garnering loyalty among his kinsmen. Herbert Kupferberger's observation of David comes to mind at this point: "The King David who emerges from these pages is a masterful (and sometimes cunning) politician, a bold (and often opportunistic) warrior and a devoted (but also vindictive) ruler - the surprising human centerpiece of an ancient story few modern novelists can match for sheer drama."

Section three. O, How the Mighty Have Fallen!

Read 1 Samuel 31:1-13, then return here.

Let's begin with a comment from Peter Miscall, who highlights the parallel scenes we have been witnessing here: "Chapters 30 and 31 gain poignancy and power if we regard their events as simultaneous. In the far south, david is anxious about his own and about spoil, while in the far north Saul and the Israelite army perish. The contrast is increased by the length of the chapters - thirty-one verses in chapter 30 to thirteen verses in chapter 31. The defeat of Israel is so devastating that the Philistines are able to seize and inhabit Transjordan cities."

Again, note the clothing motif and the final divestiture of Saul: the Philistines strip him of his armour and cut off his head. This is actually eerily similar to what David had done to the Philistine warrior Goliath, isn't it? They cut off his head, take his weapons/armour to a sanctuary, and put the cut-off head on display. Revenge?

The courageous and honorable men of Jabesh-Gilead come to honor the dead Saul. Remember them from Saul's first exploit, back in 1 Samuel 11? Saul saved the city and people of Jabesh-Gilead from Nahash and the Ammonites. Since that time, they have been loyal to Saul and in his debt. They bravely rescue Saul's remains and bury them under a tamarisk tree. Thus the end of Israel's first king, the story which began with a feast when Saul meets Samuel, ends with a fast after his death.

In summing up 1 Samuel, Keith Bodner asks a series of questions: "The book of 1 Samuel is part of a larger work. How does this ending relate to both what comes before (e.g. the book of Judges) and what is to come (e.g. the book of 2 Samuel)?" Bodner also asks: "...if 1 Samuel is part of a continuous narrative from Joshua to 2 Kings, what difference does this make for one's reading? Paul House (1998: 236) notes, "This initial instance of kingship foreshadows God's assessment of every future king in the book of Kings." What kind of foreshadowing does the reader sense for the monarchy in Israel?"

Let's end today by watching this adaptation of the last battle of Saul and Jonathan as they are slain by Philistines on high places, while we also get a glimpse of David as King entering Jerusalem, a King like Jesus:

Section four. Assignments.

Think about these questions, begining with this quote from Keith Bodner: "Finally, comment on what Rolf Knierim (1978:20-51) refers to as "The Messianic Concept of the First Book of Samuel." Do you sense any messianic undercurrents in 1 Samuel?...if so, how would you articulate such a messianic dimension, and how does this integrate with a larger biblical theology?" Journal these questions and your thoughts and reflections regarding this messianic elemtn? Have you thought about how David is a foreshadow of Christ Jesus? If so, what are your thoughts on how, in 1 Samuel, David is like the Messiah Jesus?
1 Samuel ends with a whole host of questions lingering over us...are the Philistines going to triumph and rule over the Israelites now that they have slaughtered their king and effected a military occupation of northern Israel? What will happen to David? Has God abandoned the people? We'll begin looking at those answers in the coming months here at the Vineyard Bible Study blog. We'll be back in a few weeks, so check back as to when the next series will begin!

Mythbusters - 4 of 5

2009-09-02T02:57:00.000-07:00

Welcome to our fourth study in the current series, Mythbusters.

If you missed our previous introduction and first few series, you can go back and start at the beginning:

Introductory guidance
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (4-part series)
National (In)security (6-part series)

If you are just joining the Mythbuster series, here is where we have been thus far:

Today's session should take about 45 minutes.

So, as usual, find a quiet space. Sit down and take a few breaths.

Ready? Let's begin...

Section one. Do the Clothes Make the Man?

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 23:1-29, then click back here.

Several things to note right at the beginning. In verse 15, we see David's friend Prince Jonathan appear again, visiting David and his men on-the-run from Jonathan's father Saul. It is a poignant scene. Jonathan is being loyal to his father by remaining and fighting with him against other enemies. But he does not seek David or turn him in to his father. Jonathan's comments in verse 17 are almost prophetic: "Do not be afraid, because the hand of Saul my father will not find you, and you will be king over Israel and I will be next to you; and Saul my father knows that also." While David will be king, Jonathan will not eventually stand by David's side. The Hebrew term used to descibe Jonathan's visit: wayhazzeq 'et-yado beyah-weh, literally means "and strengthened his hand in YHWH". This is a phrase used in sacred scripture to mean "encourage", like it does in Nehemiah 6:9.

It is interesting that Keilah - a city in Judah (see Joshua 15) - is seen as being deep in Philistine territory by David's men. In the Amarna Letters - diplomatic correspondence between the Pharoah in Egypt and his vassals in Canaan and Amurru - Keilah is a dependency of the Jebusite city we call Jerusalem, David's eventual capital for the kingdom of Israel.

As we mentioned previously David has gained an advantage of getting a priest with the ephod, thus he can inquire of God. P. Kyle McCarter notes: "...an ephod. That is, an instrument of divination (see note at 14:3). The answers received in vv 11b and 12b below are essentially of the "yes" or "no" type, and we may assume that the Urim and Thummim are employed (cf. tye note at 14:40-42)."

Keith Bodner also gives us some insight with his comment: "This chapter begins with a disproportionate amount of "oracular" inquiry. Notably, this episode comes right after the massacre at Nob, where Saul is probably incensed by discussion of David receiving a divine oracle. This serves to underscore a growing subplot of "seeking divine knowledge" during David's fugitive era, and also highlights Saul's lack of divine response. Many commentators point out that an "oracle" answer is usually binary, "yes or no". Observe that in this chapter David receives some rather loquacious divine responses on a couple of occasions. There is a pointed contrast, then, between David and Saul during this narrative stretch, and the growing frustration and failure (that will culminate in chapter 28)."

Penn State professor Baruch Halpern raises an interesting question about this period: what happened to the ark of the covenant? Did the failure of the ark to achieve victory over the Philistines and capture and retun from the Philistines earlier cause it to become tainted as a "power object" in the eyes of the people?

1 Samuel 6:21-7:2 tells us that the ark of YHWH was being kept in the house of Abinadab in Keriath Jearim, a Gibeonite town, which is in the same basic territory as Saul's hometown. Why, if Saul was not too far away, did he not go to inquire before the ark of God? Halpern claims: "The ark's absence in Saul's day is significant...Since Saul spent a good deal of energy attacking Gibeonites, and since Qiryath Yearim was a Gibeonite town, it is more than conceivable that the ark of God was not acknowledged by the king at that time...Not coincidentally, Saul also eradicated the priests of Shiloh, to whom Samuel traces the ark, at Nob (in the A source). And this in turn means that the narrative not just of David's own life but of the introduction of the monarchy itself is conditioned by dynastic politics: one of the goals of 1 Sam. 4-6 was to present the ark as a precious pan-Israelite legacy that had slipped from Israel's grasp and was now recovered..."

Halpern also brings the co-related passages from 1 Chronicles into our view, which helps to illumine their perspective of what had happened (from a much more theological-historical perspective, I might add): "The Chronicler in fact attributes Saul's death in part to his failure to "seek Yahweh." So David's first act as king in Jerusalem is to recover the ark, "for we did not seek it in Saul's time." [see 1 Chronicles 10:13-14 and 1 Chronicles 13:3]

Now, let's read 1 Samuel 24:1-22, then return here.

We have noted several times how clothing and garments have helped us to understand more of the context and what is going on in this narrative. From Samuels' priestly ephod and prophetic me'il, to Saul's armour, then Jonathan's armour and clothing, this has been an important indicator of office, power, status or somehow been a clue for us to take note of what is going on in the story. Context is always helpful, as Deuteronomy 25:5-10 helps us understand the "removing the sandal" ritual which Boaz is involved in Ruth 4.

In chapter 24, clothing again comes to the fore and if we can understand it in context, just might explain some things which may have been confusing while you read the text. In verse 5, David cuts the hem of Saul's robe off, and our text says: "David's conscience bothered him because he had cut off the edge of Saul's robe."

We have witnessed in 1 Samuel 15:28, the tearing of Samuel's robe ended up being a prophetic pronouncement of God tearing the kingdom of Israel away from Saul. Thus here again, as biblical scholar Ora Horn Prouser notes: "1 Samuel 24 in which David cuts off the hem of Saul's cloak while hiding in a cave. This has been understood as symbolizing David's taking of the kingdom from Saul. Although David claims that this act is a sign that he has no designs to kill Saul and is thus being pursued for naught, the symbolic meaning of cutting the hem of a cloak is unmistakable. Saul even took this as a sign from God that his kingdom was being given over to David. This symbolism is inherent in the Bible since elsewhere the imagery of rending garments is used for receiving and losing the kingdom. The prophet Ahijah ripped a garment into twelve pieces and told Jeroboam to take ten of them since God had declared, "I am tearing the kingdom from Solomon and I am giving you the ten tribes." (1 Kings 11.31)...Samuel's 'cloak'...is both a princely garment and a symbol of his calling and dignity."

Here is where David's conscience bothers him: he knows the significance of secretly cutting off the hem of Saul's garment. And while Saul act of reaching out to take hold of Samuel's hem as an act of submission and repentance tears it, David is more calculating in this scene...and his conscience is bothered by his action.

Even as Saul goes into the cave to relieve himself, Robert Alter comments regarding the realism of geography and topography in this part of the narrative: "The topography is quite realistic, for the cliffs overlooking the Dead Sea in the region of En-gedi are honeycombed with caves. Power and powerlessness are precarious balanced in this episode. David and his men are in all likelihood hiding in the far end of the cave from Saul's search party. Had a contingent of soldiers entered the cave, they would have been trapped. Instead, Saul comes in alone, and he is in a double sense exposed to David and his men."

One last note on this chapter, in this exchange with Saul, we get David's longest speech, a whole 26 lines. What is the significance at this point? Robert Polzin is persuaded that in this dialogue, both David's and Saul's self-interest are made bare for us to know some of their more base motivations. Also note that David - even though being anointed as a youth by Samuel - still considers and calls Saul "YHWH's mashiach" or God's anointed. We'll talk more about this rather unusual loyalty after we deal with the next chapter.

Section two. A Fool and His Wife Are Easily Parted.

Now, let's read 1 Samuel 25:1-44, then return here.

Thus Samuel dies, and as a fitting tribute, all Israel gathers and mourns for their former leader and prophet of God.

Biblical commentator David Roper gives us some perspective on chapter 25: "Samuel's death and David's flight to the wilderness of Paran are linked together, as though one were caused by the other. Samuel had been David's confidant and counselor, the one to whom he had gone in times of need, probably the only person in Israel who would stand against Saul. When Samuel died, David realized that his last hope for reconciliation with Saul was gone. He fled from Engedi, along the coast of the Dead Sea, because it was too close for comfort to Saul's headquarters. He fled south to the wilderness of Paran, the area in the northern part of the Sinai peninsula where the nation of Israel had wandered for thirty-eight years. As he flees south the story of Abigail and Nabal takes place."

Abigail - from the Hebrew meaning "my father's delight" - is described here as a smart, capable and beautiful woman. As we see, she is married to a fool, Nabal. Nabal is wicked or crooked in his dealings, which seems to point to him being sort of a swindler. He is obviously very wealthy, as our text says he was a chieftain of the Caleb clan, the largest clan in the tribe of Judah.

Writer and scholar Steven McKenzie - who is suspicious of David - has this perspective on the events with Nabal and Abigail: "One of the estates that David and his band threatened was that belonging to "Nabal" and his wife Abigail. Nabal (meaning "fool"...) was a wealthy and probably chief of the Calebites, the leading clan of Judah. His death, described in 1 Sam 25 as God's doing, occurred at a most propitious moment for David, who married Abigail and assumed Nabal's property and socail position. It would have been a shortstep from the Calebite chieftaincy to kingship over Judah. David would rule from the Calebite capital of Hebron during his seven and one-half tears as king of Judah." The word that is translated "feast" in which Nabal is throwing for friends, is not the usual word for "feast", but rather is mishteh, which is really a 'drinking party'. Again, God acts scandalously and strikes Nabal dead. There may be some question about David's role here and Abigail's role in this whole episode. Our text clearly and scandalously states that God is behind all these mysterious and propitious events that add wealth and status to david, as he essentially becomes the leader of the powerful clan of Caleb in Judah (remembering that David is himself of the tribe of Judah too.) This solidified his position among his own relatives.

Later in 1 Samuel, when the Amalekites attack David's base at Ziklag and steal his possession and wives and children, David takes 400 men with him and leaves 200 behind. Here in coming against Nabal, David employs the same strategy 400 men come siwth him, 200 stay behind; the implication is of course, is that he is going to raid this place and kill Nabal, and as David himself admits, put to death every male in this house. Of course, Abigail prevents this terrible thing and prevents David from incurring blood-guilt, which David has been fairly careful to not incur thus far.

The list of David's wives at the end of this chapter give further details of David partaking in that ancient near eastern tradition of marriage to secure alliances and create powerful connection. Even though he claimed not to be worthy of marrying into the house of Saul, David's first wife - who we will meet later in 2 Samuel even though our text tells us Saul has now given her to another man - was Michal, daughter of the Israelite king Saul. Then in this episode we see David solidify a powerful position as chieftain within the tribe of Judah by marrying Abigail. Our text also notes his marriage to Ahinoam from Jezreel, which is in the north. Thus, David solidifies his prominence in the south (in Judah) but also has some support (in Jezre'el) in the north, and technically has connections to the midlands (land of Benjamin) through his first marriage with Michal, daughter of Saul.

Section three. Traitor in the Arms of the Enemy?

Read 1 Samuel 26:1-25, then return here.

So we see again - just like the scene in 1 Samuel 24 - David could have taken advantage of a situation and killed Saul, but instead - this time - he takes his spear. Keith Bodner helps us understand a key difference between the two encounters where David could have taken Saul's life, buit did not: "There are a number of ways in which chapters 24 and 26 can be compared and contrasted. Most obviously, in both episodes David has a "chance" to strike Saul, yet declines. In chapter 24, Saul arrived at the cave by "coincidence." In chapter 26, David seems more calculated, as Miscall (1986:158) notes: "This is no chance encounter at Hachilah, as it was at Engedi. David "saw that Saul had come after him into the wilderness; David sent spies, and he knew that Saul had come.' David's approach and view are described in the detail befitting a careful plan." Compare Alter's (1999:162) comment: "this story will prove to be an inversion of the earlier one, David discovering Saul instead of the other way around." So after David determines that Saul has indeed come after him, does he carefully plan his encounter with Saul? Is it his visual perspective that is provided when the reader is confronted with the following: "So David and Abishai came into the army at night, and look, Saul was laying down, sleeping in the trench. His spear was thrust into the ground near his head, with Abner and the troops lying all around him"? Ironically, the "spear of Saul" usually foreshadows danger to someone else, but on this occasion the threat of the "spear" is on Saul personally."

Although this movie adaptation blends the two incidents (chapter 24 and 26), and replaces the spear with a sword, take a look at these scenes from the movie King David:

This is a sad scene, and the last encounter of David and Saul. Robert Alter notes: "These words of fatherly blessing are the last ones Saul speaks to David: the two never meet again."

Let's end today by reading 1 Samuel 27:1-12, then return here.

Thus David finally turns to the bitter enemies of the Israelites for protection. He is witnessed as becoming a vassal of the chieftain-king of Philistine Gath, Achish, which in classicial Greek means: the Achaean, one of the collective names used by Homer in his Iliad of "the Greeks". David serving the enemy of Israel? Scandalous!

Imagine, if you can, someone like Colin Powell - a war hero and distinguished in the halls of power - leaving under the shadow of night in a cloud of suspicion and ending up working for the North Koreans. Ludicrous you might say. Surely, he would be branded a traitor of the worse kind, a "Benedict Arnold". Well, I think this illustration sheds light on the predicament of David, the beloved of God.

You see everyone who was anyone was there when the Israelite tribes anointed and affirmed God's choice of Saul as King over Israel. But they weren't there at David's private anointing and affirmation...nor did Samuel and David have a press conference after this secret affair. yet, David goes on to become a war hero and military man and a trusted aid in King Saul's administration. Even best friends with Prince Jonathan. Yet, from the people of Israel's perspective, the falling out of Saul and David was unclear. They probably just came to understand that David was fleeing Saul as a fugitive, even though it looks so suspicious, right?

Then later after years of pursuit, David and a small fighting force, end up working for their dreaded enemy the Philistines, and David and his men were were so successful in military service (bringing in captured goods from others to enrich Achish likely) that the Philistines give David his own town, Ziklag, and they give him a primary position of power, as a member of the royal bodyguard of Achish. And it is quite a long sojourn that David and his men live in Ziklag under Philistine-Gath vassalship (even while running military operations against Israel's - and especially Judah's - enemies to the south). In the most of the populations eyes, does this not look clearly traitorous? I think it does. I learned all this perspective in a class at the Baltimore Hebrew University. We have to be careful when we read our scriptures, because we miss significant things like this, mainly because we are given an historical perspective that clues us in on insider information. If we lived at that time in the people of Israel, liklely we would have thought of David as a traitor and fugitive of the King's justice.

Seeing the issues from this perspective opened my eyes to bigger issues of life lived right now. I need the discernment of the Lord - His perspective - for I can't know some of the secret, insider information and events that propel people's lives and force them into making certain choices. I need the movement and spark of the Holy Spirit in me, because the Spirit has that perspective...that wider, knowing vision. Let's all pray for that kind of vision today, and be careful not to judge people who are forced to make hard choices in life. Have grace for them, and we may yet be illumined and given the very perspective and heart of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Section four. Assignments.

Have you ever had to take what others consider a scandalous position or course of action, bcause it was the right thing to do, even though it may be difficult and you had to suffer the consequences? God is scandalous in what He asks of us at-times, which we also see in Mary the mother of God, being pregnant with Jesus as an unwed teenage girl in the ancient world. Scandalous. Talk to God about this and journal your thoughts and what you think God is saying to you.
This week, take time to meditate on Abigail's wise approach and intercession with David, and David's response, in 1 Samuel 25:18-35. How does this depict intercession for us nowadays? Journal your thoughts on this as well.

Mythbusters - 3 of 5

2009-08-26T03:00:00.000-07:00

Welcome to our third study in the current series, Mythbusters. If you missed our previous introduction and first few series, you can go back and start at the beginning:

Introductory guidance
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (4-part series)
National (In)security (6-part series)

Today's session should take about 45 minutes.

So, as usual, find a quiet space. Sit down and take a few breaths.

Ready?

Since our series is called Mythbusters, let's begin by watching another segment from the Discovery show Mythbusters:

Section one. Truth and Lies.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 20:1-17, the click back here.

As we might remember when we left off last time, David is fleeing from Saul and his men who are out to kill him. David leaves Saul in his prophetic stupor and races to his friend Jonathan. David is confused and scared and it seems Jonathan is confused as well, because he unaware of all the fuss. It seems that during this conversation David is rabidly seeking to make Jonathan understand his father's death wish for David. In fact, in verse 3, our text literally says: "...he has sworn a pact between me and Death." Saul has made another rash oath (remember 1 Samuel 14:24-52 and his rash oath when fighting the Philistines?) and sworn to take David's life. P. Kyle McCarter comments, "Death is here personified as David's partner in a sworn agreement, a kind of grim parody of the covenant between David and Jonathan..." David pleads with Jonathan to honor the covenant of friendship and hesed (loyal-covenant-based-love) that the two had previously made. David foreswears several times in this exchange that he is innocent, and as we progress further into the turmoil of Saul seeking to kills David, we will see David again and again go out of his way to incur no blood-guilt in terms of Saul.

In this passage we encounter one of the many kinds of feasts that the Israelites celebrated: the new moon feast. This was a celebration marking the beginning of a month (remember the ebrew/Jewish claendar is lunar based), and this was a day of rest for the nation (see Amos 8:5). In Numbers 28:11-15, we see the special sacrifices prescribed, and the feasting could last for an additional day or two typically.

David and Jonathan end their exchange with re-affirming their covenant of friendship and their loyalty to one another.

Let's now read 1 Samuel 20:18-29, then return here.

So continuing their plan for keeping David safe and finding out what the intentions of Saul are, Jonathan and David hatch the "arrow alert". While David will hidden away, Jonatahn will get the bottom of the mystery and then tell David what he has found out. Does the text bring your imagination alight with all this intrigue and imagery? Keith Bodner highlights one aspect of the text that harkens to us imagining what is happenng: "As the scene switches to the "new moon" feast Saul is positioned "by the wall," a wall which may be punctured with spear-marks. This small detail of "the wall" thus provides a flashback to chapters 18 and 19 (when Saul hurls his spear at David, attemtping to frame his portrait, as it were) and also foreshadows another of Saul's violent outbursts (this time with Jonathan himself the target)."

This passage ends giving a peek into the paranoid obsession of Saul with David and then Jonathan's explanation that he and David had previously came up with to explain why David was not at the feast, except Jonathan improvises a little implicating one of David's brothers as the one who has called David back to Bethlehem for the new moon feast there.

OK, let's finish off chapter 20 by reading 1 Samuel 20:30-42, then return here.

Saul explodes with anger at the mere explanation of why David is not at the feast...and he is icensed at Jonathan! immediately we see the foul-mouth and further oath-making/cursing that has gotten Saul into so much trouble. Saul uses a particularly sexist vulgarity in verse 30, saying that Jonathan has disgraced the genitals of his miother, from whence he was birthed. But Jonathan is not put off by this (until later, when he refuses to return to the feast after Saul has insulted him in this way) and continues to defend David. Then, the next burst of outrage by Saul: he hurls a spear at his own heir to the throne which he just said that he was preparing for Jonathan and that david was seeking to take it.

Saul also betrays his own awareness somehow of David's destiny. Saul is angry and probably a bit bewildered by Jonathan. David is in the way of establishing Jonathan's own kingship, and yet Jonathan is bound-up with David. But did you notice that it seems Saul blames everyone but himself? Barabra Green explains: "Saul has stated his priority, which is to leave his son Jonathan to rule; it is a subset of his main drive, which is to remain king. Saul sets the problem in terms of Jonathan's shaming his mother and names David as the obstacle. He avoids saying that Jonathan's actions shame him and that he has been told that the obstacle to Jonathan's rule is God's preference. Even at his most forthright moment, he leaves a great deal submerged. Blaming at very least Jonathan and David, Saul refuses to acknowledge his own role for what it is. David's life on earth is a threat to Saul's rule as well as Jonathan's, a situation Saul has been acting on for several scenes. That his own actions have obviated his goal Saul does not acknowledge."

From there Jonathan warns David through the arrow scheme, and then we get the re-newed oath-language of covenant friendship that now extaends to descendants (which will be very important when we get to 2 Samuel). Peter Miscall explains further: "Jonathan and David are close friends and are bound by a covenant that extends to descendants (vv. 12-17, 42). Jonathan demands an oath from David sealing the covenant because his sincere love for his friend or because of his fear of David's violence. Jonathan has sufficient experience to know the violence and irrationality that his father is capable of and may fear the same of David if David prevails in the conflict with Saul."

Have you noticed that there is a lot of deception going on? Saul deceives David but then tries to kill him, David flees and Michal deceives her father; David then colludes with Jonathan to deceive Saul. The deception doesn't end here, as we will see in the next chapter.

Section two. When we practice to deceive.

Now, let's read 1 Samuel 21:1-15, then return here.

Thus David flees to Nob after having been warned by Jonathan. Immediately we get our next deception: David lies to Ahimelech, who is trembling and asks why David has come there alone. Nob is a priestly city just north of Jerusalem in the territory of Benjamin and in fact not far from Saul's home town of Gibeah, some 3 miles away. The priest in charge who greets David is Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub, and thus a descendant of Eli (remember the curse on the line of Eli God gave back in 1 Samuel 2:30-36 and 1 Samuel 3, in which God promises to break the house of Eli and that: "Yet I will not cut off every man of yours from My altar so that your eyes will fail from weeping and your soul grieve, and all the increase of your house will die in the prime of life." This is immediately in the background and foreshadows bad things...not good news for Ahimelech.

So David tells Ahimelech he is on a 'secret mission' and then the priests at Nob provide him with provisions. There is no ordinary bread, so they provide David with the bread for priests also known as the Bread of the Presence. Again, notice David gets the priestly portion of bread, just as Saul did back in chapter 9. According to Leviticus 24, the Bread of the Presence consisted of 12 cakes of pure wheat flour arranged in rows on a table in the sanctuary. The bread was replaced each week on the sabbath, and the priests were allowed to eat the week-old bread. Ahimelech is concerned that David and his men be ritually pure to eat the bread, and David reminds Ahimelech that his men will not touch a woman while on active duty - this is a statement that will come back to haunt David in 2 Samuel 11 with Uriah the Hittite). Often in the scriptures we see warriors consecrated for battle, like in Joshua 3:5, and Deuteronomy 23 points out that since YHWH-Elohim wals among the men in the camp, the military camp must be kept ritually pure for God must not see any indecent thing among them or He may turn away from them.

Note the presence of Doeg the Edomite, who will come into play at the end of chapter 22 as well. Why is this foreigner at a temple, and why is he at Nob? Ernst Kutsch notes the Hebrew there is specific, and the verb tense in the Qal form may mean "refrain from work" or in the Niphal, "to hold one's self back from work" which would mean Doeg is taking a holiday, yet Kutsch goes on further to say: this foreigner is taking a holiday and celebratuing before YHWH. Also note that since Ahimelech gives David five of the twelve loaves of the priestly bread, it had not yet been eaten, and it was likely a sabbath day that David flees into Nob.

We also see here the sword of Goliath is given back to David. Many scholars have puzzled as to why David flees to Nob. Perhaps this is why David came there in the first place, he needs a weapon, because he fled without one. In the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean, sacred shrines and religious temples were also the banks and safe-deposit places for valuables and last will and testaments. David is the rightful owner of the sword of Goliath, and thus he comes to claim his sword.

Outfitted with provisions and weapons, David flees Nob and goes to of all places the Philistine city of Gath, the enemies and oppressors of Israel. Here he decieves the local Philistine cheiftain, Achish, by acting like a lunatic and drooling down his beard. Robert Alter comments: "Achish's words are a mirror of outrage and disgust. As Simon Bar-Efrat has nicely observed, Acish three times uses the root for raving mad (meshuga), three times the first person pronoun, and three times the root b-w-' ("to bring" or "to come"). Thus David has succeeded in making himself so revolting that he arouses in Achish a primitive revulsion from the spectacle of the insane, so that the king simply wants to get David out of sight rather than have him killed. This is an extraordinary moment in the story of the founding king of Israel: avid, the glamourous young hero of the preceding episodes, is prepared to do whatever is necessary in order to survive, even if it means making himself appear to be the most repulsive of humankind. It is an even lower humiliation into which David in adversity will willingly plunge. It is noteworthy that David feigns madness in order to survive, in contrast to Saul, whose genuine madness reflects his loss of control over the kingdom."

Section three. Deception and Consequences.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 22:1-10, then return here.

David then flees from Gath to what is known as the cave of Adullam, which we think is about a 10-mile journey East-South-East from Gath. This cave of Adullam is called a stronghold, probaly making it a well-fortified hilltop, much like how "the stronghold of Zion" that becomes Davod's later residence in Jerusalem is called.

David relatives and those "bitter in spirit" gather to him, as he is now publicly an insurgent, because the public - likely unaware of the secret anointing of David by Samuel years ago - still sees Saul are the rightful and legitimate king of Israel. David's social base is strongly compared to Jephthah from Judges 11 by Alter.

Thus David begins his sojourn as a fugitive from the law in the Judean wilderness. Remember, this is sort of home territory for David, he is of the tribe of Judah, so he is among his relatives and kinsmen. Many Jewish revolutionaries have taken to hiding in the Judean wilderness, inculding over the years Judah macabee and later after Jesus Christ, Bar-Khokba. Also remember, David has family in Moab, because his great grandmother was Ruth, the Moabitess, thus he moves his parents to Moab.

We also see David has several prphets that have bound themselves to him, Gad and Nathan. In verse 5 we see Gad providing David with what we might call "prophetic intelligence". David takes this prophetic intelligence seriously and begins moving around, going into the forest of Hereth.

We witness again the paranoid Saul, as the scene in verse 6 is a familiar scene in the ancient Near east of a ruler sitting in his royal council under some sacred tree with his military implements. The tree in this scene is a tamarisk tree, also witnessed to in Genesis 21:33. Saul's harangue of his council and leading men provokes Doeg the Edomite to come forth with the information that a while ago, he saw David at the shrine in Nob.

Let's finish up for today by reading 1 Samuel 22:11-22, then return here.

Here is a scene from the movie King David depicting the action and slaughter of the priests at Nob:

Thus comes the end of Ahimelech, of the line of Eli. Yet, it is important to note that one of his sons - Abiathar - gets away and goes to David. Abiathar is taken into David's house. Significantly, he can now provide priestly services to David, especially since he gets away from Nob with the ephod, and will through it give David access to this oracualr object. Access to oracles of God and to His prophets is a major point for David, as he continually is guided rightly through them, and Saul becomes increasingly desperate for divine guidance.

Section four. Assignments.

As we have witnessed Saul swearing more and more oaths that he waffles on, I think this week we should take some time to reflect on the oaths and vows that we have made in life and how we have been loyal to them or waffled on them. Ask God to bring something specific to your mind, just one thing, and then take that before the Lord and seek to hear what God has tio say about it. Journal your thoughts and what you think God is saying to you.
This week, memorize Jesus' answer to the Pharisees who claimed he was violating the sabbath in Mark 2:25-28: "He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions." Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."

Mythbusters - 2 of 5

2009-08-19T04:49:00.000-07:00

Welcome to our second study in the current series, Mythbusters. If you missed our previous introduction and first few series, you can go back and start at the beginning:

Introductory guidance
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (4-part series)
National (In)security (6-part series)

Today's session may take between 30 to 40 minutes.

So, as usual, find a quiet space. Sit down and take a few breaths.

Ready?

Since our series is called Mythbusters, let's begin by watching another segment from the Discovery show Mythbusters:

Section one. Myth #1 - Because we love David, we don't love Saul.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 18:1-16, the click back here.

From Saul's increasingly isolated and paranoid perspective, Jonathan and Michal love and are loyal to David, and if they love David and are loyal to him, somehow they cannot love and be loyal to their father. The truth beyond this lie is that they can, and Jonathan does to the end of his life. Jonathan is loving and loyal to both his father and David.

In the Hebrew of verse 3, you get the best sense of what is happening. The grammatical pattern makes it clear by using a plural subject and a singular verb: Jonathan forges this pact of friendship, Jonathan is the active party, while David is the passive party. The sense here is that although David has just won this stunning victory, David seems a little in awe of his new friends, especially this new friend, the rockstar Jonathan.

Along these same lines - of David being acting upon and not necessarily being the actor - we witness God's work in David's life. God has anointed and blessed David and His favour is upon him. Therefore, David is the object of the verb "to love" over and over again in the narrative. Jonathan loves him. The people love him. Michal loves him.

It is also interesting to note that David's inner thoughts are not revealed explicitly at this point. What he is thinking and what is happening internally with David is left for us to surmise from his actions and his words.

Remember throughout these studies in 1 Samuel, we have been looking for certain imagery and themes and motifs that occur again and again? Well, here in the beginning of chapter 18 we see the clothing imagery come to the foreground of our narrative again. At the end of chapter 19, we will see this again, but here in 18 Jonathan takes clothes off himself and gives them to David. Robert Alter has some good insight on the resonance of all this: "This gesture strongly invites comparison with Saul's failed effort to dress David in his battle gear in the previous episode [with Goliath]. This time David accepts the proffered garments and weapons: practically, they are presumably his own size, but he also is now ready to assume a regular role in the army. The first item Jonathan offers is his cloak, me'il," which is the piece of clothing that is associated with Samuel and one of his roles: prophet. We talked about this in an earlier study session. The cloak can also be seen as conveying some sort of kingship, but I think the cloak-prophet motif stands out most to me at this time.

So David becomes the best of friends with Jonathan and gets invested with new clothes and weaponry. Saul also gives David a very choice assignment: David is given a military command over "men of war." This phrase, according to the biblical scholar Moshe Garsiel, is a term for an elite corps or we might say "special forces". Of course, jealousy rears its ugly head again, and in verse 13, Saul sort-of demotes David in moving him to another command post over a regular army unit, away from the "special forces". Of course, this jealousy arises with David's successes and exploits, brought to our attention in the ditty by the celebrating women: "Saul has slain his thousands, and David his tens of thousands." This brings up a trait we have noticed time after time with Saul - his own insecurity and listening and being influenced by the voice of the people. Alter puts it bluntly: "Saul, who earlier had made the mistake of listening to the voice of the people, now is enraged by the people's words."

Thus, even though Saul initially loved David, and even though David was loyal to Saul, jealousy begins to grip and eventually consume Saul. After the Goliath affair, David became one of the chief fighting men, and Saul enjoyed the benefits of David's victories. But jealousy raises its head and the tipping point for Saul comes after David had taken his daughter as wife, had taken the love and loyalty of his heir Jonathan, and finally had taken the love of the people. Thus Saul's jealousy drives him to seek to kill David.

It was the custom among women to celebrate the triumphs of their warriors after a great battle in spectacular performances. Decked with wreaths, they danced down the public streets, singing the songs of victory in praise of their great leaders. The ditty of verse 7 further stirs Saul to deadly jealousy. He becomes determined to suppress David in some way or to kill him outright. Also note in verse 10, most English translations use the word "raving" for what Saul is doing, but the actual word in Hebrew is nava (the rootword used for the Hebrew word for prophets: nevi'im), which is typically translated as "prophesying" or "ecstatic prophesying"; this is exactly the same activity he fell into back in chapter 10 when he met the band of prophets, and the same activity he falls into later in chapter 19 when confronted with Samuel leading a band of prophets in ecstatic prophecy. Thus, Saul is doing some sort of ecstatic prophecy via an evil spirit, which the text clearly states in verse 10. Let's leave that hot topic for a little later at the end of our study session today when we get to chapter 19.

As we will see as we progress through the narrative, Saul soon becomes absorbed in plotting and planning how to circumvent David, and looks increasingly with jealousy on the warm friendship maturing between him and his son Jonathan. Several times, Saul tried to kill David himself with a spear, but even though David was playing the harp at the time, he easily escaped. As David's fame increases, so does Saul's jealousy and his efforts to kill David.

Jealousy is bred from Fear and burns until an explosion of anger occurs. The Hebrew word for the kind of anger Saul experiences is informative: charah-"to burn, be kindled, glow with anger, be incensed, grow indignant; to be zealous, act zealously." Unlike some of its synonyms, charah points to the fire or heat of the anger just after it has been ignited. Charah captures the moment a person explodes with anger-the moment anger is ignited before any sense of control takes over, before a rational thought can be processed. When Saul's son Jonathan is discovered protecting David, Saul exlodes with anger and throws a spear at his own son in an effort to kill him (1 Samuel 20:32-43).

Section two. Myth #2 - When a Man Loves a Woman.

Now, let's read 1 Samuel 18:17-30, then return here.

Saul seems to be like a boat tossed on the waves, as he see-saws from wanting to co-opt David into his House and family, but then turns to jealous action and manipulation with David. The scriptures lay Saul's interior dialogue explicitly out for us, with Saul full of intrigue and schemes, but still experiencing the dreaded doubt and insecurity that has plagued his life thus far.

There is something important here in this section that most people miss, and we want to make sure to make sure we don't miss it. in verse 20, it says that, "Now, Michal, Saul's daughter, loved David." While this follows Jonathan and the people loving David, it is interesting to note that she is the only woman in the whole of the Hebrew scriptures who is said to love a man. It's implied in many relationships, but this is the only place where our scriptures explicitly state that a woman loves a man. Of course, many will run to Song of Songs to see if this is true, but again, while the beautiful love story and poetry of the Song makes clear the love between a man and a woman, this is where it actually states such a case.

Robert Alter has an interesting observation at this point: "Nothing is said, by contrast, about what David feels toward Michal, and as the story of their relationship sinuously unfolds, his feelings toward her will continue to be left in question." While there is a bit of ambiguity and we will talk about their relationship much later when David actually becomes the king, our narrative does mention in verse 26 that this was pleasing to David, and in fact, he accomplishes a rather horrid, heroic, and humorous challenge to make the marriage and meet ridiculous demand for a bride-price.

Saul demands Philistine foreskins as the bride-price. Let's get this straight, Saul asks David to circumcise one hundred Philistine warriors in order to marry Michal. Yikes. Horrid, but David accomplishes it, being the dashing and heroic warrior he is. Then David counts out each and every last foreskin before Saul, the imagery of which would be quite humorous to listeners and readers of this episode. Again, Saul notices that even in such dangerous but ridiculous missions, YHWH is with David, and Saul's fears fester within him.

Section three. Myth #3 - You have to keep your clothes on to prophesy.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 19:1-7, then return here.

The critical underlying theme of fatherhood, which we have looked at before, again comes front and center. The text seems to emphasize this in the first verse where twice it mentions and emphasizes that Jonathan is Saul's son. This is important to note, as Jonathan steps into the role of peacemaker between those he loves and is loyal to: his father Saul and his friend David. Jonathan is the quinessential "trusted advocate" doing this for the good of all.

I think we can learn a lot about conflict resolution and peacemaking advocacy from Jonathan. It's also interesting to note the deference and respect Jonthan gives to his father as he steps into this new role. He addresses his father as "the King" and speaks well of both parties, even as Saul fluctuates from wanting David killed to appeasement. Jonathan speaks truth to his father and his friend; I think this is the kind of "speaking love in truth" that the new testament apostle Paul encourages the followers of Jesus to take up. Be a peacemaker, listen and spea the truth in love. Bring warring factions together, be the wise advocate of both parties. Then in verse 7, the result - and note again that it is Jonathan doing all the action and persuasion here - David is reunited with saul, and begins to serve him as before. This is an impotant issue for our time, and I appreciate the words of Pope Benedict that point toward a path trodden by many throughout history: "Christian nonviolence...does not consist in surrendering to evil - as claims a false interpretation of "turn the other cheek" (Luke 6:29) - but in responding to evil with good, (Romans 12:17-21), and thus breaking the chain of injustice. It is thus understood that nonviolence, for Christians, is not mere tactical behavior but a person's way of being, the attitude of one who is convinced of God's love and power, who is not afraid to confront evil with the weapons of love and truth alone. Loving the enemy is the nucleus of the 'Christian revolution'..."

I know this can be a touchy subject and one fraught with reali-life difficulties for many people. But courage and discernment is called for as we seek to place ourselves between the strong and the weak, those with power and those without, whether it is bringing friends who are fighting together or through being advocates and peacemakers in situations that deal with tongues, tribes and nations.

Now read 1 Samuel 19:8-17, then return here.

Well, the peace doesn't last too long in our text. Let's remember that Saul is being tortured by an evil spirit, playing upon his fears and insecurities. As Robert Alter points out, "[Saul] does his best to be reconciled with David, his soothing lyre player and indispensible military leader, but the recurrent flashes of jealousy drive him again to the same lethal action. After the second occurrence of the spear throwing, David realizes he must flee the court, but he does not imagine Saul will send assassinas to surround his house."

Thus Michal helps David escape and uses teraphim to fool Saul's men. Teraphim is Hebrew for household statues, typically of the gods, which were made of precious stone or wood or ceramics and were quite valuable. The use of teraphim in an incident to fool a father should resonate with those who have read Genesis. This is an allusion to the Jacob story. Jacob's wife Rachel steals her fathers' teraphim when they fled Laban. Both in the Jacob story and here in 1 Samuel, a daughter who is loyal to her husband mis-directs and lies to their father. Note that back in 1 Samuel 19:11, instead of saying that Michal was Saul's daughter, the text describes her as David's wife. In the Jacob story, Laban does not accost his daughter and never finds the teraphim, yet here we find Saul force his way into their bed-chamber and uncovers the deception and the teraphim. When Saul accuses Michal of deception in verse 17, the Hebrew is almost exactly the same as Laban's words found in Genesis 31:26: Why have you deceived me?

Let's finish today by reading 1 Samuel 19:18-24, then return here.

Thus, David flees from Saul to Samuel - the prophet who had anointed him - and his cohort of ecstatic prophets. There is some powerful spiritual warfare imagery going on here, not to mention the power of the Spirit, so let's take a closer look.

Did you notice in verse 18 that David has come under the protection of Samuel and the prophets. In verse 20, the military men that King Saul sends to take David come under the influence of the Holy Spirit and cannot do their duty. Robert Alter points out the military imagery, not of Saul's military men, but of what is going on with the Spirit-empowered Samuel and the band of prophets: "Samuel standing poised over them. The image is implicitly military; the term for "poised" (nitsav) is cognate with the terms for garrison and prefect. Samuel, like the pope, commands no divisions, but the band of ecstatics are his troops, and the infectious spirit of God that inhabits them and devastates Saul's emissaries acts as a defensive perimeter."

I love this imagery, what an awesome picture! David being protected in the midst of a worshipful and manifest encounter with the Reign of God breaking through, while those with all the military might and power are left helpless. Such an exquisite picture and example of how God reigns.

Stacey Campbell gives a humourous story of what this might have been like to encounter the infectious power of the Spirit:

Eventually, when everyone he has sent is infected with the Spirit and lost in ecstatic prophecy, Saul comes under the influence of the Spirit and begins prophesying and ends up laying naked in a field in a state of delirium. Since Saul's garments are explicitly tied to kingship, here we see Samuel and Saul conflicted again, and just as Saul was invested with kingship in his initial encounter with the Spirit through meeting the band of ecstatic prophets, now Saul - in undressing himself - implicitly divests himself of the kingship, until naked and alone, he is overwhelmed by the power of the Spirit. As biblical commentator Fokkelman sums up quite nicely: "The same faculty for the numinous and the same sensitivity for suddenly being lifted into a higher state of consciousness which occurred there [in 1 Samuel chapter 10] under the positive sign of election, appear here under the negative sign of being rejected, and now bring Saul into a lower state of consciousness, a kind of delirium." David is saved, and Samuel and his prophets triumph through the power of the Spirit over the might of men, even those previously chosen.

Section four. Assignments.

Memorize this passage that speaks of our experience of that most holy gift: friendship - "And it happened as he finished speaking with Saul, that Jonathan's very self became bound up with David's, and Jonathan loved him as himself." - 1 Samuel 18:1
Take some time to reflect on the fears, insecurities and jealousies that may populate your own heart. Ask God to bring something specific to your mind, just one thing to work on, and then take that before the Lord and see how He can help you. Journal your thoughts and what you think God is saying to you. Pray through this and talk to friends about this experience that may need follow-up with the hard work of forgiveness and dis-embitterment.
If interested, here are some more about ecstatic prophecy and the phenomenological power of the Spirit from Stacey Campbell: Part 1 and Part 2

Mythbusters - 1 of 5

2009-08-12T04:56:00.000-07:00

Welcome back to the next Vineyard Bible Study blog series, Mythbusters. We pick up today in 1 Samuel 17.

If you missed our previous introduction and first few series, you can go back and start at the beginning:

Introductory guidance
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (4-part series)
National (In)security (6-part series)

So, to begin, find a quiet space. Sit down and take a few breaths.

Today's session should may take about 45 to an hour. Ready?

Since our series is called Mythbusters, let's begin by watching with this little homage to the show on Discovery:

OK, on to 1 Samuel 17 and the famous battle that has become a byword: "David versus Goliath"

Section one. Myth #1 - David was a neophyte, untrained in warfare, when he took on Goliath.

The narrative now turns full-focus on David who, indeed, is a mystery. Maybe because he is sooo human, such a controversial and complex person, so realistically portrayed. I think almost everyone who reads about David identifies with him at one point or another.

We saw last time, David is first introduced into the narrative in 1 Samuel 16. He is chosen by God, anointed by Samuel and selected to appear at Saul's court as a singer/therapist with harp whose music gifting soothes Saul and drives the "evil spirit" afflicting Saul away.

Let's pick up at that point with our text and read 1 Samuel 17:1-19, then click back here.

You gotta love it. The Philistine "champion" Goliath, this giant who is over eight feet tall, comes at the Israelites as one of the biggest "trash-talkers" of the Bible, but he never backs-it-up. Who is the trash-talker who backs-it-up? David does indeed "trash-talk" back to Goliath and follow's through on it. It may also be interesting to note one of the other most famous "trash-talkers" of the Bible is the prophet Elijah, who trash-talks the prophets of Ba'al at their showdown on Mount Carmel- see 1 Kings 18 for Elijah's classic trash-talking.

Notice the very detailed list of how Goliath is outfit like a bronze tank, with helmet, plated cuirass with scale armour, molded bronze encircling his entire calf and a sword, which in Hebrew is called a kidon, which might be best translated into English as "scimitar", because kidon refers to a heavy, curved, flat-bladed oriental-type sword. Goliath is big and impressive with his body, his armour and his trash-talking.

Let's move on and read 1 Samuel 17:20-30, the click back here.

Biblical commentator Keith Bodner, as well as many other commentators, note that while David was introduced previously, it is here in chapter 17 that David utters his first words. In our scriptures the first words uttered by most characters say something really important and give insight into them. What do we find here in 1 Samuel 17:26? It reads, "What will be done for the man who kills this Philistine and takes away the reproach from Israel? For who is this uncircumcised Philistine, that he should taunt the armies of the living God?"

What do you think? Bodner thinks it is as though two different sides of David are being revealed. The first is that he asks somes to reiterate something he just heard, what exactly are the rewards offered for taking up this challenge and winning? As the youngest of eight brothers, his real chances for advancement and inheritance was pretty limited. Thus David is revealed as an opportunist, weighing what is to be gained and what might be lost and doing his own sort of risk management. As we will see, David has a fairly developed skill in this risk assessment/management area. Also, David's second sentence brings to life his courage based on his rock-solid faith and love for YHWH-Elohim.

Also in these verses David gets into a little verbal tit-for-tat with his elder brother Eliab. Again Bodner gives us some insight: "How should the words of Eliab, David's older brother be heard? On the one hand, his criticism can be heard as the ranting of a jealous older brother, and the kind of sibling rivalry that is popular in biblical narrative. On the other hand, he may be using hyperbole to sound a warning to David on this very public occasion. Notably, the word-clusters surrounding Eliab's speech resound at later points in the narrative, especially 2 Samuel 11, the episode of David and Bathsheba, the murder of Uriah, and the parable of Nathan the prophet. The response of Eliab, then, is rather more complicated than many readers have appreciated."

Ok, let's start busting some myths. First up: The myth that David was just a little boy when facing Goliath. Too often, I believe, we learn something in "Sunday school" and the real story of the Bible is "changed" to present it to children. Unfortunately, we take those "Sunday school" ideas into adulthood, and we never "grow-up" and move into maturity with respect to these false caricatures of events and people from scripture. The story of David and Goliath is the pinnacle of this kind of misperception, where so many pastors on Sunday merely teach the Sunday school lesson over and over again to an adult population.

Let's begin our mythbuster investigation by watching this clip from the "King David" movie:

I like this portrayal of the story, because it adheres closer to our text in scripture than most movie adaptations.

In his popular work on David, David's Secret Demons, Baruch Halpern of the Penn State University Classics program argues that - contrary to the popular myth of David as the classic underdog, a naive boy full of faith in God - David is in actuality not the underdog in his fight with Goliath. Halpern makes the case that David uses surprise tactics and attacks from "outside the ring." David characterizes "thinking outside the box." Halpern does concede that "David would be the underdog, had he accepted combat on traditional terms," but David doesn't. David utilizes, "...the element of surprise, the ruse," as a method for "...leveraging his skills into victory." Notice the text goes into great detail with Saul trying to give David his armour, and while David tries it on, it doesn't fit, but especially does not fit with the tactics he wants to use against this Philistine giant.

Again, Halpern points out that, "David is modern man, rejecting the mindless, medieval ritualized combat of the Philistines: the fates of nations cannot depend on single combat, but the fates of nations are too important to scruple about the rules of sport. Combat is not a matter of personal honor, but of national destiny...David begins his career as a musician playing the lyre for Saul. In the Goliath episode, he moves on to reject the etiquette of social relations shared by all around him. This is the pattern that will persist throughout his history. He is not just Yahweh's elect: he is Yahweh's avenger. He is not just destined for greatness: he shapes his greatness by a complete disregard for orthodoxy."

Remember when I mentioned that we needed to pay close attention to the Hebrew words and meaning when we went through 1 Samuel 14? Particularly, I mentioned to take note of the Hebrew term na'ar and it's translation in verse 1, "young man bearing his armour" or just "armour-bearer". Well, we have come to the point of making the point of that phrase yet again. You see while na'ar can have the meaning of a youth or boy, it more precise meaning and essence of the word is "apprentice". The "young man bearing his armour" is apprenticing to be a full-fledged warrior by training - by apprenticing - under a warrior skilled in combat, and by going into combat with that warrior and serving the warrior in the heat of battle. This is just the way discipling some young man in the ways of the warrior was done. That is why Jonathan's na'ar accompanies him in his exploit and God's victory over the Philistines in chapter 14. So, how is David described heretofore? In 1 Samuel 16:21, our narrative states clearly that David came to attend to King Saul and became his armour-bearer. David is apprenticing to learn the skills of a warrior under the tutelage of Saul. David is learning to fight. He is growing in skill and military-strategy by being in the presence and attending to the person who is gathering all of the best warriors of Israel to his army. This is actually the best place to learn from the best of the best. Thus a na'ar is an apprentice, after all, a youth/boy is just a male apprenticing to be a man someday, right?

While busting the myth that David was just a shepherd boy (not that this didn't teach him valuable lessons, as David himself says: I fought off lions and bears while protecting the sheep), I wonder what an affect on parenting and also discipleship in the church there might be if we used the word "apprentice" for our children and for disciples in our congregations. Would the mere usage provoke us to be better at apprenticeship...and not in a Donald Trump kind of way!

Before we go on to the next section, let's consider some comments from Keith Bodner's commentary on 1 Samuel: "Goliath is usually understood as a "champion," which is how a number of translations render the unique phrase "man-of-the-space-between" (the idea that the "last one standing" in the "space between" two armies is, logically enough, a champion - because he is still alive). I have rendered this phrase as a more technical term, "Challenger" (or "duelist/infantryman") based on the Qumran material, and because hand-to-hand combat seems to be Goliath's forte. "Gladiator" might be a stretch, although perhaps closer to the mark than one might think."

Section two. Myth #2 - The slingshot is just a child's toy.

OK, read 1 Samuel 17:31-54, then return here.

David uses sling and stone to fell the mighty Goliath, then removes Goliath's head with Goliath's own sword. We don't think about the slingshot being a military weapon nowadays, but the slingshot was a military weapon in the ancient world, not a child's toy as it is now. As recorded by the ancient Greek Thucydides, and attested to by Diodorus Siculus, when the Demosthenes invaded Sicily to capture the large Greek colony at Syracuse, he failed, and taking his army and retreating through the hills, Demosthenes and his hoplites were trapped when the Syracusans blocked a pass. The ensuing missile engagement - in which arrows, javelins and sling shot were used and hurled upon them. The missile attack was so terrible that Demosthenes and his 6000 men surrendered.

The sling was an ancient weapon employed by the Egyptians as well. It was a projectile weapon (polished stones make great missiles!) you can check out a short article on Egyptian projectile weapons, then click back here.

The sling is also attested in sources from the Lelantine war. In his Geographica, Strabo (ca. 63 BC to 23 AD) reports that the two poleis, Chalkis and Eretria had once been friendly. He states that their former friendship resulted in both parties to the conflict agreeing before battle on contractually determined conditions, especially on not using missiles. This treaty seems something like what was witnessed in the bad old days of the "Cold War" where we agree not to use our heavy atopmic weapons.

"Now in general these cities were in accord with one another, and when differences arose concerning the Lelantine Plain they did not so completely break off relations as to wage their wars in all respects according to the will of each, but they came to an agreement as to the conditions under which they were to conduct the fight. This fact, among others, is disclosed by a certain pillar in the Amarynthium, which forbids the use of long distance missiles."
A similar agreement is indirectly referred to by Archilochos (seventh century BC), the second contemporary author to refer to the Lelantine War. He tells how the "warlike lords of Euboea" will not use bow or sling, but only swords, in a (future) battle.
"Not many bows will be drawn,nor will slingshots be common,whenever battle will be joined in the plain;instead the much-sighing work will belong to the swords, for the warlike lords of Euboea are experienced in that manner of war."

The Romans, masters of military that they were, also employed slingers as part of their mighty military. Below are two videos on the slinging.

basic slinging:

here is the closer look at the ancient mediteranean style, as witnessed in thucydides:

Thus the myth is busted: the sling was not a child's toy.

Section three. Myth #3 - The Bible contradicts itself, because it says Elhanan killed Goliath.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 17:50-51 and then 2 Samuel 21:19, and then 1 Chronicles 20:5, then return here.

OK, what's happening here? Who killed Goliath...David or Elhanan?

Some scholars have posited that David and Elhanan are the same person and that Elhanan was David's personal name he was born with, while David was the throne name he took on when he became king. While this practice is attested throughout the Ancient Near East, this assumption, as McCarter points out, causes more problems than it solves. Let's look at another perspective from Old Testament scholar and Semitic language expert Gleason Archer and his extended answer and analysis to this perplexing question:

"First Samuel 17:50 states that David cut off Goliath's head with the giant's sword, after he had first felled him with a sling and a stone. Because of this amazing victory over the Philistine, David became the fore-most battle-champion among the Israelite troops, even though he was still a mere teenager. But 2 Samuel 21:19 in the Hebrew Masoretic text states that "Elhanan the son of Yaare-oegim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam." As this verse stands in the Masorestic text, it certainly contradicts 1 Samuel 17. But fortunately we have a parallel passage in 1 Chronicles 20:5, which words the episode this way: "And Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittie." It is quite apparent that this was the true reading, not only for the Chronicles passage but also for 2 Samuel 21:19. The earlier manuscript from which the copyist was reading must have been blurred or damaged at this particular verse, and hence he made two or three mistakes. What apparently happened was the following:

The sign of the direct object, which in Chronicles comes just before "Lahmi," was '-t; the copyist mistook it for b-t or b-y-t ("Beth") and thus got Bet hal-Lahmi ("the Bethlehemite") out of it.
He misread the word for "brother" ('-h) as the sign of the direct object ('-t) right before g-l-y-t ("Goliath"). Thus he made "Goliath" the object of "killed" (wayyak), instead of the "brother" of Goliath (as the Chron. passage does).
The copyist misplaced the word for "weavers" ('-r-g-ym) so as to put it right after "Elhanan" as his patrronymic (ben Y-'-r-y'-r--g-ym, or ben ya'arey 'ore-gim - "the son of the forest weavers" - a most unlikely name for anyone's father!). In Chronicles the 'ore-gim ("weavers) comes right after menor (a beam of") - thus making perfectly good sense.
In other words, the 2 Samuel 21 passage is a perfectly traceable corruption of the original wording, which fortunately has been correctly preserved in 1 Chronicles 20:5."

Let's tackle one more mystery before we end today with the last few verses in this chapter.

Read 1 Samuel 17:55-58, then return here.

Waitaminute. I thought Saul all ready knew David and "loved him" like scripture says at the end of chapter 16. How is it that Saul now asks Abner who this David person is?

Perhaps Gleason Archer can give us another solid understanding of what is happening at this point: "It is altogether true to life for Saul to see David in an entirely new light and to show a keen interest in his background. Apparently General Abner had no previous acquaintance with David except as a harp player and so was not even aware of Jesse's name (17:55). Abner had not been involved in David's earlier introduction to the palace as a soothing musician (16:18)...Saul's rekindled interest, however, went far beyond the name of David's father - even though that was his lead-off question. It is quite apparent that Saul wanted to know whether there were any more at home like him; this was in line with his standard policy set forth in 1 Samuel 14:52: "When Saul saw any mighty man or valiant man, he attached him to his staff" (NASB). That is to say, Saul was intent on building up a first-class bodyguard of champion fighters, and he saw in David a promising lead to obtaining more soldiers like him. From 18:1 we are informed that David carried on a fairly extensive conversation with Saul, going far beyond the giving of his own father's name. Thus we find that when we view the two episodes in their own context and situation, they turn out to be very true to life; and there is no real contradiction between them."

Section four. Assignments.

Memorize this passage that memorializes David's trash-talking the enemy of God: "You come to me with a sword, a spear, and a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the LORD of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have taunted. This day the LORD will deliver you up into my hands, and I will strike you down and remove your head from you. And I will give the dead bodies of the army of the Philistines this day to the birds of the sky and the wild beasts of the earth, that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, and that all this assembly may know that the LORD does not deliver by sword or by spear; for the battle is the LORD'S and He will give you into our hands." - 1 Samuel 17:45-47
Take some time to reflect on how you may have conceptions given to you about events and people in our scriptures that are caricatures of it rather than the real deal. Do you picture Moses as Charlton Heston? Is Jesus a white-pastie Swedish actor? What about other events or particularly caricatures of Jesus. Ask God to move in and help you re-think some of your underlying assumptions about Him and His ways. See what emerges and consider that God may be calling you into a deeper knowledge and relationship with Him through this activity.

Issues of the Heart 2

2009-08-05T06:56:00.000-07:00

we are in-between series this week again, and below are two more teachers and teachings from 1 Samuel:

Check out Steve Salsman (a pastor at the Central Maryland Vineyard) and his latest teaching: What's In Your Heart?
Check out Julia Pickerill (formerly of the Columbus Vineyard but now church-planting with Eric and friends at Vineyard Amsterdam) and her talk entitled: The Desperate Heart

see you next week as we begin our next 1 Samuel series: Mythbusters!

Issues of the Hearts

2009-07-29T02:58:00.000-07:00

While we are in-between series this week and next, I want to highlight some other teachers and teachings from 1 Samuel.

The first three this week each regard the issue of "the heart" in 1 Samuel:

Check out Nazim Bouadjemi (a pastor at the Central Maryland Vineyard) and his latest teaching: "King Saul's Heart"
Check out Nick Sutton (senior pastor at the Coventry Vineyard UK) and his talk entitled: "A Heart After God"

see you next week!

National (In)security - 6 of 6

2009-07-22T03:08:00.000-07:00

If you missed our first five sessions of National (In)security, please go back and start at the beginning:

Today we wrap up this present National (In)security series focusing on two heroes: Jonathan and David.

So, find a quiet space. Sit down and take a few breaths.

Today's session should may take about 90 minutes.

Ready? Let's begin.

Section one. Jonathan's Mission Impossible.

With the theme of Mission: Impossible now running in your head...let the adventure begin: read 1 Samuel 14:1-23, then click back here.

Before we get further in, let's consider some comments from Keith Bodner's commentary on 1 Samuel:

evaluate the presentation of Jonathan as this episode unfolds.
note the ambiance of the opening lines of this chapter, as Saul's posture of "sitting" will become increasingly familiar as the narrative continues.
for those of you who are familiar with the story in 1 and 2 Samuel, can you feel the tension between the faith, honor and goodness witnessed in Jonathan and the fact that he will never be king?

We find ourselves immediately in a situation of Philistine occupation and the heir of Saul, Jonathan, and his armour-bearer moving into a dangerous situation. A mission impossible situation. Pinned-down with less sophisticated weapons and the enemy has the high-ground. But that doesn't stop Jonathan. Did you notice that it actually says he did it without telling his father, Saul, the King? Saul probably would not have let his son take on this dangerous mission, but is Jonathan just a young adrenaline-junkie looking for action and adventure or is there more to it? Obviously, as we read, there was more to it. Jonathan and his helper scout out the Philistine garrison position and acting in faith, they join God in a great rout of the Philistines. Way before John Wimber's timeless observation, Jonathan puts it into action: "Faith is spelled R-I-S-K!" Jonathan seems to intuit an opportune moment that God will win the battle, which prompts him into taking action. Take note here of the Hebrew term na'ar and it's translation in verse 1, "young man bearing his armour" or just "armour-bearer". We won't go into detail at this point, but take note of it here, because we will come back to this when we get to 1 Samuel 17.

P. Kyle McCarter gives the basic background for this episode that flows from the previous chapter, 1 Samuel 13: "The general situation in palestine is clear. It is a time of Philistine occupation, or at least of a strong Philistine military presence, in the central hill country...Saul's armies, deployed in the hills around Bethel to the north of Gibeah (13:2), represent an organized resistance force. In the immediate background is Jonathan's assassination of the Philistine prefect at Gibeah, an act of open rebellion..."

So while Jonathan is out being a catalyst for God's will, where is his father? The author of our text seems to be contrasting the action of Jonathan, the crown-prince, and his father, Saul, who is sitting under a pomegranate tree, which is curious because pomegranate's grow on bushes. Anyway, as chapter 13 made clear, Saul and Jonathan have the only equivalent weaponry - swords - with which to really partake in a battle. Saul seems to have a terrible sense of timing and realzing what to do when. I know I have struggled with this as well, and may be a common experience of others: when we have made a few mistakes or mis-stpes that errode our self-confidence, we get trapped in not knowing what to do next.

I sympatheize with Saul at this point, because I think I have been in that situation. In my situation, I had wise counsel that guided me to transfer my confidence in myself to having confidence in God. When people get like this they often can turn to many places: horoscopes, pamlistry, even mediums to contact the dead. Even in American Christianity, I think many a tortured and insecure person have ran from conference to conference seeking with great anxietyIt can be paralyzing, just as it is here with Saul. But I think the contrast we see through 1 Samuel 14 between Saul and his son Jonathan is striking. Jonathan and Saul both probably believe that God can help defeat the Philistines, and yet it is Jonathan who puts his belief into action and goes looking for the opportune moment rather than sitting back and waiting for God to come to him.

I think we can learn something from this portrayal of Jonathan and Saul given by Erwin McManus:

"Jonathan is an unusual character in the history of Israel...this unique individual who did not allow his circumstances to limit the impact of his life. The Philistines were warrior(s)...described as idolatrous and wicked. It was God's desire to establish Israel as a nation that would reflect His character...Jonathan did not tell his father, but sneaked out while the six hundred warriors with them were asleep. The circumstances that led Jonathan to make his decision expose a dilemma we all face. As warrior-king, Saul had the responsibility to lead the charge. He had been commanded by the Lord God to engage in battle and was promised a sure victory...which leads to what we might call the pomegranate dilemma. Samuel described the dilemma that faced Jonathan. he told us that Saul was staying on the outskirts of Gibeah under a pomegranate tree in Migron, and with him were his six hundred soldiers, and also Ahijah, who was the priest of the Lord. In other words, all of the political, military, and religious authority needed to act was under Saul's direction. Earlier Saul was too impetuous to wait on Samuel to invoke a blessing of God before they went into battle. Now he was paralyzed and afraid to engage in the very same battle. There is a tragic reality that many times the very things that God blesses us with become the obstacles to seizing our divine moments...The greatest danger that success brings, aside from arrogance, is the fear of losing what has been gained."

And the fear of losing what has been gained will take Saul to very dark places as we shall see as we continue through 1 Samuel.

God does a great thing through Jonathan's risk. I'm not sure we can picture Jonathan' climb up the side of the hill on his hands and knees like this, but I thought I would share this scene for fun:

Thus Jonathan and his valiant assistant move out in faith and God literally rocks the world of the Philistines. The literal rendering of the Hebrew herdat elohim in verse 15 is "terror from God" or a "shuddering of God," which can also be witnessed to in Genesis 35 and 2 Kings 7.

Notice in verse 21, the reference to "Hebrews" who were with the Philistines and then turn and join Saul and Jonathan. The Hebrew word for "Hebrew" here is 'ibri. P. Kyle McCarter gives us some perspective on this:

"...the term 'ibri, "Hebrew," appears most often in the Bible as the designation of an Israelite in the speech of foreigners (or in speeches by Israelites to foreigners: Exodus 3:18; Jonah 1:9, etc.); the only clear exceptions in narrative materials to this generalization occur in Gen 14:13...in the story of Moses, where the ethnic distinction between Egyptians and Hebrews is crucial (Exod 1:15; 2:11,13), and in the present passage. The term is also used in legal (Exod 21:2; Deut 15:12) or quasi legal (Jer 34:9,14) material, where matters of kinship require emphasis...Scholars have long entertained the possibility of a connection between 'ibri and 'apiru, a title applied to certain peoples of disputed cultural background and affiliation...most often as enemies of established societies."

In the Amarna letters, which are ancient diplomatic correspondence from the Pharoah in Egypt to his underlings in Canaan, the 'apiru appear almost exclusively as militant mercenaries or even highway bandits/robbers. While these Egyptian records speak of 'apiru, those written in Akkadian refer to Habiru. These 'Apiru/Habiru are often described as displaced people, disturbers of the peace, malcontents who harassed the Ancient Near East during the second and third millennia. Not infrequently these 'Apiru/Habiru hired themselves out as mercenaries.

Further scholarship and research has ascertained that 'apiru/habiru is originally a sociological, not an ethic, term. It is significant that "Hebrew" occurs in the Book of Exodus especially when the sojourn in Egypt and the Egyptians oppression are concerned. It is likely that a process of assimilation took place: ancestors of the Israelites who had freely gone down to Egypt later became assimilated to other 'apiru/habiru. The latest scholarship by Anson Rainey actually points to another group similar to 'apiru called the shasu, who in one Egyptian text from the late 13th century BCE - the Papyrus Anastasi VI - refers to the transfer of shasu tribes down into Egypt, "...in order to keep them alive and in order to keep their cattle alive." Interesting parallel with the Gensis account of the Israelites going down into Egypt (beginning in Genesis 42). In any event, the use of the term emphasizes the oppressed nature and staus of God's people.

OK, let's move on and read the rest of chapter 14; click on this link and read 1 Samuel 14:24-52, then return here.

Saul commits another blunder in his binding of the entire gathered fighting men with his oath or vow. We can conjecture at some motivations for Saul's oath, but most of them are mere good intentions. At this point in the battle with the Philistines, perhaps Saul is trying to do the best thing: keep his men from being dispersed chasing the Philistines who are filled with "the terror of God."

It is a fact that in their skirmishes and battles with the Philistines, every time the Israelites have them on the run, the Israelites fail to follow through. Perhaps that is just what Saul realizes and tries to commit his men to actually follow through. Perhaps Saul is blundering in seeking to be like Joshua, who also put his men under an oath with similar language in Joshua 6:26. Either way, the text is clear in stating that Saul caused distress on his men, committing a great blunder.

The Septuagint (click here to learn more about the Greek version of the Hebrew scriptures), actually uses the word blunder, and McCarter picks it up in the Hebrew word segaga, which refers to a mistake made out of ignorance or carelessness or inadvertance. Milgrom adds, "when one commits a segaga, he is conscious of his act...but not of its consequences." Again, Saul fails to foresee how his action will affect everything else. The pattern of Saul's impetuous anger and lack of good judgement are beginning to be more developed and the consequences are felt more and more as we progress through the narrative.

Thus ensues a crisis involving the heir of Saul, his son Jonathan. We have previously noted connections between Saul and Samson, but now let's read Biblical commentator Miscall's notes on the interesting connections between Saul and another of the shoftim: Jephthah:

"Saul, like Jephthah, crushed the Ammonites. Saul, like Jephthah, makes a hasty, stupid vow that threatens, and in Jephthah's case takes, the life of a child. Saul's oath, in some ways, makes even less sense than Jephthah's. At least Jephthah's vow was explicitly designed to ensure victory. The association of Saul's curse - "cursed be the man who eats food before it is evening and I am avenged on my enemies (1 Sam. 14:24) - with victory not obvious. Does he consider it a form of fasting? Is he convinced that some ritual is necessary? Saul's motivation for the vow is unclear. "

Another character-flaw of Saul begins to emerge here, although when we looked at chapter 15 last time we saw it there too. Saul seems to care too much and give too much weight to what "the crowd" thinks than focusing on being obedient to the work given him to accomplish. So while Saul has bound the people with an oath, and they mostly uphold the oath until his own son violates it in eating from the honeycomb. Notice that Saul - beginning to become obsessive about divine guidance in evey move he makes (yet tragically making all the worng moves eventually), is consulting God and just as Jonathan violates the curse and the curse goes into affect, the guidance/oracle falls silent in verse 37...somethings gone wrong. Yet, while he searches and through divine guidance comes to find the culprit, only the intervention of "the crowd" saves Jonathan from Saul following through on his word.

We learn a lot more about Saul as this chapter unfolds. Did you notice the carefully-worded interaction and comments about one another between Saul and Jonathan? Again, we see the issue of fatherhood emerge from the fabric of the text. How does their relationship at this point compare with other father-son relationships that we have explored?

Jonathan says that his father has "stirred up trouble for the land." The Hebrew word-picture here is stirring up muck in a pond and making what would have been clear, cloudy. Keith Bodner also points out that this statement reflects the Achan narrative in Joshua 7, where Achan "brings trouble" on Israel after the victory at Jericho (where the echo of God shaking the enemy, and bringing down the walls of Jericho can be heard.).

We should also point out in verse 39 where Saul utters his vow, 'as YHWH lives', can be seen as a expletive. Thus the oath sworn under God's name implies that if you do not follow through - which we know Saul does not - you have taken God's name in vain, thus breaking one of the 10 commandments. Saul's impetuous use of God's name in vain - and as an expletive - will be witnessed again when we get to 1 Samuel 20.

One final note before we go to the next section: the disaster that Saul is becoming, led by the consequences of his impetuous and misguided vows and actions, are bringing the tragic character of Saul more fully into focus, in that while he is not merely a depraved man, but also a man abandoned by God as his relationship with God detriorates increasingly and expotentially from here on out. In other words, Saul's failure as a leader can also increasingly to traced to the failing relationship he has with God and being lost in his own disorienting shame, fear and insecurities.

Section two. Shepherding and the Discipline of Following.

Let's star out this section with a little encouraging word from the always-inspiring Erwin McManus:

We are moving on to 1 Samuel 16, because we covered 1 Samuel 15 in our last session.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 16:1-13, and then return here.

And finally, we have the appearance of the anti-hero that we have all been looking forward to: David. Biblical scholar Jobling points notes an interesting bit of information: the anointing of David occurs in the exact middle of 1 Samuel.

When we are first introduced to David, we find David in an important place: shepherding sheep, which is probably easier and less hassle than herding cats:

Samuel re-enters the narrative, and we see him mourning for Saul. Again the poigancy of tragedy felt. Even though Samuel is much-more straightforward in this anointing scene with David, we cannot escape the overarching point of how important good leadership is to God, especially the leadership of His people.

I was reading a paper from Don Williams recently in which he pointed out that the calling and role of 'pastor' is unique to the Christian faith. All the world religions have their teachers...they have prophets and sages. Yet while the disciple/discipled relationship is not unique to Christianity in particular, the role of a pastor is. I find that really interesting, because the term pastor is derived from 'shepherd'. I know from my own studies in biblical and ancient near eastern civilization that the image of a shepherd with his sheep was adopted by rulers throughout ancient times as descriptive of themselves.

Here we find YHWH instructing Samuel in the midst of choosing David from among his brothers, all of whom look like great candidates for leadership from outward appearance...just like Saul did. Keith Bodner notes that Samuel, upon seeing Eliab, does not wait for God, but when he first sees him Samuel immediately says: "No doubt, before YHWH stands his anointed!" While most English translations render this line as "Samuel's thought," the more obvious understanding in the Hebrew is that this is a public pronouncement. This is an utterly serious matter, and while Samuel is prevented from following through by YHWH interrupting him, how should we understand the "mistake" of the prophet? Whatever we think, this mis-step by Samuel seems to be followed by humility, as he is much more subdued when David is finally anointed, because we do not witness the detailed instructions that Samuel gave to Saul. rather, it simply states that Samuel returned to his home in Ramah. Several times throughout 1 Samuel 16, the text points out that David is tending to the flock, or David is with the flock. In YHWH's choice of David as a king for His people, David becomes a 'shepherd-king' who reflects the 'shepherd-heart' of YHWH for His People, because the heart of the matter is YHWH's heart, and leaders who shepherd God's flock being people after God's own heart.

Shepherds guide their flocks from both the front and the rear. Shepherds use undershepherds (and also dogs like Border Collies) to help steer the flock - they walk from side to side behind the flock to help steer it. I actually put into practice one of his insights while working with Ukrainian orphaned children at one of the summer camps. We took some of the orphaned children to an amusement park and then split into several groups. My friend and I lead our group from behind it rather than from in front of it...for the very reason that we didn't want to lose anyone who had been entrusted to us (of course, being fathers probably helped us in this aspect too).

Yet too often leaders are too busy playing 'King of the Hill' to really have true concern to care for those under them. As Dave Goetz points out, the rub lies in the fact that if you are a leader, you are already in a position of power. But where does your power come from and how is it exercised? Those seem to me to be the key issues for leaders in any sort of endeavour. Some types of power include:

Punishment: the power that comes from your capacity to coerce or punish someone
Reward: the power that comes from the potential reward you can hand out
Reverence: the power that comes because people admire or like you
Expertise: the power that comes because of your superior knowledge or ability to get things done
Information: the power that comes from having information others want

Exercising leadership requires self-knowledge of the leaders own short-comings, but most especially in my estimation patient listening and discernment. The best intentions of any leader can be corrupted. Perhaps we need to understand that the enduring force of leadership comes not from personality and popularity nor from the standing and recognition from some piece of paper on a wall behind a desk, but rather from the hard work flowing from our life's endeavour.

For Christians, our life's endeavour, as Jesus puts it, is to pursue first God's reign and God's justice in Christ. Therefore, the strength of our leadership is in humility and dependence upon Him. Our powerfulness is in our weakness. That is just how it needs to be with Christian pastors, they are following Someone else as they lead others. This is actually fairly difficult. They should get their leading from Jesus, the Great Shepherd, then act to steer the flock in the direction indicated by Jesus. Pastors and elders are undershepherds who guard the flock under the Chief Shepherd's watchful eye (Acts 20:28). Theirs is a full-time responsibility because they minister to people who, like sheep, often are vulnerable, defenseless, undiscerning, and prone to lose direction. We also need to recognize that pastors and servant-leaders in the church are not first of all servants of people...for this is the path too many have trodden to burnout. They are primarily servants of God...seeking God's interests and priorities in the life of His people, and therefore they are freed to serve the deepest needs of His people. Also, lest leaders become self-serving, I think Gordon MacDonald has it right when he says: "Servanthood is not about how I add value to my life but about how I add value to yours."

Here are a few more thoughts on Jesus as the Good and Chief Shepherd from Vineyard pastor and theologian Don Williams:

Christ is the Chief Shepherd. All shepherding must be under him, submitted to him, and like him. This would have saved the church from abusing the shepherding concept, whether by ecclesiastical rule or by recent discipleship theories.
Christ places his flock under the care of earthly shepherds. They remember that they serve him, caring for "God's flock," not their own ["my ministry, my church"].The shepherds must have pure motives, not be controlling, greedy or abusive. They (and those they shepherd) are to be humble - broken before God and each other, shorn of pride.
Shepherding is not a duty but a privilege, without ulterior motives, coming from a servant's heart. (where other motives emerge, they are to be confronted - shepherds work in plural, not in singular ministries). They form a team ministry.
Shepherds are servants of the flock. As such they will be examples of Christ-like character.
As shepherds, they are submissive to Christ (and implied, submissive to each other), they are to receive submission from "young men." But this is not a power position, it is a place of mutual service and humility: "All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another....Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand, that he (not yourselves or the ecclesiastical machinery) may lift you up in due time." (v.5-6)

We'll end this section the way we began, because I think Erwin McManus has something important to say here, and I think it relates to Saul. I think I see fear and shame and doubt creeping into Saul's life incident-after-incident in scripture. McManus tells us where that leads:

Section three. You Give and Take Away.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 16:14-23, then return here.

The tragedy of Saul really sets in here, doesn't it? And it's rather controversial again, so let's wrestle with this controversy, just as we wrestled with others including the ambiguities of the relationship between Samuel and Saul and also the issue of genocide and the Amalekites.

The controversy we face immediately is in verse 14: the Spirit of YHWH is taken away from Saul and: "...an evil spirit from YHWH terrorizes him." God sends an evil spirit to torment Saul, the chosen one? This has been another threatening issue to many Christians over the years. Perhaps, P. Kyle McCarter can help us in beginning to engage with this controversial issue:

"In ancient tradition a person once touched by divine spirit can never again be free...Another way of saying this is that the infusion of spirit is never neutral. It may endow with special powers, or it may breed misery; and indeed the spirit now torments Saul. We may speak of mental illness if we want - Saul manifests some symptoms of paranoia, others of manic-depressive illness - but surely Hertzberg is correct to stress the fact that "Saul's suffering is described theologically, not psychopatheically or psychologically." The evil spirit is "from Yahweh" and will play its part in the working of the divine plan."

I'd like to share two other provocative comments from Keith Bodner. First, there seems to be in the Hebrew sentence structure of verse 21 in the line, "And David came to Saul, and stood before him, and he loved him greatly, and he became his weapons-carrier." Who loves who? The Hebrew text does not contain "Saul" as the subject, thus the plain reading would infer that David loved Saul greatly. Second in the final picture in this chapter, David is ministering to Saul and soothing the king with his musical therapy during intense times of spiritual torment. What does this astounding ministry image communicate?

One last thought before we wrap up today's session and this present series. David's name in Hebrew means: 'beloved'. A fitting name for one so beloved by Jews and Christians as well as Muslims and more secular artists and writers. David has this mythos about him and his life sparks are interest. Besides Jonathan, he is really the most positively-portrayed person in 1 and 2 Samuel, yet at the same time we witness that David is also sooo human. He is also beloved and not insecure in the ways we have seen others to be. In being the "beloved" did David experience the kind of wholeness and love that casts out fear, as 1 John 4:18 speaks of? We will get more into all of that and David's "mythos" in our next study series.

Section four. Assignments.

memorize this passage that memorializes Saul's positively: "He acted valiantly and defeated the Amalekites, and delivered Israel from the hands of those who plundered them." - 1 Samuel 14:43
Take some time to reflect on the leadership issues of shepherding and Jesus' perspective on servant leadership. How do power and servant leadership interact? Do you have to give up power to be a servant leader? When given the position to lead, have I been selfish or selfless? Who am I seeking to truly serve?
If you are interested in more of what you heard here from Erwin McManus and his teaching on Soul Cravings, check it out here.
We will return in a few weeks with the next study series and pick up where we left off in 1 Samuel 17. Until that time, be sure to check back here weekely for some great related teaching and reading in between series.

National (In)security - 5 of 6

2009-07-15T02:56:00.000-07:00

If you missed our first four sessions of National (In)security, please go back and start at the beginning:

Otherwise, let's get ready to begin today's study. Find a quiet space. Sit down and take a few breaths. We have some difficult topics in this one, so prepare yourself. Today's session should may take about 90 minutes.

Ready? Let's begin.

Section one. The Anointing of the One Asked For.

We are going to backtrack a little today, and begin with Chapter 9 - which we touched on previously - because we need to take a closer look at the patterns and events and people as the story shifts focus again to another major character Saul, and all of this will help us understand the issues and impact of later events.

Let's begin by reading 1 Samuel 9:1-4, then click back here.

What do we find out in these first few verses about the next major character to arise in the sacred text, this young man named Saul? Immediately the father-son issue is addressed. Who is Saul's father: Kish, a mighty man of valor. The Hebrew here is literally: "gibbor hayil", which plainly means 'powerful person', but typically is used of great military men (as seen in Joshua 1:14 and a few other places) but it also references a wealthy person, describing the social standing and economic power of the person, as it does for Boaz in Ruth 2:1.

Did you notice the pattern right at the beginning of this passage of scripture? Let me give you a hint: compare these few verses to 1 Samuel 1:1-2.

Just as with Samuel's story begins with his father Elkannah, a certain man of substance living among the tribe of Ephraim, so Saul's story begins with his father Kish, a man of some standing of the tribe of Benjamin. As we shall see, Kish's interaction with Saul is conspicuously absent in the text, just like Elkannah's interaction with Samuel was left out of the text. Thus, we witness agin this motif running throughout Samuel of the possibility of absent fatherhood.

What do we notice right away about the description of Saul? Scripture goes out of its way to emphasize that Saul is a "choice and handsome young man", which suggests that Saul is a young person just emerging into adulthood, and he has "beautiful-people"-like good-looks. This is important for the development of the plot in 1 Samuel. This is also typical of how scripture introduces some of its heroes, as it did for Joseph (Genesis 39:6) and Moses (Exodus 2:2), and as it will for later heroes David (1 Samuel 16:12) and Esther (Esther 2:7).

Let's also take note at this point of the Hebraic similarities of the biblical description of the names of Samuel and Saul. in 1 Samuel 1:20, Hannah names Samuel and says, "Because I have asked him for the LORD." Although literally, Samuel means "His name is God" or possibly "heard by God". It is actually Saul which literally means, "asked for" or "the one asked for". Thus, as Keith Bodner notes, if Samuel is the answer to Hannah's request for a son, Saul is the answer to the people's request for a king like the nations. But, kingship seems a tricky thing here in our sacred scriptures at this point, and it doesn't happen right away. There are some more interesting paths to travel in our text. So let's move on in Saul's search for his father's donkey's and his initial meeting with Samuel the seer.

Read 1 Samuel 9:5-25, then return here.

The first utterance of people in sacred scriptures is most-times a defining moment for that individual (choose thy words carefully, says the wise one), and certainly in 1 Samuel it does just that later for David, but now let's focus on Saul. What do we find here with Saul's first utterance? He seems to be a young and handsome man, but uncertain about pursuing his own way, more concerned about what others are thinking about him, especially at this point his father. For some of you who have read through these passages of scripture before, this might strike you as surprising. Here we have Saul, who is portrayed at first as this handsome and sensitive young man, concerned about his father, and full of uncertainty about himself. Take note, because this sensitivity and uncertainty will be the primary battle within our young friend and king-to-be, Saul. Yet Saul seems far from being heroic at this point, and in fact his servant seems the most heroic and informed person, next to Samuel. This is in contrast to his master, Saul, who seems rather clueless. Another contrast between Saul and his servant is that the servant makes a decision and drives the action, while Saul waffles around and is ready to go home without having accomplished his mission of finding the donkeys.

So, Saul and his servant inquire of some young women at the well as to the seer's whereabouts. This well scene should resonate with us, as many times in scripture important things happen when men approach women at wells: Genesis 24, Genesis 29, Exodus 2, and John 4.

Yet what the young girls have to say might disturb you if you have read further into the scriptures and the history of the people of Israel before the exile in Babylon. The girls say that the seer has come to their town for a festive sacrifice in a high place. As I said, those who have read further into the old testament might be shocked by this: a sacrifice on a high place. Sacrifices on or at high places are condemned in later Israelite history. In fact, 2 Kings 23 praises kings who destroy high places.

This present instance, which has the famous and illustrious figure of Samuel involved in this sacrificial festival and meal in a high place, might seem scandalous. But nonetheless, it is what it is, and we are confident that YHWH is the focus of the worship festival here in a high place, and not the Ba'als or Asherah's of later worship festivals in high places.

Thus, Saul and Samuel finally get together, and we find out that God has revealed to Samuel that Saul is the one "asked for", and that Saul is YHWH's choice to be king of Israel. Note the continuing "unknowing" or cluelessness of Saul, as this becomes a huge issue later in the story. Saul's first exchange with Samuel is the question, "Where is the house of the seer?", and of course, Samuel the seer is right in front of him!

Yet God has all ready told Samuel this is the one, and to anoint him king, right? Well, that is what the English translation gives you, but if you kept with that you would not get the nuance of precise meaning here. In verse 16, YHWH tells Samuel to anoint him ruler over His people Israel, but the words there in the hebrew are 'mashach' for 'anointed' and 'nagid' for 'ruler' or 'king'. Literally, mashach is anointed or smeared with oil, from which we get the transliterated word "Messiah", which is applied to many in scripture, especially David as he reflects the coming Messiah Jesus. 'Nagid', however, is not the word for king. The Hebrew word for king is 'melekh'. 'Nagid' is ranges in meaning from 'cheiftain' to 'overseer' or also 'prince' or 'crown prince'. We noted this in a previous study that this kingship/monarchy in Israel emerges not all at once, but slowly in several steps from anointing by God and his prophet to acclaim by some but not all of the people to inauguration of the king's reign by all.

Did you notice the pattern here? This is a prophetic pattern that points to Jesus the Messiah, as we understand from the writings of the new testament: God anointed Jesus at his baptism with John the baptist, and during his ministry Jesus is acclaimed by many but not all as king. Then later, at His eventual return, Jesus will finally vanquish our enemies and every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. This is a pattern woven here and throughout scripture underlying the prophetic hope in Jesus.

Thus Saul is initially anointed as 'leader'. Saul has what sems to be the appropriate response in verse 21, almost the exact same words has previous heroes Moses and Gideon: "But I am only a Benjamite, from the smallest of the tribes of Israel, and my clan is the least of all the clans of the tribe of Benjamin!" Yet there is more to it, as Thomas Preston foreshadows at this point: Saul's sense of his own lowliness, his own un-worthiness, becomes a mental block that prevents him from psychologically ever becoming secure as king. Even though God eventually gives him a new heart, changes him into another man with the potential to rule God's people, Saul remains an insecure farm boy who accepts his role reluctantly at first and is riddled with insecurity. 1 Samuel 15:17 reveals it when it says: "Though you are little in your own eyes, are you not the head of the tribes of Israel?" This establishes Saul as a very sympathetic character in sacred scripture. This makes Saul's life and fate even more tragic, considering all the potential and promise the sacred scriptures witness to in this young man Saul.

Now we come to Saul and Samuel at the sacred worship festival, so pay attention, this is where things get even more uncertain for our possibly even more confused friend Saul.

Note that Saul is given the seat of the guest of honor. Also, in verse 24, Saul is given the priestly portion of the sacrificial meal, which would have been evident by precise wording here and its resonance with Leviticus. Why is Samuel giving Saul and priestly portion? What must have young, sensitive Saul been thinking at this point? Even later in this whole episode, Samuel gives Saul the symbolic two loaves of bread, again confusing priestly imagery.

Why is all this imagery important to note? We need to pause to get some background, because this may impact what we think of some of Saul's actions later. In the surrounding Canaanite city-states of this time period in history, the leaders of these city-states were priest-kings. They held both the office of high priest and king.

Understanding this might help us see the uncertainty and confusion of Saul here at this meal, and then later when Saul offers sacrifices, once with no condemnation, the other with utter condemnation. Is Saul confused about what exactly his role is as leader of Israel and what is expected of him?

Let's finish this section with the anointing of Saul. Read 1 Samuel 9:26-10:1.

Thus we read that to add to his confusion, Samuel takes Saul aside - privately with just the two of them - and anoints him 'nagid', cheiftain/prince/leader over Israel. It is at this point that Samuel tells Saul about his upcoming extreme makeover, prophetic-style. And Saul falls hard in his extreme makeover, just like Gloria Brown:

Section two. To Be or Not To Be a Different Man, That Is The Question.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 10:1-16, then return here.

Remember what we noted earlier about all the priestly motifs going on with Saul during his initial meeting with Samuel. Now, we go from priestly issues to prophetic issues, as Samuel instructs Saul and then Saul joins in with a band of prophets. Priest-Prophet-not-yet-King. Even with the initial person selected to be Israel's first monarch like the other nations, we get the prophetic pattern of who the eternal Messiah Jesus will be: Priest-Prophet-King.

It's interesting to note a few things in this passage. The key to the interaction with the prophetic group involves what scripture attests to in verses 6 and 9. Commenting on verse 6, Robert Alter says, ""you shall turn into another man. The drastic nature of this process is surely meant by Samuel to be startling; nothing less will do in order to transform this diffident farmer's son into a king than to be devastated by the divine spirit, violently compelled to radical metamorphosis."

Then P. Kyle McCarter has this to say regarding verse 9, "God changed his heart...", literally in the Hebrew, "God turned another heart to him." Compare the turning of Saul into another man in verse 6; the two expressions are about equivalent in importance. The metamorphosis into another man begins with a new heart, just as it does for the new people of God we become in Christ Jesus, as He gives us a new heart when we trust in Him and begin to follow after Him and His way. This is the breaking in of God's Reign in someone's life, giving them a taste of eternal life. Again, followers of jesus and readers of the new testament should feel the resonance in verse 7, which has the phrase "wondrous signs", which is the phrase used of the breaking in of God's Kingdom in the new testament book of Acts, and the phrase "signs and wonders" among the people of God.

Keith Bodner adds some questions to consider about this passage: "Why does Samuel command Saul to join the prophetic group? A reader might expect Saul's first activity as "leader" to be something in the military sphere. Evidently, a key component of this scene is the response of the people who have "previously known Saul." What do their words signify? Do they approve, disapprove, or is their reaction merely one of astonishment? Why does "Is even Saul among the prophets?" become a proverb (or perhaps a byword)? Why is the same prverb quoted in chapter 19?"

Another sad note at the end of this passage. It is to his uncle that Saul interacts with at the end of all of this, not with his father Kish. Kish has gone missing from the text and perhaps his sons life.

Finish reading chapter 10, 1 Samuel 10:17-27, then return here.

We will not linger on this passage, as we have all ready gone through it in a previous study. I do want to point out how controversial this is, because it's not entirely apparent to some. When the lots are cast, the tribe of Benjamin is chosen, and then from Benjamin, eventually Saul.

Remember context is so important. This choosing of someone from the tribe of Benjamin is utterly controversial, because it has only been 50 years since the nightmarish civil war described in Judges 19 through 21, which ended the book of Judges, directly preceding 1 Samuel. So the tribe that the others go to war against (Benjamin) now becomes the choice by God to lead the Israelites? No one would have imagined it! It's like the grandson of Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson, living in the South of the U.S. after the U.S. Civil War being chosen to lead the country. The memory of atrocities and war is still fresh. The wounds of this civil war still linger in the conscienceness of the people. But, just as readers of the new testament will attest: our sensibilities and lingering doubts are scandalized by God. In fact, the way God sends His only begotten Son to our planet is through an unwed, pregnant teenager named Mary of Nazareth. Scandalous.

Note again Saul's actions and God's actions. Saul is shy or ashamed and hiding from everyone. God leads the casting of lots and it falls to this handsome-but-awkward Saul from the tribe of Benjamin; a Benjamite as God's choice for leader. Scandalous!

OK, let's move on and read 1 Samuel 11, then return here.

Lots of interesting issues in this chapter, eh? We mentioned the similarities of 1 Samuel with the "western' genre of movies before, but also we noted in the same study, the similarities with 'mafia' genre movies. Here Saul acts like some prophetic mafia kingpin, calling the tribes of Israel to gather and coercing them with torn-up oxen parts with an ugly underlying threat. Also notice Saul's shrewdness in knowing that all the people haven't yet accepted him as leader: Saul includes Samuel in his call to gather the tribal warriors. Did you also notice that the Spirit rushes upon Saul and, our text reads in verse 6: "...and he became angry." Well, angry is actually putting it mildly. The Hebrew phrase that is translated into "angry" here is "'aph charah m'od", literally "anger kindled greatly" or we might say: enraged.

We tend to shy away from this sort of inspiration of the Holy Spirit upon people, to cause them to become "enraged", but Saul isn't the only one in sacred scripture to have the Spirit rush upon him and become enraged. Lytta Bassett in her paper, Holy Anger: Jacob, Job, Jesus, argues that anger, usually thought of as an emotion opposing faith, can actually, when properly expressed, give structure to a living faith. An underlying assumption behind Basset's thesis is her belief that anger awakens in us an innate ability to stand up for ourselves and to confront some injustice when it is expressed properly of course.

At this point, I want to call our attention to the many similarities between Saul and the infamous Israelite liberator Samson. For those who are not familiar with the story of Samson, check out Judges 13 through 16. Like Saul in 11:16 where the Spirit rushes upon him, he becomes enraged and then tears an animal to pieces threatening other people, Samson in Judges 14, has the Spirit rush upon him, he becomes enraged and tears a lion and some Philistines from Ashkelon to pieces. Disturbing as it might be, for both Samson and Saul becoming enraged is a symptom of inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

There are several aspects of the scriptures concerning Samson and Saul which are summarized by Simcha Brooks of University College London:

Circumstance: Saul and Samson both emerge as a result of similar politcal circumstances: the oppression of the Philistines
Calling: Samson and Saul are both called to liberate the Israelites from the oppression of the Philistines
Signs and Wonders: Both Saul and Samson are empowered by the Spirit to perform signs and wonders
Inspiration and Rage: I mentioned the connections regarding this above
Poor Life Decisions: Both Saul and Samson suffer the consequences of their poor decisions in life, being ruled by their desires/emotions
Death: Both Samson and Saul commit suicide and die while fighting against the Philistines

We aren't going to spend much time commenting on 1 Samuel 12 - as we focused on it in our study session concerning Samuel.

Yet one thing I do want to note here in chapter 12: in verse 23 - is this the establishment of the underlying role of the prophet?: "to instruct the nation in the good and right way?" If you have read the other prophetic scriptures, it would seem a good summary of what they prophets call Israel to come back to the good and right way. Personally, I think that is the heart of prophetic ministry.

Will Saul remain a different man? Let's move on to the final chapters that we will cover today: 13 and 15.

Section three. Holy Disturbing Warfare, Batman.

Read 1 Samuel 13:1-23, and then return here.

The winds of change begin to be felt here in chapter 13, with the whispers of a new and better person to lead and shepherd God's people. Is the making of Saul into a new man by God a failure? What do you make of this shift we find here, as Saul begins to be rejected, and we find the transition to a new hero in that famous saying in verse 14: "YHWH has sought out a man after His own heart." We will go more in depth on this reference to David in the next study session.

Remember what we mentioned earlier when Samuel and saul first meet each other and share that festive worship meal together. Do you remember all of the priestly imagery going on there? Well, as we just read, Saul gets in trouble for confusing his role as leader and king and thinking it's OK for him to offer the sacrifice before the battle with the Philistines. What do you think? Even though he tries to explain away his actions to the upset Samuel, is Saul confused about his role? Is he acting like the other priest-kings of Canaanite city-states? Is it OK for Saul to offer sacrifices or not? Here in chapter 13 he is condemned by Samuel with an oracle of judgment, but what about in 1 Samuel 14:31-35? Saul sets up an altar and sacrifices animals as an offering to cover the sin of his men. There he acts like a priest, but there is no condemnation with this one?? What gives? Are the two situations just different? What do you think?

Also did you notice verses 19-22? The Philistines seem to be doing a little "arms control" and "techonological embargo" against the Israelites. In fact it mentions that only Saul and Jonathan have a bit of the military technology: supposedly iron swords/spears, as opposed to the lesser technology of bronze swords/spears. As Robert Alter notes: "This bit of background notation vividly reflects the aject status of the Israelites under Philistine domination. Ironsmiths are banned among them to prevent their development of the weaponry needed for rebellion. The Philistines have a technological advantage, and are denying access to new technology. This is the assumption of many scholars and theologians, yet no archaeological evidence has found blacksmith sites in the region of Philistine cities as yet."

One final issue in chapter 13, all of the sudden we learn that Saul has a son, Jonathan, who is of an age to be a military-trained man. Kind of comes at us out-of-nowhere. Considering what we have found out about sons thus far in 1 Samuel: Elkannah, Eli, Samuel and their failure with their sons, even Eli's and Samuel's sons being called "wothless", what are we to expect with the new, sudden appearance of Saul's son Jonathan. We'll go into more detail about just what type of person this Jonathan seems to be in our next study session.

OK, let's finish by reading 1 Samuel 15, then return here. We are skipping chapter 14 about Saul's son Jonathan, because we will begin with him in our next study session. For now, let's keep our focus on Saul.

We want to note several things here. As Keith Bodner notes, this whole episode presupposes a background of a discussion about the Amalekites in Deuteronomy 25 but also Deuteronomy 20:16-18 outlines what some have called "the ban" or "the devotion to destruction" or "YHWH war" or "holy war". The term in Hebrew is herem. As outlined in Deuteronomy 20, everything possessed by the adversary is "utterly destroyed." Samuel instructs in verse 3, "Spare no one, but kill alike men and women, infants and sucklings, oxen and sheep, camels and asses!"

Holy war...that resonates with us today, doesn't it? We have become more familiar with it as Islamic fundamentalist terrorists have taken the notion to use for their own means. In Arabic we know it has the word jihad. Disturbing, isn't it? Even more disturbing, at the end of this chapter, Samuel takes the Amalekite king Agag, and ritually sacrifices him before YHWH. What does all this mean? Why is it recorded here in scripture? Why are people we have come to respect and revere like Samuel doing this...? So many questions, few answers that settle the matter. At this point, I can only give you my own perspective and recommend a resource for further study. As for me, Jesus is the reason I am interested in all this anyway. He changed my life, He wrecked my life in a beautiful way. I kind of stumbled into this gig because of Him, His Way. He is the gate I stumbled through and have been following after Him. Therefore, for me, it begins and ends with Jesus. We have a saying at the Central Maryland Vineyard: It's all about Jesus. I know it can sound trite sometimes, but it really is true. If I am ever faced with the choice of utter destruction of people or love of enemies and overcoming evil with good, I follow Jesus. He said love your enemies. That's actually pretty tough. Anyway, again, for me Jesus is the center, and He got me into this in the first place, so it begins and ends with Him. I can also recommend a resource that I have read that takes on this tough issue of scripture and God and genocide. It is a book called: Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide, edited by Stanley N. Gundry. It has four theologians tackle this issue from four different perspectives, 1. The Case for Radical Discontinuity; 2. The Case for Moderate Discontinuity; 3. The Case for Eschatological Continuity; 4. The Case for Spiritual Continuity. As the back cover states:

"September 11, 2001, brought us face to face with the stark reality of jihad. But holy war is neither new nor the invention of Islam. The Old Testament writings record what amounts to Canaanite genocide in the name of Yahweh. How do we reconcile this with the teachings of Jesus, who commands us to love our enemies and overcome evil with good? If our theology bears the fruit in our behavior as Christians, then we cannot ignore the question of violence in the Bible. Is there continuity or discontinuity between the Old Testament concept of holy war and New Testament ideals? Do we serve the Lord of Hosts or the Prince of Peace - or is God both? How should our actions reflect his character in these dangerous, desperate needy times?"

I do want to point out the connection here with Jesus, which is captured in a comment from Willard Swartley in his book Israel's Scripture Traditions and the Synoptic Gospels: "That Yahweh as Warrior is interconnected to, even lies at the heart of, other traditions such as exodus and kingship, is persuasively argued by Cross, "Divine arrior," 11-31. J.L. Greenspoon...contends that Yahweh's holy warfare gives rise to the belief in resurrection in Israel, of which Dan. 12:2 is the endpoint, not the beginning (see Deut. 32:39; 1 Sam 2:6 for earlier indications). This view, developed with no mention of M. Dahood and his contention that belief in resurrection has a significant place in the Psalms...provides another element of continuity between Israel's faith and the Gospels: Warrior-suffering Messiah/dying King-Resurrected One is a dominant christological portrait of Jesus in the Synoptics."

I highly recommend Show Them No Mercy for further exploration, although I realize this can be a deeply threatening question for many followers of Jesus. But rather than avoiding difficult issues, I recommend you take it on and pray about it and explore it for yourself in community. I find that this actually works well, and the Spirit may indeed guide you to an answer, even if we end up living with the tension.

Let's end today with two more observations in chapter 15.

First, notice the important imagery of Samuel's torn hem of his mantle and this prophetic utterance to tearing the kingdom away from Saul. We noted in a previous study that clothing is really important to pay attention to in scripture. We have seen the priestly ephod and Samuel's prophetic mantle/cloak. Keep a watch out for clothing and what it tells us, this will emerge again when Saul and David confront one another.

Lastly, we want to take note of the overarching connections throughout Israel's history between the Israelites and the Amalekites and the enmity between them. From Exodus 17 to Deuteronomy 25, the enmity and battles between them begin.

Of course, we just read about Saul and his holy war against the Amalekites, and yet the survivors go on and appear much later, while the Israelites are in exile and under Persian rule. We find the end of the line in the book of Esther. Esther and her uncle Mordecai are said to be descendants of Kish, Saul's father. They battle the evil Haman, the Amalekite and descendant of Agag, who tries to exterminate the Jews. Again, this theme with the battle between israel and Amalek keeps coming back to genocide. Eventually Esther and Mordecai outsmart Hamon and the Jews survive even to this very day.

This was a difficult and long study, so we'll go lite on the assignments this week.

Section four. Assignments.

Draw yourself a nice hot bath and soak for a long time. Enjoy!! See you next week.

National (In)security - 4 of 6

2009-07-08T02:58:00.000-07:00

Welcome to the fourth session of our current series in 1 Samuel: National (In)security. We've look at more context, Samuel and the "Ark Narrative", so if you have missed one of those sessions, please click the links and go through those sessions, then you can join us back here. Today, we enter into the section of 1 Samuel where the elders and people of Israel ask for a king, to be like other nations. Sounds fairly straightforward, doesn't it? Well, get ready, because it is anything but!

As always, find a quiet spot to go through today's session. Take a few deep breaths.

This session should take about 30 to 40 minutes. Ready? Let's begin.

Section one. Crisis in the Kingdom of God.

Let's begin by reading 1 Samuel 8:1-9, then click back here.

Did you notice the fatherhood issue we talked about previously, it comes at us right away. Samuel has set up his corrupt sons as judges in the north of Israel. This action by Samuel of fostering a hereditary judgeship is actually the activator for another shift in the narrative. The elders of Israel, when they first come to Samuel with the request for a king, claim that Samuel's sons are at least one reason for their seeking new governance. As Keith Bodner asks pointedly, the request for a king "like all the other nations" is obviously important for the plot of this narrative - but what are some theological aspects of the request?

I recall my old professor Dr. Gittlen at the Baltimore Hebrew University pausing here to linger on the questions implicit at this part of the text of 1 Samuel. What are they seeking when they reject God's way of doing things...His Reign? From our earthly perspective this might look like political progress. Remember, God's way of raising up shoftim (judges/liberators) is messy and takes a lot of faith and isn't exactly efficient. How does the monarchical form of governance advance their interests? What does a monarchy do for them? The next section of 1 Samuel 8 lists what the King does: builds a standing army complete with a personal bodyguard (in verse 11, an "outrunner" for his chariot, is something we can imagine: click on the link to see secret service walking along with a presidential motorcade , then return here), followed by the development of a military-industrial complex (verses 11 through 16 outline this). Thus the cost outlined for an earthly hope of stream-lined governance and apparent peace and security. No longer will the average subject have to be ready to be called up as warriors as part of a militia force for either military campaigns or just homeland security, all of which in inefficient, as it takes time to gather as well as taking one away from family and farming or herding (their pursuits of economic security). Law&order is established and apparent protection found in the king and his standing army, et al. Thus from a very earthly perspective, this would seem an advance in governance. For those readers of the new testament this "peace and safety" rhetoric should resonate with you. Both the apostles Paul and Peter harken to a disturbing time of transition and destruction using these words:

1 Thessalonians 5:1-6 - actually using the phrase: "Peace and Safety".
2 Peter 3:10 - speaks further of this disturbing time.
another resonance within scripture would be the response of selfish Istaelite King Hezekiah to the oracle of doom and eventual exile for the Kingdom of Judah from 2 Kings 20:19: "The word of the LORD you have spoken is good," Hezekiah replied. For he thought, "Will there not be peace and security in my lifetime?"

As our new testament readers will also remember, Jesus was always getting criticism from others for how God's will being done on earth as it is in heaven, always broke through the traditions of men, the ways of this earth, and was clearly a messy thing. C'mon, if someone spit in the dirt, made clay and tried to put it on your eyes, you might complain about God's way of doing things, right?

This reminds me of something John Wimber, one of the primary founders of the Vineyard movement, once saw with reference to God's messy Kingdom. As John drove home from ministering to a family in need, he had a vision of a giant honeycomb dripping honey on everyone below it; and these people's various responses: some were loving it and trying it, and sharing it with others, while others felt it was icky and sticky and well, messy, and they didn't want the mess. John interpreted this as the honey was God's mercy/grace dropping on people. Some embraced it, some rejected it.

Section two. High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 8:10-22, then return here.

In view of the cycle of God's deliverance of the people from oppression time and again, and especially in chapter seven where we read of peace and prosperity the people enjoyed under God's chosen prophet and judge, the people and elders of Israel, according to biblical commentator P. Kyle McCarter, "could perpetrate no greater breach of trust, no more arbitrary exercise of self-will, no more senseless deed of vanity than to demand for themselves a human king".

A later "son of David" - Jesus of Nazareth - comes preaching, demonstrating and embodying the 'kingdom of God' and though he is initially hesitant to be called a king, he does acknowledge that he is in fact a king (Luke 23:3, John 18:33-36). Of course, those who have read all the way to the end of the new testament know that Jesus is eventually acknowledged as King of kings and Lord of lords (Revelation 17:14; 19:16) What do you think this means? Is there a connection between the kingship of Jesus and that of Israel's kings? This will come to the forefront alittle later in the text of the scroll of Samuel, but again, I don't want to get us too far ahead and spoil all the fun. Thus, back to the current crisis of confidence that the people are having with God and Samuel.

When things get easy and we are partaking the in the blessings of God, we often lose sight of the need for God. We assume a lot and take Him for granted, forgetting the previous oppression and saving grace that comes from relationship with God. In those times, He can seem more like a big "Santa Claus in the sky". Take a few minutes to watch and listen to this song, I think it has something important to say to us:

Let's turn to a little political reflection for another moment. Compare Samuel's speech with those of Moses (Deuteronomy 32-33) and Joshua (Joshua 24). Notice how God responded each time Israel was on the brink of a major political change. Notice the emphasis that recurrs again and again in the short span between verses 11 and 18:

He will take . . . He will take . . . He will take . . . He will take . . . He will take . . . He will take . . . And you will be his servants. Samuel makes this warning utterly plain: kings are takers, not givers, and they come to be served, not to serve. If Israel wants a king at this point, they must realize he will be a taker, not a giver, and they will serve him.

There is something else happening here with Samuel. We mentioned it briefly last time, but did you catch it? Samuel is really reluctant in doing what God keeps telling him to do, and it leads to another reversal, which as we all recall is a major underlying theme. Biblical scholar Victor Hamilton tells us what the issue is: "God's response to this [the people's request for a king] is most interesting. Not once but three times he instructs Samuel to "listen to the voice of the people," adding to this on the third occasion "and set a king over them" (vv.7, 9, 22). The judge and the prophet (i.e. Samuel) are the individuals par excellence to whom the people are to listen. Here, that is reversed. Samuel, the judge/prophet, is to listen to the people (Miscall 1986:47). It is as if the writer is drawing a contrast between "a God who reveals his love in spite of being rejected" and "a judge who fails to conceal his selfish reluctance to become a maker of kings." Upside Down again: the people are supposed to listen to the prophet, but God tells the prophet to listen to the people. You have to love the honest portrayal of one the most exemplary characters in scripture. Even the third time in verse 22, when God tells Samuel to heed their demands and appoint a king for them, Samuel doesn't do it...he sends the people home. Samuel really must be shaken at this point, possibly having a faith-crisis to dis-obey God's direct instruction a third time. But, as we will find out in chapater nine, Samuel comes to terms with it, and moves to follow the instruction of the Lord. God asks Samuel to do something that seems really hard for Samuel to do, yet God patiently endures until Samuel is ready to obey. I call that grace. I can relate to this, can you?

Ok, let's move on and read 1 Samuel 9:1-25, then return here.

We will talk much more in-depth about Saul the son of Kish in the next session of National (In)security, so I only want to highlight a few things here for now.

First, Samuel begins to follow through with God's instructions to appoint and anoint a leader. Yet, in verse 16, notice that this looks more like the old system so far. The Philistines are oppressing the people again, and God instructs Samuel to appoint an anointed leader. The word in verse 16 for 'leader' in the Hebrew is actually nagid, which mostly means 'prince' or 'noble'. It is not the word from chapter 8 for 'king', which is the Hebrew word melek, which means, well, 'king'.

Of course, there are a lot of other underlying issues and imagery happening in chapter nine, but again, that is where we will pick up in the 5th segment of our National (In)security series.

Section three. Just What Sort of Monarchy Is This?

Read 1 Samuel 10:1-26, then return here.

The number three is significant in sacred scripture. Several things have happened thus far in 1 Samuel three-times, and the use of triad as a significant pattern is important for us to note. It is the way the biblical text highlights things for our attention. Let's review a few others that have occurred and then we will come back to our present text:

Hannah brings three sacrificial animals (bulls) when she dedicates Samuel to Eli's care and the service to the Lord.
Three times the text in chapters 2 and 3 tells us that Samuel was in the "service of YHWH."
YHWH calls out to Samuel three times before Samuel - through Eli's help - replies to Him.
The "Ark of God" goes to three Philistine cities (Ashdod, Gath and Ekron) before they finally retun it to Israel.

Now to return to our present text and kingship in Israel: what is the triadic pattern here?

First: Saul is anointed leader by Samuel at the beginning of chapter 10.

Second: the Israelites meet at Mizpah and Saul is chosen by lot and yet not acclaimed by all, and neither does he begin acting "kingly', but merely returns to his father's house.

For the third piece, read 1 Samuel 11:1-15, then return here.

The third element is at the end of this chapter, where Saul, having proved himself by defeating the Ammonites, is declared king and his monarchy is inaugurated by all the people of Israel at Gilgal.

At this point, you might be thinking: what kind of monarchy is this...? He's privately anointed by a prophet. He's publicly singled-out by God using the sacred lot, but not everyone goes in for it and they all return to their homes, including the chosen one. Then, finally, after proving himself, they acclaim Saul king at Gilgal.

Is this some weird democratic-monarchy? What is this?

I'll leave you with that lingering question today, and we will look more into all of this again next time when we shift focus, recover some of the ground-work we have laid, and turn our attention on the shy and chosen Saul of the tribe of Benjamin, who gets an "extreme makeover".

Section four. Assignments.

See if you can memorize this passage from 1 Peter 2:9 - "But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light."
Spend some quiet time reflecting on the messy aspect of God's Reign in the lives of people and nations. Journal your thoughts throughout this week, and see if God brings anything to your mind.
Has God asked you to do something really, really hard, especially difficult for you? Are you still waiting to do it? Return to this subject in prayer and conversation with God, talk it through, and see what happens.

National (In)security - 3 of 6

2009-07-01T03:11:00.000-07:00

We are back in the text of 1 Samuel again, and today we will seek to go through what most scholars call the "Ark Narrative", when the Philistines capture the Ark of God. If you missed our first review and our session focused on Samuel himself, please click the links and you can begin there.

Otherwise, find a quiet space. Sit down and take a few breaths. Today's session should take about an hour.

Ready? Let's begin to look at the insecurity of idolatry.

Section one. YHWH-Tzva'ot-Enthroned-Upon-The-Cherubim.

Let's begin by reading 1 Samuel 4:1-4, then click back here.

In this section, I want to begin with verse 4 and work our way backwards. In verse 4 we get this fuller descriptive name for God and what people typically refer to as "the ark of the covenant": YHWH of Hosts who is enthroned upon the cherubim. "YHWH of Hosts" denotes the myriads and myriads of YHWH's armies. Let's see what Robert Alter has to say in his commentary on 1 and 2 Samuel: "This extravagantly full title is a kind of epic flourish reflecting the power that the elders of Israel attribute to the Ark. "Hosts," bearing its older English sense of "armies," underscores the LORD's martial nature. The cherubim are fierce winged beasts imagined as God's celestial steeds, and so the carved cherubim on the Ark are conceived as the earthly "throne" of the invisible deity."

The actual ark, just as it is first described in the book of Exodus 25:10-22, would have been a large hollow case or trunk made from acacia wood overlaid with gold, with carved cherubim on its top with their wings meeting to cover the mercy seat/throne of God. Inside it held the stone tablets of the Law given to Moses at Sinai. You get a good look at a model of the ark of the covenant from this picture from the classic movie 'Raiders of the Lost Ark':

The problem that Israelites will face in the next section: they treat the ark like a lucky charm; they treat God like an idol or impersonal power to be used and manipulated for their interests alone.

This is the primary issue, the primary idea, obscured throughout our human history: God is not our genie in the bottle granting wishes to us. God is King...He reigns. Let's read Don Williams, Vineyard pastor and theologian, breath-taking description of God as King:

"God is King. He reigns enthroned in glory with a sea of flaming angels bowing low before him and rising to shout his praises. From his throne he speaks and the galaxies are hurled into space. From his throne he orders the molten, gaseous stars, and directs the planets circling them. From his throne he place our earth into its orbit and rules the ages of our geological and historical life. From his throne he upholds all things and judges all things. Moreover, on the awesome final day each of us will stand before his throne and give an account of our lives to him. Beyond our current chaos, the razor edge of nuclear night upon which we stand, beyond Northern Ireland, the Gaza Strip, Ethiopia, Haiti, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, and a hundred other wounds which seep nightly from out TV screens, and beyond our personal anxieties, our deep loneliness when the lights go out at night, beyond all of this stands the eternal, supernatural, divine kingdom, pulsating with power, revealing God's glory. This kingdom is not merely some otherworldly hope, Marx's opiate for the masses, or a spiritual "high" reached by mystical moments of mindless chanting. The shattering, life-changing news of the Bible is that the King who rules this kingdom both sustains our world from heaven and decisively and irrevocably invades it in the incarnation of his Son who bears his dynamic Spirit."

This is the first time in 1 Samuel that the Philistines come to our attention, so let's get to know them a little better because they will be important to the story in 1 Samuel. The Philistines are a people who have fought the Israelites over and over (in Genesis, Exodus and especially Judges) and will be a primary enemy, and a surprising ally, in our text. Again, the surprising upside down consequences of the Reign of God, the Kingdom of God: bitter enemies become loyal friends. But let's not get too far ahead of ourselves, because at this point the Philistines represent enemy number one.

We need to know a little about them, but I'll try not to overwhelm you. In the interests of full-disclosure, my advisor and main professor at the Baltimore Hebrew University was Dr. Barry Gittlen, who served as Field Archaeologist and Archaeological Coordinator for the Tel Miqne/Ekron Excavations in Israel (1982-1996). Ekron is one of the "5 cities of the Philistines". He was an amazing teacher, especially when we were going through this material back when I was his student. Truly, he is a leading scholar and educator with expertise in Philistine material culture.

So, a little about the Philistines: click on this entry from a bible dictionary for a decent overview. Read it and then click back here.

In our passage of scripture, the Israelites and the Philistines battle each other once again. The Philistines rout their enemy, but then the Israelite elders and warriors send for the "ark of the covenant" also referred to as the "ark of God". But there is a problem. Let's move on to the next section and dig into what we find out as the problem at-hand.

Section two. The False Security of Idolatry.

OK, let's read 1 Samuel 4:5-22, then return here.

Now let's see how Indiana Jones describes the Ark:

Did you notice how the description that Indiana Jones' friend Brody gives to the ark? That's exactly the issue. The Israelites in our text think exactly the same thing. They have made the "ark of God" into an idol, or like a lucky charm or a genie's lamp. What do they expect? maybe something like this:

The Israelites treat the ark of God like a lucky charm and they are devastated and thrown into serious uncertainty, both by the utter defeat and loss of the ark to the Philistines, but probably much more by what all of that means. Has God abandoned them? Or possibly, as Eli's daughter-in-law exclaims: "The glory of God has been exiled". God has left the building folks...or has He? That's what they struggle with, has their God abadoned them or, in fact, had they abandoned their God? Scripture witnesses again and again (from Genesis and Exodus to Amos and Jeremiah), God hates being treated like an idol.

We wrestle with idolatry today, and I'm not just talking about whether to watch 'American Idol'. I like what the North London Vineyard says about idolatry, because the slow creep of idolatry can sneak up on any of us.

When I was in the Vineyard Leadership Institute, Don Williams was teaching the "Latter Prophets" and shared the six characteristics of idolatry which he had learned from N.T. Wright, the Bishop of Durham:

idols are a perversion of the good - in fact, "good things" - like 'family' or 'politics' or 'church' - are easily made into idols. Anything that de-centers Jesus/God is an idol.
idols make you feel ten feet tall - idols make you feel larger-than-life, beyond anything; those who have struggled with drug additions as idols can witness to this fact.
idols demand sacrifice - whether its time or relationships with other people, whether your health or lifespan, idols demand that you sacrifice to them.
idols receive ideological justification - again, here recovering addicts can help us understand this: they justify the use or interaction with an idol
idols steal your humanity - idols isolate you from others; they make you grow cold to those around you, even while you may be thinking you are being more 'spiritual'.
idols kill you - given all the rest of these, we can see the downward spiral that leads to death.

Let's pause for a moment and consider this: What are the idols (life-dominating sins or addictions) of your heart and in what ways do you see the characteristics of idolatry at work in you?

OK, read 1 Samuel 5:1-12, the return here.

God breaks down the idols of the nations and afflicts them with tumors. It is somewhat unclear what kind of plague God visits upon the Philistines. Some translations say "hemmorhoids", while because of the mention of mice, others point to the bubonic plague. The Jewish historian Josephus delicately concludes that the plague was dysentery.

"Thier cry was so great that it went up to heaven" is an interesting phrase. The closest parallel in scripture occurs in Exodus 2:23 and Exodus 3:7-9, relating to the oppression before the plagues of Egypt. Either way, the Philistines panic and try to get other Philistine cities to take this ark and its afflcition away from them. Eventually, the Philistines have had enough of God and His Ark, and they seek to send it back to the Israelites.

Let's finish the return of the Ark by the Philistines. Read 1 Samuel 6:1-21, the return here.

Just a short comment at this point, because some biblical translations don't give you all the sacrificial nuance of reading this in the Hebrew. There is a lot of sacrificial imagery and instance happening here. First, the Philistines relaize they can't just send the ark back, they have to include some sort of compensation or payment of tribute (the golden tumors). Also the "milk-cows" who pull the cart are sacrificial animals, who are indeed sacrificed as a whole burnt offering. Biblical commentator and scholar P. Kyle McCarter notes in his commentary: "The account is filled with similarities to biblical purgative rites. The prescription of a compensatory offering ('asam), the notion of the ransom for the afflicted, and even the specific detail of the provision of unyoked cattle are all referable to known Israelite ritual...It is not impossible, moreover, that the report reflects the details of certain Philistine practices [that resemble common eastern Mediterranean practices of the Hitties]. The point seems clear: the Philistines are trying to appease God with sacrifice and offerings."

Section three. The Cycle of Deliverance and Intercession.

Read 1 Samuel 7:1-4, then return here.

So the ending of the Ark narrative is wtinessed with the return of the Ark to the Israelites, the ordination of a priest to care for the Ark, and the turning of the Israelites back to God.

"...and the Israelites...served YHWH alone." So, post-Ark crisis, Samuel re-enters the picture (after being mysteriously absent during the entire "Ark narrative") and turns the people's hearts and devotion back to YHWH. I think we are meant to recall the cycle that has just taken place over these few chapters: it is the cycle so often seen in the book of Judges: Apostasy-Oppression-Repentance-Deliverance, etc., etc.

Let's finish chapter 7: Read 1 Samuel 7:5-17, then return here.

We see here that the people implore Samuel to intercede with God for them, and he does. Besides a few other episodes (particularly Abraham in Genesis 18:20-33), we see intercession here as the act of one person praying to God or advocating with God for or on behalf of another. I like the thought of prayer as advocacy. What do you think?

Thus, the Philistines attack Israel when they see them gathered at Mizpah (assuming that they are going to go to war with them imminently). This time, due to the prayers of Samuel and the actions of the people, God is with the Israelites, and the Philistines are routed. It is said that God thundered with a great thunder against the Philistines and with the memory of tumorous afflcitions fresh in their memory, they surely have wtinessed the power of God, thus it probably didn't take much to put fear into them. God carries the day and the Israelites defeat the Philistines. Samuel erects a stone monument and calls it 'ebenezer' since 'God helped the people.'

One last look from Raiders of the Lost Ark:

ah, the problems you get into with idols...

Section four. Assignments.

If you have some time to listen to Rob Bell talking about sacrifice and idolatry in his series called: The Gods Aren't Angry #1, The Gods Aren't Angry #2, The Gods Aren't Angry #3; The Gods Aren't Angry #4; The Gods Aren't Angry #5; The Gods Aren't Angry #6;
Go to what we call the new testament, and read Colossians 3:1-10. Did you catch that? In verse 5, what does this first century Jew and follower of Jesus, Paul call idolatry? Interesting, huh? When we covet, we may not be bowing down to some image, but there is something else at work. Reflect on this and journal your thoughts on idolatry and covetness this week, and see if God brings anything to your mind and thoughts.
Check out this classic sermon from the great preacher C.H. Spurgeon on Samuel and Intercession.

National (In)security - 2 of 6

2009-06-24T02:56:00.000-07:00

Today we are ready to jump into the text of 1 Samuel again, and who better to begin with than the one whom the scroll is named after: Samuel himself. If you missed our first review and context session, please click this link and start there.

Otherwise, I hope you have found some quiet space with between an hour to 90 minutes to go through today's session.

Sit Down and Take a few deep breaths. Relax. Ready? Let's begin.

Section one. Seeing and Believing: Samuel and "the System".

Let's start by reading this passage of scripture. Click on the link and read 1 Samuel 2:11-36, then click back here.

I want to highlight a phrase that clusters here in verses 11, 18 and 21; it also appears in 1 Samuel 3:1. The sacred scripture tells us that Samuel entered into "service unto YHWH" as an "attendant", girded with a linen ephod. Very important imagery here. In fact, you might say "the clothes make the man", at least biblically-speaking. As we take a closer look at two pieces of clothing that speak to us about our friend Samuel, let's add clothing details to what we are looking for in our characters in 1 Samuel, especially as Saul and David come to the fore a little later. So, back to Samuel and his clothing: the linen ephod is first mentioned as the priestly garment in Exodus 28:1-8. There is an interesting aspect to the ephod that we find in 1 Samuel; we will see later that the "ephod" is sought after by Saul and David as a divination device that priests use to ask yes-no questions of God and deliver answers. Another garment that is highlighted in this passage, which is connected to the emergence of special activity among the people of God. In verse 19, we witness Hannah making Samuel a cloak or robe, in Hebrew me'il. As biblical commentator Robert Alter says: "The garment, fashioned as a gift of maternal love, stands in contrast to the ephod, the acolyte's official garb for his cultic office. Moreover, the robe (me'il) will continue to figure importantly in Samuel's life, and even in his afterlife, and we will have occasion to see."

This me'il seems more associated with the office and function of a prophet, as we eventually witness another word for cloak, adderret which is the word referring to the famous prophet Elijah's mantle that passes to his servant Elisha along with a double portion of the Spirit. Keith Bodner comments regarding clothing: "In two seccussive sentences there is a reference to Samuel's garment...Does this juxtaposition of garments (priestly ephod, prophetic mantle) symbolize his multiple offices?"

Thus, over and over here in these verses, Samuel from his youth is serving and ministering in a priestly function at Shiloh. This is an interesting wording: "serving God" or "service unto YHWH". The Hebrew is sharat - 'to wait upon'; 'to serve'; 'to attend to'; 'to minister unto'.

This word sharat is used to speak of Moses service unto YHWH and Joshua's service unto YHWH, as well as the word used to describe the priestly and magistrate duties in Deutronomy 17 (note the focus of both the roles of people involved in worship and in justice are the focus there). The word is also used to speak of Joseph's service to Pharoah (Genesis 39:4) and Abishag's service unto the elderly King David (1 Kings 1:15).

Is there a nuance of sharat (waiting upon, serving, attending to, ministering to) that resonates with you when you think of your serving in any context you can think of, but particularly when helping/serving someone with superior status, like your boss or a military commander, or a governor or even the Lord?

OK, let's move on and read 1 Samuel 3:1-10, then return here.

Samuel grows up "in the system" so-to-speak. Samuel was brought up within the structure, rhythm and institution of serving the Lord, without ever knowing the Lord (yet). We see that he lives for years "in the system" but not experiencing nor hearing from the Person to whom the System supposedly points: the One he is serving. Perhaps, in being raised within this system, Samuel was too young to realize or question the corruption that surrounded him with the likes of Eli's sons, but also the lack of a lot of prophetic activity, as the text emphasizes several times. But here he is working with the priests and ministers performing rituals of worship and keeping up the property. It seems rather ironic, but the System did not lead its prized pupil to know and connect with the Lord.

The Hebrew word for "to know" in verse 7 is yadah - 'to know'; 'to perceive'; 'to know by experience'. Thus the text let's us know several times that prophecy was not widespread and the word of YHWH had not yet been revealed to Samuel either. And yet, Samuel is opening the doors to the shrine at Shiloh, sleeping before the the lampstand and in the place where the ark of the covenant was and serving in a priestly function.

Susan Johnson, from the Hyde Park Union Union Church in Chicago, notes an interesting echo parallel with something we read about Jesus in the new testament:

"In the first chapter of the Gospel of John, we read the story of Nathaniel's call as a disciple. Nathaniel is credited with articulating everyone's private suspicion: that nothing good could come from the undistinguished town of Nazareth. He is recognized by Jesus as "one in whom there is no guile, no deceit;" but Nathaniel is more impressed that Jesus somehow espied him under the fig tree before Philip had spoken to him. "Rabbi, you are the Son of God!" Nathaniel unwittingly proclaims. In Jesus' reply, one is given the impression that for a moment the Lord is stunned and amused by his newest disciple's capacity to know him and yet not know him at all, to see and hear, yet not quite perceive."

So back to Samuel, who is waiting upon YHWH, without yet knowing Him. This should really cause us to pause and say: "Say What!?!" Does that strike you as odd? That someone might find themselves being with and hanging around other "believers" and not yet know/experience/perceive the Lord? Inclusion before profession of belief?

I want to highlight two issues here: discipleship and the radical inclusion of centered-set thinking.

First, let's look at what I like to call the radical inclusion of Jesus and His centered-set thinking. Check out Dave Schmelzer, who is not the religious type, talk about two types of thinking, which have come to be called bounded-set and centered-set:

I like the way the centered-set paradigm envisions people coming to know God. It "gives permission" so-to-speak for inquisitive Jesus seekers and those who wrestle with doubts (don't we all?) to be a part of the faith community before even "knowing God". It takes the burden of "conversion" off my shoulders and puts it on God's shoulders (a much easier yoke). It makes the relationship with God and experiencing Him not a sales pitch and "sign-on-the-dotted-line", but makes it relational, like becoming friends with someone, then introducing them to your other friend: Jesus - The One who still lives.

The other very real issue here is the discipleship issue.

Nowadays, most local churches try to "disciple" people. I was chatting recently with my friend Nazim Bouadjemi concerning discipleship, and Nazim has something important to share with us:
"I was reading in another church's Vision and Values packet (well done I might add--and I don't mean that sarcastically) and what was interesting is that I really liked it until I got to one point in it. So first it had a paragraph of its vision. Then four values to support it: Encountering God, Nurturing Community, Transforming Lives, and Living the Adventure. It then gave things under each value. So for Nurturing Community it talked about joining a Kinship, fellowshipping at meals, and then membership. Under Transforming Lives it said the following:
"Here is a list of areas where God may work in your life as you grow spiritually.
Spiritual Growth
Healing:
Inner healing and counseling for past wounds.
Deliverance
Freedom from past sins and bondages
Discipleship:
Learning the foundational truths of what Christians believe
Personal Walk with God:
Reading scriptures, worship, prayer, fasting, and other ways of relating to God.
Spiritual Gifts Basic Training:
Begin to learn about your spiritual gifts"

OK where am I going with this? I have a problem with discipleship being defined as "Learning the foundational truths of what Christians believe." That's it? Go through some curriculum? That is so Western/Greek. That is only a piece of discipleship. IN fact the other things listed are just as much of discipleship including the Nurturing Community where I think discipleship is most created; in the community on MISSION and Honest Fellowship. The last couple of days I've realized why it is so hard for me to define in a neat sentence what discipleship is. It is like trying to define culture. Anthropologists (which is what I'm studying) can't define it, agree on one definition. They have some definitions that grunt and grasp it but it isn't neat. Not black and white. And I believe that the culture of the church of Jesus is the major source for creating disciples, for better or for worse. That's why the discussion and discovery of Who we are what we value both in theory and in ACTION, and where we put our resources, is one of the most important things to be talking about and praying about as we talk about discipleship."

Section two. Experiencing God and Hearing God.

Let's read 1 Samuel 3:10-21, then return.

"...and YHWH came and stood in that place." Can our imaginations even conjure such a scene? What are you picturing in your mind right now? Exquisite joy? Sheer terror?

I think an insight from the great Abraham Joshua Heschel might be helpful at this point. He is speaking of the difference of what we might call prophetic experience and the mystical experience:

"...Despite all vagueness one feature clearly stands out. To the mind of the prophet revelation was not merely an event that happened to him only. The prophetic act is an experience of an act of God which was both beyond and for the sake of man. Unlike the mystic act, revelation is not the result of a quest for esoteric experience. What characterizes the prophet is, on the contrary, an effort to escape such experience. Never does he relish his vision as one relishes the attainment of a goal longed for. Revelation is not an act of his seeking, but of his being sought after, an act in God's search for man...Israel's religion originated in the initiative of God rather than the efforts of man...the God of the philosopher is a concept derived from abstract ideas; the God of the prophets is derived from acts and events...the lack of realism, the insistence upon generalizations at the price of a total disregard of the particular and concrete is something which would be alien to prophetic thinking. Prophetic words are never detached from the concrete, historic situation...the mystic experience is man's turning toward God; the prophetic act is God's turning toward man...the mystic experience is an ecstasy of man; revelation is an ecstasy of God."

As we read, we see Samuel is mostly passive and humble in this interaction. Also take note of the humility found in someone who has heard from the Lord. Samuel lays back down, with his mind and heart probably racing from experiencing God present with him and speaking to him, revealing hidden and future things to him. How his heart must have remained strangely warm throughout the wee, early hours, but equally he was likely disturbed. Revelation and prophetic insight are hardly always an act of enjoyment. It may be wonderful and awe-inspiring, but it's almost always disturbing as well. But Samuel then in the morning just gets up and goes about his normal activities. Eli encourages Samuel to be courageous after his initial encounter with YHWH. Certainly, there is the frightening issue that what the Lord has revealed to Samuel is the downfall of the man who is like a father to him. yet the wily Eli intuits the young Samuel's shy and possibly solemn silence and does not beat-around-the-bush, but gets right to helping Samuel speak forth what has been revealed from God, whether good news or ill. It is noteworthy that God's initial message to Samuel is an oracle of doom. Further, Robert Alter comments on this passage: "It's content not only indicates the overthrow of the priestly authority of the house of Eli and the implicit move to a different sort of authority to be embodied by the prophet Samuel." It also foreshadows the role Samuel is to have among Israel as a people, but also in his relationship with Saul and David.

Let's stay on this topic of experiencing God and hearing from God for a little longer, because it really is the most imporatnt issue. Again, let's read this quote from Heschel: "Is there a way of developing sensitivity to God and attachment to His presence?...Two sources of religious thinking are given us: memory (tradition) and personal insight. We must rely on our memory and we must strive for fresh insight...There is in the Bible God's word to man, but there is also man's word to Him and about Him; not only God's disclosure but man's insight...The Bible has several words for the act of seeking God (darash, bakkesh, shahar). In some passages these words are used in the sense of inquiring after His will and precepts...Yet,...it means addressing oneself directly to God with the aim of getting close to Him; it involves a desire for experience rather than a search for information. Many things occur between God and man which escape the attention even of those to whom they happen."

Sometimes we merely seek information about something rather than seeking to experience "the thing itself". What we are emphasizing here, "the thing Itself" is God, experiencing and hearing God is connection to God, is experiencing God Himself. It's "the one thing" that David seeks, the "one thing" that will not be taken from Mary of Bethany: being with God...connecting with God.

Let's listen again to Dave Schmelzer, senior pastor of the Greater Boston Vineyard, talk about connecting with and experiencing God and how he and his wife actually do it differently...and that it's OK to connect and experience God in various and different ways!:

While we are o the subject of interacting with God, I want to mention, as we mentioned in the first session, we begin to see roles shifting and emerging in the transition from the theocracy of Israel to monarchy as their form of governance. In chapters 2 and 3, we get identifiers for certain characters: "prophet" and "man of God". These are similar terms along the 'prophetic' continuum. The editorial note in 1 Samuel 9:9 explains that at one point what the audience knew as a prophet was then called a seer. It also explains that when a man wanted to enquire of God, he sought out a seer. There is some distinctiveness with each one, so let's review the basic continuum that we see and that develops throughout the sacred scriptures:

nav'i - prophet; from the Akkadian verb nabu, "call by name or duty', one summoned for a special assignment, usually by God; someone speaking who is actuated by a divine spirit; one whose words are inspired by God.
ro'eh - seer; one who sees; a person who has visions; someone who perceives or is caused to see something;
cho-zeh - fore-seer; one who perceives; many times referring to someone who sees that future;
'ish elohim - man of God; usually an anonymous person with a message from God (although several are named, among them: Moses, Samuel, David, Elijah and Elisha); someone given a message from God to deliver; a messenger of God;

Thus, Samuel is called "a trustworthy prophet of YHWH" in 1 Samuel 3:21. In 1 Samuel 9:6 Samuel is referred to as a "man of God". He is called "Samuel the seer" in 1 Chronicles 26:28. Notice, as Ben Witherington III notes in his book Jesus the Seer: "The prophet is not an initiator of this particular relationship with God, nor of the particular tasks that he will undertake, nor of the word he will speak. He is a person under authority who can only speak and act at the behest of his Master; this is the normal bondservant-master relationship. Note also that being a prophet is not so much a vocation pursued in this context, but as something that happens to a person, quite apart from his or her plans or will."

In the case of Samuel, who is being prepared and trained as a priest, his prophetic role is new and unexpected.

Witherington notes another interesting and important aspect of this prophetic role, and we would do well to note it also: Although Samuel had heard God's word, still he had some choice about whether he would speak it. God had not simply turned Samuel into a megaphone; there was some human will involved in responding properly. This "narrative of Samuel's call" serves as a paradigm for a prophet, and later in 1st century Judea and Galilee, Jesus is marked by these same characteristics of seer and fore-seer and prophet and man of God that we have noted above. Some would say, they find their fulfillment in Jesus Christ.

Biblical commentator Robert Polzin catches an important aspect of the narrative to take note of: "...not only does the account of God's revelation to Samuel end with a reference to the LORD's eyes (v.18), it also begins with a reference to Eli's eyes, which had begun to grow dim. In what way does this description of Eli's weakening sight stand for Israel's diminishing insight...What had Eli/Israel lost sight of?"

One final thought on this section of scripture. There is an interesting phrase used in verse 20 that we should take note of, because it will recur throughout our text. The phrase is: "From Dan to Beersheva". Take a look at this map. Did you notice where Dan and Beersheva are on the map? They represent the furthest points in the "Promised Land". We have similar phrases, especially in America. Like: "from sea to shining sea" or "from New York to LA". This turn-of-a-phrase is saying essentially the very same thing. It means in all of the land of the Israelites Samuel is known for his connection and relationship with God.

Section three. Rejection and Finding True Security.

Read 1 Samuel 8:1-22, then return here. (We are skipping the "Ark of the Covenant" narrative and it's capture by the Philistines to focus on Samuel now. This "Ark Narrative" will be the focus in our next session.)

I think there is something special to how the relationship between God and Samuel begins. It forms Samuel. I think we can learn something about security and insecurity from Samuel. Even though Samuel grows old and has kids and leads the people of Israel and lives life, the primary focus in scripture, the primary relationship for Samuel is with YHWH. What I continue to find refreshing and encouraging in the sacred scriptures is the simple "real-ness", the reality of people and events that are portrayed. You're probably thinking: "waiting-a-minute, I don't think the extraordinary parting of the Red sea or creation of the universe can be cast as simple and real." What I am talking about is people like Samuel. They are tremendous people of faith, and we see them as people to admire and be like. And yet, scripture portrays even Samuel as a real person, with real issues. As we just read in 1 Samuel 8, Samuel is a mixed character, very human. He has this great and special relationship with YHWH, yet his own kids turn out to be greedy and corrupt sods. God speaks to him intimately and reveals things to him, and yet he is threatened and hurt by the people of Israel rejecting him and his sons and Samuel's effort to develop a prophetic dynasty. Sure, God clarifies things for poor, insecure Samuel that in fact the people are actually rejecting God as King, but Samuel feels the rejection too. Somehow this makes Samuel more real to me, more human...more like me, a mixed character. This also teaches me something: It is only with God that we find security. Samuel is insecure thinking the people have rejected him after all he has done; his only real security comes with the faithfulness of YHWH to their relationship and to the prophetic and liberation ministry of Samuel. My security lies with our Father through Jesus Christ. Not in my family. Not in my job or money. Not even in my ministry. In God alone. In that way, Samuel encourages me, that as greatly as God moved through him, he is as frail and broken a jar of clay as I am.

Let's finish today by reading 1 Samuel 12:1-11, then return here for the big finish.

In this passage, Samuel is at the end of his dominance and rule in israel, and is reviewing his life and work before handing off to the one God chose: Saul.

Do you sense an underlying tension in the text? Many readers get the feeling Samuel is voicing some of his own anger here. They may or may not be right or wrong. Note the similar language used by Moses in Numbers 16:15, which tells us directly that Moses was angry. Also note the somewhat similar context, in Numbers 16, the rebellion against Moses' leadership lead by Korah is the context. Here, Samuel's leadership has been rebelled against, and the people asked for and received a king in place of YHWH and Samuel.

As P. Kyle McCarter explains concerning the last few verses, Samuel outlines the good and gracious work of YHWH among the people, even though they keep turning away from Him and his appointed leaders, who rescue and restore the people in security. This long retrospect of israel's history of apostasy is one of a series of reflective speeches by major figures, including Joshua (Joshua 23-24), Samuel here and then also Solomon (1 Kings 8:12-61). Although the focus of Samuel's reflection is more on what many call the 'period of the judges', it implies that things are changing with the development of kingship in Israel. But before we get to all of that, next week we will go through the narrative regarding the "Ark of the Covenant" and it's capture by the Philistines.

Section four. Assignments.

If you have some time to listen to some other teachers on hearing God and experiencing God: Check out Jay Pathak (pastor of the Arvada Vineyard in Colorado) and his teaching on "Hearing God's Voice" and/or Ellie Mumford from VineyardUK and her speaking on "Experiencing God".
Seek to spend some "quality time" connecting with God throughout this next week. Whether it is getting into a quiet space (in an actual closet or just yur bedroom) or taking a walk outdoors, or going for a run or climbing a mountain, just seek the "one thing" to connect with God. Just do it!
Examine your life and ask God to reveal to you or cause you to remember those insecurities that populate your own heart. Work on giving them over to Jesus, to His gentle touch, to His beautiful reign in your life, and whenever you feel threatened in your security - whatever the circumstance - remember to give it to Jesus, who is faithful and true and walks with you through all your dashed hopes and insecure feelings. Trust Him and put your hope in Jesus.

National (In)security - 1 of 6

2009-06-17T02:55:00.000-07:00

Welcome back! Today we begin our second bible study blog series. If you missed the first series, we explored issues and themes emerging in the opening chapters of 1 Samuel in our initial study we called: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Our new series, as you have probably ascertained by now, is called: National (In)security.

We will be looking at the characters and events in the period traditionally known as the transition from the time of the shoftim (judges/liberators) to the initial starts-and-fits of the Israelite monarchy under Saul and eventually introduce the hero/anti-hero all-in-one of 1 and 2 Samuel: David.

Reminder: For those who are new, please click on this link to our introduction to the Vineyard Bible Study and blog guidance. It has guidance for how we are entering into these studies and guidelines for interaction among ourselves here in this space. OK, before we jump into the text of our second series, let's pause again and review something important: context.

Section One: Context

Today's session should take about 30 minutes. Take a few minutes to relax. Make sure you are ready to learn. Minimize your distractions. Get comfortable. Ready? Let's begin.I'd like us to take a deeper look at the issues of context as we begin this second study series. I think Henry Neufeld of the Participatory Bible Study blog has a great intoprduction concerning the issues of context, so let's dive in:

"You're discussing a Bible verse with a friend, and suddenly he says, "You're taking that verse out of context!" You didn't think you were taking it out of context, but how do you know?
Quite frequently the "out of context" claim is used to stop arguments, often with no basis in fact. Yet many times Bible texts are taken out of context, and made to mean things which their authors never intended them to mean. How do you respond to this argument? How do you make sure that you are not the one guilty? What is context anyhow?

Types of Context

People usually think of context as a single thing. But each text has a number of different contexts, and different types of literature need to be considered differently. Let's look first at a number of types of context.

Syntactic Context - This is simply the linguistic structure of the verse, and how various elements of it fit together. It means you need to get various clauses and phrases attached to the right element of the sentence.
Literary Context - Where does this element fit in the broader structure of the passage I'm reading. In part, this involves understanding what type of literature you are reading.
Historical Context - When in history was this passage written? What were the circumstances? What elements of the history contribute to the nature of the material written.
Cultural Context - This overlaps with historical context, but goes beyond it. How did the people who wrote and/or heard the piece of literature you are studying understand the world, and written texts? What concepts were available in their world?
Canonical Context - Where does this passage fit in the overall canon of scripture. For those who are reading the Bible as part of the literature of their faith, this is particularly important. There are reasons why these texts were chosen and put together into the larger book we call the Bible. How does your passage fit into this broader picture?
Spiritual Context - Where does this passage fit in spirituality generally?
Experiential Context - What is the nature of the religious or spiritual experience of the people who wrote and read or heard the passage you are studying? "

Let's seek to keep these context issues in mind as we move forward in our study of 1 and 2 Samuel. If we do, we just might find our experience of study and our spirituality to be enriched.

Section Two: Themes

Along with some of the traditional themes that we recognize in 1 Samuel, such as covenant and kingship, as Christians, we want to be aware of the prophetic echoes that point to Jesus, the Messiah, since Jesus did say that all scripture witnesses to Him. We also want to keep looking for the themes we talked about in our first study: relationship and connection to God/prayer; upside-down dynamic of the Reign of God; fatherhood; rivalry and jealousy.

These themes will emerge again and again as we work through the material of 1 and 2 Samuel, but there are are a few additional themes that we can pick up on in our present series, and I want let you know about them, so we can keep an eye out for them. The first is more of an unspoken question running throughout the narrative: "Where do we find security?" As you might guess, this is where we get our title for this eries: National (In)security. We'll return to this several times throughout our study. Some of the other themes we will focus on will be: serving and discipleship.

For more on discipleship, click on the following two links Scott Knight recently had some good insights on being a disciple and also on what it takes to be a disciple.

One of the other issues that begins to be teased out in 1 and 2 Samuel and really solidifies in 1 and 2 Kings will be the roles people undertake. By this, I mean, as Israel takes up governance through monarchy, we will of course, see the role of the king emerge. Let's really seek to put aside our predispositions concerning what we think we know about monarchy, because I bet we find something interesting in how kingship and monarchy emerges in ancient Israel.

Also we see the priestly role continue, but we find the roles of prophet, sage and warrior emerging as their own peculiar role or being re-worked from what has come before. As you might guess, since Jesus fulfills scripture, we can find everything in Him: anointed King, righteous Warrior, insightful Sage, holy Priest and passionate Prophet. I just wanted to get those themes and issues on your internal radar as we proceed, so we can recognize them as we make our way through the material.

Section Three: Perspectives

Remember in our first series, I mentioned the connections between what we read in Samuel and Western-genre movies? Let's review that again: Westerns often portray how primitive and obsolete ways of life confronted modern technological or social changes. This may be depicted by showing conflict between natives and settlers or U.S. Cavalry, or by showing ranchers being threatened by the onset of the Industrial Revolution. American Westerns of the 1940s and 1950s emphasize the values of honor and sacrifice. Westerns from the 1960s and 1970s often have more pessimistic view, glorifying a rebellious anti-hero and highlighting the cynicism, brutality and inequality of the American West. The underlying events and themes of 1 Samuel highlight honor and sacrifice as well as having its own rebel anti-hero: David; it also weaves the sometimes tragic, sometimes brutal, sometimes heartfelt story of social, political and economic changes from the primitive and messy period of the shoftim (judges/liberators) and the theocratic society having YHWH-Elohim as King to the establishment of the monarchy of David and its succession through Solomon and beyond.

Well, the movie connections continue in 1 Kings, as it begins with David's bedside wisdom to his son Solomon before David dies. It reads more like a scene from The Godfather series, though. The aging patriarch of a dynastic family transfers power to his son. David's parting shot at the wise son Solomon is worthy of a mafia cheiftain: Be a wiseguy, kill your rivals and exact my revenge on my cousin and henchman Joab. Like I've said before, Hollywood couldn't make a better movie than to take scripture at facevalue. Anyway, scripture reveals the faithfulness of God to His people, even though they are increasingly unfaithful to Him. The sin adds up, and the horror and dread of exile is on the horizon as 2 Kings rushes toward its finish, with just the barest glimpse of hope left. But God's people learn that He is with them in exile just as He was with them in glorious Jerusalem. The story of God's purposes continue and are highlighted through the various prophets that God raises up...eventually their prophetic home is found as the seed of hope blossoms in the person of Jesus. Jesus the Messiah. Jesus the Holy One of God. Jesus the Incarnate Son of the Living God. Jesus the descendant/son of David. Jesus our Redeemer and Saviour. Jesus the Kingdom Catalyst.

Section Four: Assignments

Commit this verse to memory: "Young Samuel meanwhile grew up in the service of the LORD." - 1 Samuel 2:21
Take some time this week to be alone with God. In a journal or notebook write this question, "What is the context of my own life?" Spend some time reflecting and asking God about how you follow Him in your present context. Then ask, "What is one change I can change to live differently...to seek His Kingdom first, right now in my life?" It doesn't have to be something really big, but see what comes to your mind and take a risk that maybe God is trying to show you something.

Experiencing the Father's Love - part 3

2009-06-09T04:17:00.000-07:00

This is the final session with Ed Piorek regarding Experiencing the Father's Love - part 3. I hope you have enjoyed this time and teaching from Ed.

Next week, we jump back into 1 Samuel with our next 6-part series: National (In)Security. We will go in-depth with Samuel, Saul and the "Ark Narrative", as well as be introduced to David. See you next week!

Experiencing the Father's Love - part 2

2009-06-03T02:56:00.001-07:00

This week we continue through the three-part teaching series by Ed Piorek on Experiencing the Father's Love. Ed gave this presentation at the Current Summit in Cincinnati in November 2008. There is about 25 minutes of worship music at the beginning, if you have the time, worship with them for a while; if not, if you move the video up to about 29 minutes, that's when they will be introducing Ed.

Click on the following link for part 2 of Experiencing the Father's Love.

We will jump back into the book of 1 Samuel on Wednesday, June 17th, with our next study series called National (In)Security, covering the chapters 2 through 16...

peace

The Father's Love - part 1

2009-05-27T02:55:00.000-07:00

Last week we looked at the failure of fatherhood in both Elkannah and Eli. This week, we will hear from Ed Piorek, a Vineyard pastor from California, talk about experiencing the love of the Father, just as Jesus did. Ed Piorek grew up in the surfing culture of Southern California. He found Jesus as his Savior in the late 1960’s at the beginning of the Jesus Movement. He entered ministry as a youth pastor and eventually began a Vineyard Christian Fellowship in his hometown of San Clemente. Ed traveled extensively with John Wimber and Vineyard Ministries International. He taught on a wide range of subjects such as healing, deliverance and prayer. In 1989 he began to conduct seminars on the Fatherhood of God. Since then over 100,000 people have attended his conferences.

Ed gave this presentation at the Current Summit in Cincinnati. There is about 30 minutes of worship music at the beginning, if you have time worship with them for a while; if not, if you move the video up to about 35 minutes, that's when they will be introducing Ed.

Click on the following link for part 1 of the Father's Love.

peace

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly - 4 of 4

2009-05-20T03:02:00.000-07:00

The Ugly of the Good and the Bad

Welcome to the final session of our first bible study blog series: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. We aren't going to spend much time reviewing, so if you are new, here is what I recommend:

Make sure to go back and do the study in order.

Part One: Context for the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Part Two: The Good of the Bad and Ugly
Part Three: The Bad of the Good and Ugly

Today's lesson may take up to 90 minutes. When you are relaxed and ready to proceed, go for it:

Let's set the tone with this little video, from the nooma series with Rob Bell. It's about 10 minutes long, so watch it, and then jump back here:

Section One: The Ugly of the Good and Bad

There are two "uglys" in this story we have been looking at in opening chapters of 1 Samuel. These guys are Elkanah and Eli. These are the characters we'll be focusing on today, because they set-up a primary and underlying theme that begins with them and goes throughout the scroll of Samuel: Parenting, especially Fatherhood.

We see this theme all over: with Eli and Samuel, shadows of it with Saul's father Kish and Saul himself, and particularly with David and his children. It just gets worse in 1 and 2 Kings. I am a father of young girls, and I have come to understand that failure in our responsibility as fathers, in our stewardship of our children, is ugly.

We will start with Elkanah, so let's get some background: read 1 Samuel 1:1-3, and then 1 Chronicles 6, especially verses 25-28, then click back here.

So, Elkanah is established as living in the hill country alloted to the tribe of Ephraim.

Click here to see a map to get an good idea of where the tribe of Ephraim settled in the promised land.

From the later book of Chronicles, we find out that in fact, Elkanah isn't actually from the tribe of Ephraim, but descends from Levi, and therefore is part of the hereditary line of priests in Israel. The best explanation may be that Elkanah was geographically an Ephraimite, but genealogically a Levite. Thus, the reference to Elkanah as an Ephraimite relates to the territory where he lived rather than to his tribal origin. Joshua 24:33 supports this suggestion, in that some Levites are said to have dwelled in a hilly region of Ephraim. In hebrew, Elkanah's name means "God has acquired [a son]". Thus, from the outset, Elkanah's name provokes prophetic foreshadowing of what is coming: God's intervention to provide a son through Hannah: Samuel.

Elkanah also seems fairly devoted to worshipping YHWH-Elohim, as he takes his entire family year-after-year to the shrine at Shiloh to worship and celebrate before the Lord.

Now, let's get a snap-shot of the family life of Elkanah. Read through 1 Samuel 1:4-8, then return here.

We aren't going to spend too much time here, as we went into detail of the rivalry and jealousy involved in this turbulent threesome last time, but does anything jump out at you when you read through this passage again?

OK, let's move on to read through 1 Samuel 1:19-28, then come back here.

Did you notice anything particular with regards to Elkanah in this section? The focus of the story turns from Elkanah to Hannah, his first wife. Elkanah seems to "go missing" in any action or character interaction, epsecially with regards to his "miracle" son Samuel. While he goes along with what Hannah wants - "do what you think is right" - we never see Elkanah connect with his son Samuel.

Now, this may or may not be the case, as the scripture doesn't tells us what, if anything, went on between Elkanah and Samuel. Any good scholar would say that absence of evidence is not evidence at all. It just may be that it wasn't important enough to the writer to include it. While that is true, I want to linger here for a moment. We have been picking up on major underlying themes that are introduced in these opening scenes and then woven throughout the story. Thus, whether it's a busy, rich and important father who never has time for his children, or an absent father altogether, I believe the 'struggle with fatherhood' theme that appears again and again throughout 1 and 2 Samuel begins with the erstwhile Elkanah and then also Eli.

I know from firsthand experience that when a father "goes missing", it can hurt their children. There are a couple people I want us to hear from concerning their experience with an absent father:

Click on this link and watch Shannon Culpepper share about life with an absent father, then jump back here.
Click on this link and watch Barack Obama talk about being a father and his life with an absent father, then jump back here.

Even though my father was not in our home, he did stay engaged over time as I got older. Yet, even more, I know I was blessed that God inserted a godly step-father in my life to raise me up. I'm thankful to this very day for the love, wisdom and respect that my Dad showed me and taught me to show to others.

Check out this video interview with Ed McGlasson, former pro-football player and Vineyard pastor out in California, regarding the Blessing of a Father:

OK, let's move on to the the other person we want to look at today: Eli

Section Two: O Father, Where Art Thou?

Let's find out about Eli, starting with 1 Samuel 1:9-18, which is his first appearance in the story (which is usually significant and tells you something about the person). Let's also peek in on 1 Samuel 4:15-18 to get some perspective. So read these passages and then return back here.

So, what do we find out about Eli from these glimpses?

Eli was one of the charasmatic leaders of ancient Israel known as shoftim in Hebrew, typically translated as "judge" but also "liberator". He served in this capacity for 40 years (note this number as it recurrs more than 100 times throughout scripture...click here if you are interested in a brief overview of the number 40 in scripture, then return).

It's interesting to find out that Eli is so human and complex even in his first appearance. He utterly mis-judges Hannah as she is crying out to the Lord, thinking she is drunk. But then, affirms her, shores up her faith and gives her a blessing as she leaves. I think for the most part we give Eli a bad rap, but if we actually take time to read through the scripture (maybe while taking off our traditional paradigms) we get a much richer, more complex person. It should not necessarily surprise us if we have read through the book of Judges and witnessed the flawed but charismatic heroes there. This should also give us some hope, because scripture is not "hero-izing" these people, just telling their amazing with-God story. For instance, I want to also point out an important word-play that goes on in the passage from 1 Samuel 4. The word 'heavy' in verse 18 is the Hebrew word 'kavod'. kavod means weighty or heavy in the sense of honor or glory. After the Philistines steal the ark, Eli is ashtonished and falls over and dies, while his dauhter-in-law responds by going into labour and names her child in exclaiming: "i-kavod", or "where is the glory?" or even possibly meaning "the glory has been exiled"; therefore, I want us to understand the double entrendre here. Eli may have been overweight as a result of corrupt practice among his sons and the priesthood at Shiloah, but he was also heavy with honor for serving as a judge/liberator for 40 years. Eli is protrayed as frail and human; he has his faults, especially 'fatherhood', but he has glory as well.

OK, let's get another glimpse of Eli's world, read 1 Samuel 2:12-35, then jump back.

Uh-oh, sounds like trouble from the "man of God", huh? What always amazes me about scripture and the people in scripture is the honest portrayal. Even when we get to David, he is sooo human. This goes for our friend Eli too. While Eli was respected and known as a judge among the people, Eli is a mixed character, very human.

Eli's sons are said to be "scoundrels" taking advantage of their position to extort from worshippers the best meat of the offerings and having sex with the women who served at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting (see Exodus 38:8). Eli rebukes his sons but they ignore him and he takes no action. Were his sons just bad seeds? maybe, maybe not. The scripture passage seems to report that while Eli verbally reprimanded his sons, he took no real action.

Whether it was senimentality or outright neglect or self-absorbtion, he does not discipline them, nor work to change the corrption they have brought into the worship services of the people. Sure, Eli helps Samuel, but his glaring struggle and fault is the same as most of the other male characters throughout the scroll of Samuel: being a Father. To add to the tradgedy, it seems he passed this on to Samuel. Sin is real. Sin is ugly. Sin seems to be contagious, yet mysteriously, Jesus also says that wholeness is just as infectious.

In the ancient near east, and as emphasized in Ephesians 6:4, fathers are given the primary responsibility in terms of the training and transmission of their tradition and faith to the next generation. Deutronomy 6:20-25 gives an excellent example of what was supposed to happen. Read the Deuteronomy passage and then come back.

The spiritual life of a child is forming at a deep level early on. We are whole beings, embodied spirits, thus healthy personality development as well as good psychological bonding and connection and trust to parents open children to life and allow for openness to God. We must learn to practice spiritual formation even in our children, and not just through "speaking-teaching", not merely academic. It cannot merely be instruction and giving lip-service, but has to be in the experiential realm. In his book The Divine Conspiracy, Dallas Willard tells the story of a girl who was working her way through Harvard University. She was working for a cleaning service, cleaning rooms when one her her fellow-students, a man, propositioned her. In tears she went to her professor, and told him about it. You see, they were in this professor's ethics class together, and although this guy was getting an "A" in the ethics class, he had no ethics. This is why actually doing it really counts.

In Jewish communities, during the Passover festival, the tale of the Exodus is told year-after-year to the children through the experience of a communal and festive time of eating and enjoying each others company. Experience teaches all of us and colors the way in which we perceive almost everything. Now communicating knowledge is important, but experience gives depth to understanding. We are embodied beings - spirit and flesh both now and also in resurrection - so we must come to understand that basic human development and spiritual formation are not two utterly different things, but interconnected processes of growth, understanding and experience. Spiritual formation and development sets the stage for our own relationship with God, and knowing God as Jesus tells us: Abba. Daddy. Our Father. I like what Vineyard pastor and author Ed Piorek has to say about this and about God "fathering" us:

"God has placed within every human being a need to know Him as Father and to experience His perfect love. Our search begins early in life as we look to our natural fathers for such love, yet so often it is not to be found there. Unsatisfied, we seek all that this world offers to make us feel loved. Ultimately, however, there is nothing that can take the place of the Father's love. We now live in what many are calling a "fatherless generation" that yearns for this missing love. At this crucial time the Father is revealing His tender love for His children throughout the world. The Father has loved us from before the foundation of time. Some two thousand years ago He sent His Son, Jesus, to sacrifice his life to save us from our sins. Everyone who places their faith in Jesus as Savior becomes an adopted child of God. The Father then loves them just like He loves His own Son. He wants them to experience the same affectionate love that He showed to Jesus. He wants them to know Him intimately and be able to call Him "Abba" just as Jesus did. In this way our deepest need for a father's love is truly satisfied. It is the work of the Holy Spirit to make all this love real to us."

Section Three: People Rub Off on You

My mother, Margaret Ann Warren, is a wise woman. One of the best pieces of wisdom she ever said to me early on in my life - and it actually stuck - was: "Steven, choose your friends wisely. Choose who you spend a lot of time with carefully...they rub off on you." I never forgot this...even to this day. Little did I know this was bedrock, foundational wisdom from our sacred scriptures: The righteous should choose his friends carefully, for the way of the wicked leads them astray. - Proverbs 12:26

I remember Jason Jackson, in sharing some thoughts on proverbs and friendship, saying that the book of Proverbs is a unique piece of inspired literature. Couched within its brief, memorable phrases is wise instruction for godly living. In fact, Proverbs touches a variety of concerns that confront the person who is trying to live a righteous life. One of those topics is "friendship."

Friends are important, and we all have them. JRR Tolkien once said that the Church should not denigrate friendship as sub-gospel, rather celebrate it, like David and Jonathan, like Paul and Barnabas, like the disciples of Jesus. Friendship is the offering of a special relationship. Of course, we all know - or at least suspect - friends can be a positive influence or a spiritual hindrance. "Good friends" are characterized by four qualities as seen in Proverbs: constancy, candor, careful counsel, and consideration.

A good and faithful friend and/or parent evidences constancy. "A friend loves at all times, and a brother is born for adversity" (Prov. 17:17, ESV). This is the kind of friendship that we will see between David and Jonathan. But some so-called friends do not "love at all times." Solomon wrote in Proverbs 14:20, "The poor is disliked even by his neighbor, but the rich has many friends." Cultivating friendships indiscriminately can be disastrous. A true friend possesses candor. He will be open, honest, and sincere. Reproof that is given in love is noble; insincere affection is hypocritical. Solomon said, "Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy" (Proverbs 27:6). We ought to be thankful when our friends offer criticism; we ought to take it as constructively as we can. "Whoever rebukes a man will afterward find more favor than he who flatters with his tongue" (Proverbs 28:23).

Candor is a quality of a true friend. A genuine friend and/or parent offers wise counsel, even being at-odds with us yet always being loyal...perhaps critically loyal, but loyal nonetheless. Real friends provide this kind of constructive advice and a listening heart. It is very important to be discerning when it comes to who we associate with, just as Jude warns us in Jude 1:12-23. Yet the sage of Israel wrote, "Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another" (Proverbs 27:17). This counsel, even in the form of loving correction or disagreement, as shared among friends, is very healthy. "Oil and perfume make the heart glad, and the sweetness of a friend comes from his earnest counsel" (Proverbs 27:9). Friendship involves recommending even the difficult and conveying the unwanted counsel. Such a counselor is a friend to be cherished. A trustworthy friend has consideration. He should demonstrate compassion for the feelings of friends. He ought to have a deep sensitivity so he can say the right thing at the right time. If "counsel" is what he says, "consideration" is how and when he says it. Solomon observed, "Whoever sings songs to a heavy heart is like one who takes off a garment on a cold day, and like vinegar on soda" (Proverbs 25:20).

All that we have just said about friends applies equally to parents. We rub off on our kids. Have you ever seen you child do something that was copying you, but it was one of your "bad" qualities? (Ugh...I know that too well!) Unfortunately, based on what we read about Samuel and his sons. Take a minuste and go read 1 Samuel 8:1-5, then come back and we'll finish up.
It appears that Eli rubbed off on Samuel. It may very well be that Samuel picked up the parenting and fathering habits of his surrogate father Eli. This is borne out in that Samuel's sons seem to have more in common with the troublesome sons of Eli. For those of us who are parents, we know from experience that it's hard work to be a parent. There are few guarantees. It takes perseverance and patience and love. And we need grace...lots of it. We struggle, but we do not give up. Be encouraged. I want to end today by encouraging you with the graceful and insightful words of Frederick Buechner, from 'Whistling in the Dark':

"When a child is born, a father is born. A mother is born, too of course, but at least for her it's a gradual process. Body and soul, she has nine months to get used to what's happening. She becomes what's happening. But for even the best-prepared father, it happens all at once. On the other side of a plate-glass window, a nurse is holding up something roughly the size of a loaf of bread for him to see for the first time. Even if he should decide to abandon it forever ten minutes later, the memory will nag him to the grave. He has seen the creation of the world. It has his mark on it. He has its mark on him. Both marks are, for better or for worse, indelible...Even as the father lays down the law, he knows that someday his children will break it as they need to break it if ever they're to find something better than law to replace it. Until and unless that happens, there's no telling the scrapes they will get into trying to lose him and find themselves. Terrible blnders will be made-dissapointments and failures, hurts and losses of every kind. And they'll keep making them even after they've found themselves too, of course, because growing up is a process that goes on and on. And every hard knock they ever get, knocks the father even harder still, if that's possible, and if and when they finally come through more or less in one piece at the end, there's maybe no rejoicing greater than his in all creation."

Section Four: Wrap-up

Memorize one of these proverbs on friendship and/or parenting: "Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy" (Proverbs 27:6); "A friend loves at all times, and a brother is born for adversity" (Proverbs 17:17); "Listen to your father, who gave you life, and don't despise your mother's experience when she is old." (Proverbs 23:22)
Check out this video of Brian Welch (former guitarist of Korn), as he talks about the struggle of fatherhood and coming to faith in the Father
We'll be back in a few weeks for the next study series in 1 Samuel as we continue in our Vineyard Bible Study Blog series. We'll pick up where we left off, but for the next 3 weeks, every Wednesday, I will be posting and having you watch the 3 sessions that Ed Piorek did at the Current Summit. See you next week!

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly - 3 of 4

2009-05-13T03:01:00.000-07:00

Section One: The Bad of the Good and Ugly

Welcome to the third in our 4-part series focused on the opening of 1 Samuel. If you missed the good times that the first two sessions were, feel free to click over to the first session and the second session, then come back here for today's session. It should take between 30 and 40 minutes to get through today's study, so I hope you set aside some time.

Ready? Let's start today by watching this video:

...how does this gunfight scene between rivals echo in the story of Hannah and Peninnah and Elkannah...and later Saul and David and Jonathan? We'll explore that a little later, I just wanted to whet your appetite with that classic gunfight scene from the Good, the Bad and the Ugly; but now let's jump back into the opening chapter of 1 Samuel.

OK, read this passage from 1 Samuel 1:1-11, then return here.

So the book of Samuel begins with a family, a festival and a rivalry. Joy and bitterness mingled in the living of life. We see Elkanah and his family heading for Shiloh, a place of worship with a shrine. It's vacation time...living-it-up time...feast time...time to celebrate. Afterall, they are called "feasts" in scripture because that's what they were: parties with people and good eats. It was a holiday, a time in which they worshiped God and gathered before Him, a time of rejoicing and happiness. Yet, because of their life situation, Hannah - the first wife - is depressed and annoyed by her rival, the second wife Peninnah. What a buzz kill. But this is because Hannah is provoked by Peninnah. One translation says Hannah is 'mocked'. She is marginalized because of the tensions brought to bear in this three-way relationship. Tragic for all of them really. Well, until YHWH takes action and changes the course of the narrative.

Hannah can be seen here as the outcast; a marginalized woman with no children, no future, even though she is loved. Hannah is the outsider: a barren woman in a culture that prizes fertility. Hannah can be seen as the victim. Peninnah - the one who has it all going for her from the culture's perspective (she is married and bearing many children) - torments Hannah, because Peninnah seems to be jealous that Elkanah loves Hannah more or better, but no matter what the culture's view of the situation, Peninnah knows she is second. This should remind of us of another set of jealous characters from Genesis 29 and 30, Jacob and Leah and Rachel. The similarities are striking. Jacob loved Rachel more, but the Lord opened Leah's womb first and gave her more children because of this favoritism. Thus we need to understand that Peninnah can equally be seen as a victim from a certain perspective as well. She had everything a woman in the ancient near east wanted - a husband and children - but obviously longed for her husbands love, which in turn he lavished on his favourite: Hannah. Friction ensues. Jealousy ensues. Torment ensues. One woman filled with jealousy, one woman lavished upon with love...both miserable. Carol Meyers in the book Women in Scripture has this to say about the situation:

"The second wife to Elkanah in the Hannah narrative (1 Samuel 1-2 set in the tribal period-eleventh century b.c.e.) Peninnah is unloved-hence hated-but fertile. She is also jealous of Hannah, Elkanah's first wife, who is loved but barren. Peninnah's prestige as mother of Elkanah's children is emphasized at the annual pilgrimage to Shiloh, when Elkanah gives each wife and each child a sacrificial portion. Peninnah taunts Hannah on this occasion. Because the reader's sympathies are directed toward the childless Hannah, Peninnah comes across as a malicious woman. In fact...Peninnah represents a woman who accepts social paradigms without examining them, thus acting out the type of jealousy between co-wives known from the matriarchal texts of Genesis. Unlike the fecund second wives in Genesis, Peninnah has no voice in the text and is mentioned only in three capacities: as second wife to Elkanah, as mother of an unspecified number of daughters and sons, and as tormentor of Hannah. She disappears from the narrative when Hannah conceives."

Yet it is in each woman's response to her misery that the real issues come forth. In the case of Peninnah, her bitterness and jealousy are uncontained; they spill over into the constant torment and ridicule of Hannah. Yet for Hannah, she takes her misery to God...trusts Him with the ugliness inside her. She trusts Him with the pain and the place that it drives her.

But the misery and rivalry and stife between Peninnah and Hannah and Elkanah does not end in a gunfight like the three-way stand-off in the Good, the Bad and the Ugly we saw above...but another rivalry almost does.

Section Two: O Jealousy

Remember the song by the band Good Charlotte Jealousy?

Click and listen to this:

Notice the truth in the lyrics at the end of the song:

"Oh jealousy, Oh jealousy, look what you've done.
You've got a hold of me, you've made me become.
Thought I'd never be what I'm running from,
This jealousy look what it's done.
You ripped apart my insides (this jealousy)
You know that I can't sleep.
You tear apart my whole life (this jealousy)
You take the best of me.
Oh Jealousy."

John Dryden, a sixteenth-century philosopher, once called it "the jaundice of the soul." The Song of Songs says it is as "cruel as the grave," (Song of Songs 8:6). Others call it the green-eyed monster. It sends some to prison, others to the edge of insanity. It is jealousy. Jealousy is in fact one of the underlying themes throughout the scroll of Samuel. It is introduced with the rivalry between Hannah and Peninnah, but continues through the narrative especially seen between two well-known characters: Saul and David. "And from that time on Saul kept a jealous eye on David" (1 Samuel 18:8-9). Jealousy becomes the major motivating factor in Saul's later life...eventually it consumes him.

There are other minor rivalries and jealousies in Samuel, including: David and Absalom. Joab and Abner. Joab and Beniah. But the main one is Saul and David flowing from the initial rivalry seen between Hannah and Peninnah.

Let's look at the connections between the tense three-way relationship between Hannah-Peninnah-Elkannah and David-Saul-Jonathan:

Peninnah is extremely jealous of Hannah and the love lavished upon her. Saul is jealous of David and the love and admiration lavished upon him by the people.
Elkanah has to live with both of his wives, and even though Peninnah has raised up offspring for him, he loves Hannah more. Jonathan lives with both his father Saul and his friend David, and even though Saul has his inheritance and loyalty as his father, Jonathan loves David more.
Peninnah torments Hannah and drives her to flee to God in tears and weeping. Saul torments David by seeking to kill him and driving him to flee into the wilderness...and eventually driving David from Israel altogether and into the employ of their enemies, the Philistines.
Hannah, weeping, wanders into the temple at Shiloh and pleads with YHWH to take up her cause. David, who weeps and wanders through the wilderness, is constantly seeking YHWH's direction and praying that YHWH would take up his cause (see Psalm 35:23).
Hannah makes a vow to YHWH and fulfills it. David makes vows to YHWH and fulfills them (Psalm 61:8)

Even though Saul initially loved David, and even though David was loyal to Saul, jealousy soon consumed him. After the Goliath affair, David became one of the chief fighting men, and Saul enjoyed the benefits of David's victories. But jealousy raises its head and the tipping point for Saul comes after David had taken his daughter as wife, had taken the love and loyalty of his heir Jonathan, and finally had taken the love of the people. Thus his jealousy drives him to seek to kill David. It was the custom among women to celebrate the triumphs of their warriors after a great battle in spectacular performances. Decked with wreaths, they danced down the public streets, singing the songs of victory in praise of their great leaders. They were specially enthusiastic over David, as the little ditty notes, "Saul hath killed his thousands, but David his ten thousands," was chanted with pride by beautiful maidens and wise matrons, further stirring Saul to deadly jealousy. He determined to suppress David in some way or to kill him outright. Saul soon beamoes absorbed in plotting and in planning how to circumvent David, and looked with jealousy on the warm friendship maturing between him and his son Jonathan. Several times, Saul tried to kill David himself with a spear, but even though David was playing the harp at the time, he easily escaped. As David's fame increased, so did Saul's jealousy and his efforts to kill David. Jealousy is bred from Fear and burns until an explosion of anger occurs. The Hebrew word for the kind of anger Saul experiences is informative: charah-"to burn, be kindled, glow with anger, be incensed, grow indignant; to be zealous, act zealously." Unlike some of its synonyms, charah points to the fire or heat of the anger just after it has been ignited. Charah captures the moment a person explodes with anger-the moment anger is ignited before any sense of control takes over, before a rational thought can be processed. When Saul's son Jonathan was discovered protecting David, Saul exloded with anger and threw a spear at his own son in an effort to kill him (1 Samuel 20:32-43).

Thus, jealousy is a dangerous thing. But check it out, I think Bob has something we need to hear about jealousy and God, just to maybe understand it a little deeper:

Section Three: Where Is Your Pain Driving You?

As important as it is to acknowledge your pain and brokenness to yourself and before the Lord, we need to discern where our pain is driving us. To false comforts or to God? I like the way Paula White sums up the meaning of the story of rivalry and pain between Hannah and Peninnah:

"Have you ever known what it means to have things going right in many areas of your life, yet in one or more areas, things couldn't be more wrong? Have you ever been in that place where you appear on the outside to be succeeding, but on the inside you're fighting a horrific battle? That's what was happening in Hannah's life...

The female rivalry in this family was rooted in jealousy, which is rooted in fear, and specifically, a fear that one can be replaced. Hannah was jealous of Peninnah because Peninnah had children. Peninnah was jealous of Hannah because Hannah had Elkanah's love.

Hannah's problem drove her to God. Only God could cause Hannah to conceive and bear a child. At the entrance to the tabernacle of the Lord, Hannah poured out her heart to God. She was so deeply wounded that she wept there and prayed with her lips moving but without any sound coming from her mouth. It was so intense that the high priest, Eli, thought she must be drunk. But Hannah refused to be denied, and God answered her desperate prayer of faith (1 Samuel 1:17). "

God reveals Himself to Hannah through His action in her life. The desperate situation of Hannah reminds me of another woman who encountered Jesus. Do you remember the Samaritan woman at the well? Click this link to read her story in John 4:4-27 and then come back here.

Can you see the immediate connection between Hannah and the Samaritan woman? As Jean Vanier comments, When I hear the woman in the gospel saying: "I have no husband," I hear the terrible and painful cry of humanity, of so many of us: "I feel lonely and guilty. Nobody is really committed to me." It is an anguished response. Did you notice what time of day the Samaritan woman was going out to the well? Mid-day, the sun is high and hot, and Jesus is thirsty. All the other people in that time go out to the well for water early in the morning or early in the evening. At mid-day no one else would normally be there, thus this woman comes as an outcast, anguished, yet is surprised by meeting a divine encounter. Remember when Hannah went to the shrine at Shiloh to seek God the first time? It was after everyone who was there at the festival partying would be gone. Anguished, she went to weep and cry before God without anyone else there, except Eli. Eli blesses Hannah, and God opens her womb. Jesus reveals Himself to the Samaritan woman, and God opens up her life. It's utterly amazing to me that Jesus reveals to the Samaritan woman who he is before he does to His own disciples in the text of the gospel of John. To the Samaritan woman Jesus responds to her comment about the Messiah by saying: "I AM" It's His big secret, yet to this broken and lonely woman Jesus reveals His secret name...who He is...and she responds

Both Hannah and the Samaritan woman were desperate, lonely even though they both had men in their lives. They felt and lived as outcasts from their societies. Both of these women's pain drove them to meeting with God.

Are you desperate enough today to press toward God? Is your pain driving you to Jesus? Are you at the point of forgetting yourself and pushing everything in the way between you and God out of the way? Are you facing a need that is deep enough to drive you to push through any resistance that comes your way to get to God? When you are sick and tired of being sick and tired, you'll do whatever it takes to connect with God. He is willing to meet us...are we seeking Him?

Section Four: Assignments

Memorize this verse: And she was in bitterness of soul, and prayed unto the LORD, and wept sore. - 1 Samuel 1:10
Get alone with God this week. Speak your mind. Cry out. Weep. Laugh. Repent. Ask God where the pain in your life is driving you. Take some time to reflect on your life and see if you can discern the patterns in your life and where pain drives you. Is it driving you to false comforts and tormenting others? Or is it driving you to the Father and His embrace? Do you think sharing this with trusted friends might be helpful? Do you need counseling and prayer ministry?
Talk to a trusted friend about helping to keep you in a loving, accountable place with respect to any false comforts or dysfunctional behaviours that you identify.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly - 2 of 4

2009-05-06T02:55:00.000-07:00

Section One: The Good of the Bad and Ugly

Sit down and take a few deep breaths. I hope you have put aside maybe 45 minutes to an hour to work through this study today. If you didn't get a chance to go through last week's session, please click here: Good-Bad-Ugly #1, and start there first.

Ready? OK, let's jump into our study of 1 Samuel.

Click on this link to read 1 Samuel 1:1-8, then return back here.

As I mentioned last time, the scroll of Samuel reads through like a "Western" film, full of action, tragedy, drama, romance, and more action. So the first scene opens: "There was a man..." But this immediately mis-leads the reader, because as we find out about this man, Elkanah from Ramathaim (which some have associated with the Arimathea in the Gospel accounts in the New Testament), we actually meet the primary person in the first story of 1 Samuel...no, not Samuel himself, but his mother: Hannah. The tables turn, the perspective shifts, and everything we find out in the first two chapters of 1 Samuel revolves around the good Hannah. Hannah's part in this story is a wonderful testimony to the "true grit" of a woman honestly devoted to God and highlights the primary relationship we have with God: Prayer.

So, as we just read, Hannah is living in diffculty with her husband - who loves her - and her rival, his second wife Peninnah (we'll highlight more about her and the relational angst and dysfunction between the threesome in this family in our next study session). Hannah is explicitly referred to as the "first wife" or "primary wife". We learn a few sentences later that this is because her husband favours her, loves her, even though she is childless after what appears to be quite a few years of marriage. Perhaps, even as the couple aged, Hannah's barrenness contributed to Elkanah taking a second wife to raise-up sons. Hmmm, can you see the pattern in that? Can you hear the echo of other famous stories from scripture in that scenario? This should remind us of another account of a barren couple who bring in another woman to rasie up a son for them. Remember Abraham, Sarah and Hagar from Genesis 16? Hannah is barren and yet she is Elkanah's favoured wife, and the other wife is provoking her.

Admission: I'm kind of a word-nerd, in that I like looking up the original words in Hebrew and Greek when I study the Bible, and even wonder at the choice of words made by English translators. Thus, it's interesting to note, as Keith Bodner points out in his commentary on 1 Samuel, scholars have been divided over the interpretation of "Hannah's portion" in the sacred festival meal in this beginning story, whether this is "one portion" or a "double portion". Of course, the context clearly states that Elkanah has two wives, and there is rivalry and jealousy between this threesome. There are actually two translations of the Bible that take these differing views: The RSV and the NRSV.

Take a look at the RSV translation of 1 Samuel 1:4-5
Now look at the NRSV translation of the same passage

The literal Hebrew reads: "but to Hannah he gave a whole face portion; for he had love for Hannah." so, the debate cirlces around what the Hebrew "whole face portion" or 'echad 'aph manah means.

But what do you think? The RSV/NRSV seem to base their translation on their interpretation. If he loves her he gives her a double portion...or does it make better sense for Hannah to receive a single portion? Remember the context: Peninnah and her children get "portions" but poor, hopeless Hannah gets one portion, for she has no children. Personally, given the context and the Hebrew wording, I think I would say Hannah gets the "choisest" or "best" portion (which agrees with some ancient commentators of 1 Samuel in Aramaic Targums), but it is only a single portion, because the Lord had closed her womb and she has no children to share more portions with. This to me teases out the poignancy of this passage: she get the best portion because she is loved, but only one portion because she has no children. She is favoured, but somehow bears the weight of being unfulfilled without children. Again, remember our context regarding life as a woman in the Ancient Near East; the lack of children, especially sons to continue the family, was the bitterest disappointment for a woman in the ancient Near East. Barrenness was often seen as a curse from God (note v. 5). However, the barren woman to whom God gives a child is an important theme in several biblical stories (Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, Manoah's wife , Elizabeth). One thing I learned from my days at the Baltimore Hebrew University was that prophecy is primarily pattern not prestidigitation. The pattern is the key element in our text.

These accounts also highlight one of the perspectives of Jesus: ...with men this is impossible, but all things are possible with God. The emphasis in such stories is always God's ability to work in the world in spite of and beyond human frailties. God is shaping what is happening and brings Hannah to the place where, in her desire for children, she is ready to give her first-born to the service of the Lord. As we might presume, this is perhaps God's plan all along and the reason he had closed her womb until she was at the place of giving Samuel over to the Lord.

From these other accounts in scripture of barrenness, we come to see another pattern: faithful prayer and eventual devotion to God and His ways were always important elements in the birth of a son to one who had been barren (Genesis 15:1-6; 16; 25:21; 30:22; Judges 13; Luke 1:6-7-7). In each case, the child born to the barren woman played a significant role in biblical history (Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Samson, Samuel, John the Baptist).The deeply symbolic imagery underscores where the narrative begins...but then we get to the good stuff of prayer and the upside down Kingdom of God. But before we rush to the radical Kingdom-centric prayer Hannah sings in response to God's action in her life, let's focus on her first prayer, which hopefully will teach us something just as important about prayer as our on-going relationship with God.

Section Two: The Downside Up Prayer of Hannah

Let's read through 1 Samuel 1:9-18, and then return back here.

Hannah is down, depressed, as she is carrying "bitterness in her soul". She was down, but looked up to God. Remember, Hannah didn't have any children and desperately wanted a child so she does the next best thing: take it to the Lord. Can we sense the desperation and anguish of Hannah as she weeps and pleads before God? Notice the increasing intensity in the order of events in Hannah's prayer vigil at the shrine in Shiloh:

Hannah wept (1 Samuel 1:8) and later wept even more (v. 10).
She was distressed and in "bitterness of soul" (v. 10) because of her barren state.
Hannah prayed (v. 10) and continued to pray (v. 12) and finally she poured out her soul (v. 15).
She regarded her unproductive state as an affliction, which she called "my great anguish and grief" (v. 16).
She then makes a vow: 1 Samuel 1:11

Can we see how vulnerable Hannah gets with God here? She openly weeps before Him. She opens herself to let God into the "bitterness of her soul". In her prayer of lament, she trusts God with more of her whole being, the "bad" stuff, not just the "good" stuff. This was really important for me to learn. God wants all of us: the good, the bad and the ugly. It's the only way to give Him all of us. I think we have lost this kind of lament in our relational prayer lives and conversations with God somewhere along the way. We settle for shutting down emotionally and stuffing down these honest emotions when we seek to be present before God, and then we put on our happy-happy joy-joy mask. We do this in our marriages, with our children as well. We don't trust them...and we don't trust God with our messy stuff. But we need to learn to trust Him with everything that we are. This is what I learn from this first prayer of Hannah before God...she turns and trusts God with her "stuff".

One other thing that I find really fascinating in this sequences with Hannah: fasting. Essentially, without making a plan to fast, Hannah is fasting and praying to the Lord both with her words and actions. She doesn't eat at the feast - not even when coaxed by her husband - until after she had spent time before the Lord pouring out the bitterness. It was only after Eli - this priest and man of God - had given her a blessing that she felt an answer from God had been put into action...then she goes and sits down and eats. Sometimes the events of our lives and the condition of our souls begat an almost natural fasting. Whether we struggle with the heartaches that our children can bring to parents or some other situation, we often find ourselves unplugged from eating and given over to an almost natural way of fasting. Hopefully, like Hannah, we are also given over to praying and living with God, who cares about us and can comfort and/or answer us with His presence and power.

Section Three: The Upside Down Kingdom of God

OK, let's move on to what is known as "Hannah's Prayer" or "The Song of Hannah". Click on 1 Samuel 2:1-10, read it, then return back here.

I think it is important to see Prayer in the context of the Kingdom of God, because this radical, subversive (in the best way possible) prayer is for things to change and for us to be the change...to be the Kingdom catalysts for God's will to be done on earth, just as it is in heaven. What I love about this Kingdom-centric prayer of Hannah's is that even though it has been seen as lofty and praise-worthy throughout the ages, it seems to work much like my own prayer-life, which is messy with my own stuff. There is a movement in this prayer from the particular (Hannah and her stuff, like her rivalry with Peninnah) to a wider circle/perspective (God and His Stuff and His rivalries). It opens with Hannah's own gratitude for a local reversal, and closes with the cosmic reversal of God's defeat of His enemies. The prayer goes on to highlight reversal after reversal, and as such functions as an introduction to the whole book of 1 Samuel. Biblical scholars Keil and Delitzsch argue that Hannah's experience of reversal was a pledge of how God "would also lift up and glorify his whole nation, which was at that time so deeply bowed down and oppressed by its foes."

Walter Brueggemann, one of my favorite biblical scholars and commentators, suggests that the Prayer of Hannah/Song of Hannah paves the way for a major theme underlying the Book of Samuel: the "power and willingness of Yahweh to intrude, intervene and invert." Yet God's Reign (His Kingdom) is upside down, and as we read at the end of chapter 2, the second "sacrificial feast" sees Hannah bring all the ingredients for the feast. Thus, the two "sacred meal" accounts in these opening scenes show us how Hannah has been delivered from dejection to delight because of the intervention of the Lord.

The prayer/song of Hannah has several features in common with the prayer from Luke's gospel called the "Magnificat" of Mary of Nazareth, the mother of Jesus. Mary is depicted as setting her personal call from God and the destiny of her community against the backdrop of God's protection of his people down through the ages. The recurrent use of the perfect tense throughout the poem conveys the certainty that these are the permanent characteristics of God -- the way things are in the Kingdom: this is the rock-solid platform from which the new Jesus movement, and His New Covenant, is to be launched.

Historians tell us that the Magnificat put to music was sung in early Christian circles (and continues to be regularly sung or said in many Christian churches to this day). These common features include the themes and order of great reversals and God setting things right and defeating His enemies; many textual scholars believe that the Magnificat is essentially just a copy of the Song of Hannah, together with part of a previous prayer of Hannah referring to herself as a maidservant/handmaiden (1 Samuel 1:11), which have been paraphrased to be more succinct.

Hannah's prayer is a Kingdom of God-centric prayer. What can we say about Kingdom-centric prayer from the examples of Hannah and Mary? Here are a few of my thoughts:

It is focused on God's presence and kingdom (His reign that turns our world upside down).
It finds it's context in missional community.
It is BOLD (It is most interesting to study prayers for revival, even biblically such as in Acts 4 or Exodus 33 or Nehemiah 1, where these three elements are easy to see. Notice in Acts 4, for example, that the disciples, whose lives had been threatened, did not ask for protection for themselves and their families, but they cry out for more of God's Presence, boldness in communicating the good news of the Kingdom of God in Christ Jesus and they do it together.)

I love what Tim Keller has to say about Kingdom prayer: "We are to pray for the glory of God to be seen. This is a major theme of the Psalms. God's glory is his weight, his importance, his reality. Many people in our cities believe in a God but not in a God of glory." We will encounter this word for glory/honor/weight again: the Hebrew is kavod. We'll see it when we turn our attention to Eli, but also it will come into play with what is called the "Ark Narrative". Yet, in terms of Kingdom-centric prayer, I am awed that it is in humble broken vessels (like ourselves and like Hannah) that the glory of God radiates out...and it is for His Glory and the renown of His Name that we pray. In this way, we can see that Kingdom prayer is also humble, lifting up Jesus, not ourselves or our "ministries", etc. Life in the upside down Kingdom of God also calls on us to reverse our notions of power and control. Jesus makes it clear that the greatest is the servant of all. The greatest in the upside-down Kingdom is the least. The weak, the meek, and the poor are those who will inherit the Kingdom. When Jesus washed the feet of his disciples he asked them, "Do you understand what I am doing?" In the upside down kingdom we do not "lord it over" one another - we serve one another.

To wrap up today, let's hear from Greg Boyd below for more on this theme of reversal and the Upside-Down nature of God's Reign:

Section Four: Assignments

Over the next week, memorize one of these passages: 1 Samuel 1:9-10; 1 Samuel 2:7; 1 Samuel 2:10
I have been thinking about prayer a lot as I am preparing to teach some spiritual formation gatherings at the Central Maryland Vineyard. I wonder at how we have shorted and limited so many things in our day and age to a "one-liner" or a "tag line", like "gospel" and even "Kingdom of God". I also wonder if we haven't limited and shortened what "prayer" meant. Surely prayer is more that "chatting with God" or even "conversing with God"...there is connection that goes beyond words to "silent prayer" or "prayer language/tongues", and an experience of His Presence. I wonder if we do a dis-service to people we disciple by making prayer to be words...but how would we describe prayer..this communion/union/communication and connection to the King? What do you think?
Take time this next week to evaluate your prayer and relationship with our Father. Do we just make quick wish-lists for God to fulfill? Are we moving to take our masks off with God and to trust God with not only the happy-happy joy-joy stuff...but also our anguish and fear and anger...trusting God with our whole self?
Cry out to God for more of His Presence and boldness and do it with others, then leave a comment later to encourage us all in how God responded.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly - 1 of 4

2009-04-29T05:15:00.000-07:00

Today we begin our first 4-part series into the biblical book of 1 Samuel. I'm glad you joined us today. I hope you have set apart about an hour to get through this first session. It's best to go straight through, but if you need a break in-betrween sections, that's cool too. Find a quiet place that will allow you to focus. Limit your distractions. OK, let's begin:

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly 1 of 4

The book of 1 Samuel opens like a western, setting up everything to come. In fact, the 'Western' as a genre of film has much in common with 1 Samuel. Westerns often portray how primitive ways of life were threatened and confronted with modern technological or social changes. This may be depicted by showing conflict between natives and settlers or U.S. Cavalry, or by showing ranchers being threatened by the onset of the Industrial Revolution. American Westerns of the 1940s and 1950s emphasize the values of honor and sacrifice. Westerns from the 1960s and 1970s often have more pessimistic views, glorifying a rebellious anti-hero and highlighting the cynicism, brutality and inequality of the American West. The underlying events and themes of 1 Samuel highlight honor and sacrifice as well as having its own rebel anti-hero: David; it also weaves the sometimes tragic, sometimes brutal, sometimes heartfelt story of social, political and economic changes from the primitive and messy period of the shoftim (judges/liberators) , having a theocratic society withYHWH-Elohim as King to the establishment of the monarchy of David and its succession through Solomon and beyond.

Watch this piece from the opening scene of the movie "King David":

Now watch this opening scene from "High Plains Drifter":

In these two theatrical pieces, did you see any similarities beginning to emerge?

So, we are going to follow the opening scene of this honest and vulnerable yet at-times unfathomable piece of scripture with several sets of Bible Study blog series, but this initial one will focus on the opening scene and characters: The Good (Hannah), The Bad (Penninah), and the Ugly (Men in general, but particularly Elkannah and Eli). The biblical genre of the scroll of Samuel is narrative. The author is telling a story, historical in nature. It tells the story of Israel's heroes and history through the establishment of the reigning house of David, especially the early history and exploits of David. It's interesting to note that 1 Chronicles 29 suggests there were multiple sources for information on David:

Now the acts of King David, from first to last, are written in the records of the seer Samuel and in the records of the prophet Nathan and in the records of the seer Gad, with accounts of all his rule and his might and of events that befell him and Israel and all the kingdoms of the earth.

Also, within the scroll of Samuel is mentioned several other ancient sources: 1 Samuel 10:25 has Samuel creating a scroll of the rights and duties of kingship, but also in 2 Samuel 1:18, it cites the book of Jashar, which is also cited in Joshua 10. I think this is important to take note of, as sometimes we have very naive notions of how scripture came to be, when sacred scripture itself at-times, tells us from where it got some of itsbasic materials or research. We believe it is inspired, but sometimes research and writing takes work, even if inspired by God.

We want to find faith and inspiration when we study scripture. For those who follow Christ Jesus, we want to see it through Jesus' Kingdom perspective. When I say "Kingdom", I mean, "KIngdom of God", which in turn means: God's Reign, His rule. As we find from Jesus' instructive prayer: "Your kingdom come, Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven." Yet also one of our primary endeavours throughout this first Bible Study blog series will be to discover some of the major underlying themes and motifs for 1 Samuel that find their beginnings in these first few chapters but emerge again and again throughout our story. But first, we have the business of context to attend to, so let's get started.

Section One: Context

Take a few minutes to relax. Make sure you are ready to learn. Minimize your distractions. Get comfortable. Ready? Read the three quotes below. Take time to think about each of them:

"As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice"

"For God's will gave men their form, their essence, and their abilities. Anyone who destroys His work is declaring war on the Lord's creation, the divine will."

"Words build bridges into unexplored regions."

Now, pick the quote above that MOST RESONATES with you. Which one do you like the most? There is no right or wrong answer. Which one is most compelling?Once you have your favorite quote selected, hi-light the entire quote with your cursor and click "copy." Then paste the entire quote into a search query at http://www.google.com/ to discover who said your quote. When you have the answer return back here....Got your answer?

What, if anything changed once you learned who was the author? Did it make you like the quote more or less?

I begin our study in 1 Samuel with this exercise for the same two reasons the brilliant Joe Boyd at the Cinicinnati Vineyard has tread this way before me in his Facebook Bible Study on Matthew 5-7:

First we will be studying words that we all mostly agree are sacred scripture (literally: sacred - set apart; regarded with reverence; AND scripture - anything written; a writing; a document; an inscription. ) It is impossible to separate the words of people from the life they lived. To study someone's words and actions is to study their life.
Secondly, the most important rule in any Bible study is the rule of CONTEXT. The quotes above mean something different to you when reading them in their original context as opposed to on their own. This means that it is impossible to know what a section of Scripture means without seeing it within the larger context of the whole. In this regard, our little study is already flawed.

We cannot really understand 1 Samuel without seeing the context of what has come before (Genesis thru Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth) and what comes after (2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, the Prophets, etc.). So, let's do the somewhat unexpected this week and begin our study with just a little context.

Section Two: The Story Before and After

I like how Rob Bell and Don Golden sum up the Old Testament in their book Jesus Wants to Save Christians. Click on the following link that will take you to a short audio introduction by Rob Bell of his book with Don Golden, where he winsomely sums up the storyline quite well: Exodus-Sinai-Jerusalem-Exile. The whole thing is about 25 minutes; listen to it, then jump back here and we will finish up our first session of the study.

Section Three: The Story After

Remember I mentioned the connections between what we read in Samuel and 'Westerns'? Well, we see other movie genre connections just after the scroll of Samuel as the story continues in 1 Kings; it begins with David's bedside wisdom to his son Solomon before David dies. It reads more like a scene from The Godfather series, though. The aging patriarch of a dynastic family transfers power to his son. David's parting shot at the wise son Solomon is worthy of a mafia cheiftain: Be a wiseguy, kill your rivals and exact my revenge on my cousin and henchman Joab. Like I've said in other places, Hollywood couldn't make a better movie than to take scripture at facevalue. Anyway, scripture reveals the faithfulness of God to His people, even though they are increasingly unfaithful to Him. The sin adds up, and the horror and dread of exile is on the horizon as 2 Kings rushes toward its finish, with just the barest glimpse of hope left. But God's people learn that He is with them in exile just as He was with them in glorious Jerusalem. The story of God's purposes continue and are highlighted through the various prophets that God raises up...eventually their prophetic home is found as the seed of hope blossoms in the person of Jesus. Jesus the Messiah. Jesus the Holy One of God. Jesus the Incarnate Son of the Living God. Jesus the descendant/son of David. Jesus our Redeemer and Saviour. Jesus the Kingdom Catalyst.

Section Four: Assignments

Read through the entire book of 1 Samuel over the next week, much like you might the latest action-adventure/romance novel. A few chapters a day will get you through.
Commit this verse to memory: "In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes." - Judges 21:25
Take some time this week to be alone with God. In a journal or notebook write this question, "God, what things do I try to do or not do in order to be right with You or just in my own eyes?" Spend some time asking God to give you a heart that loves Him. Then ask, "What things do you want me to do or not do this week?" See what comes to your mind and take a risk that maybe God is trying to show you something.
If you have some free time and are a movie-buff check out some of my favorite Westerns: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, Silverado, The Magnificent Seven, High Plains Drifter, Tombstone and Unforgiven

Vineyard Bible Study blog Guidance

2009-04-14T10:16:00.000-07:00

We are preparing to launch a web-based Bible Study on April 29th. We will also be posting the weekly study guides here at http://www.vineyardbiblestudy.blogspot.com/. We may be simul-posting the study to our Central Maryland Vineyard facebook page. Each week's study will involve working through a self-directed, web-based experience under the direction of a spiritual director/teacher.

Steven Hamilton, a member of the pastoral staff at the Central Maryland Vineyard in Millersville, Maryland will be facilitating the web-based teaching, and will be the main teacher for the first 4-part series working through the opening chapters of the book of 1 Samuel. There will be more forthcoming series thereafter, working our way through the books of 1 and 2 Samuel. We want to find faith and inspiration when we study scripture. We want to see it through Jesus' Kingdom perspective. At this point, we want to go through some guidance and basic understanding for those participating in our web-based teaching series.

Please read below to see our Bible Study blog Guidance. The first study guide will be posted here and, hopefully, on our facebook page on Wednesday, April 29th.

The Vineyard Bible Study blog Guidance:

This is an online community of spiritual seekers desiring to learn more about the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. This group is not for everyone. The following guidance will be maintained and helpful for those entering into our teaching series. Failure to meet the guidelines may result in removal from the study. Please read through our seven guidelines for participants in our study:

We understand that the study is facilitated by a Christian, thus making the study unavoidably biased toward a confessional Christian worldview.
Having that understanding, we welcome anyone of any faith or tradition (Christian or non-Christian) to participate.
We come from every imaginable religious and spiritual background and desire to study the same Scriptures at the same time because we desire unity and mutual respect. We vow to respect everyone, even those with whom we disagree.
We vow to be completely civilized - among other things, this means no harsh or course language in the comments, and no mean spirited interactions. There are plenty of places on the web for that sort of thing. This just isn't one of them.
We agree that each study will be taught by a qualified Christian teacher/spiritual director. Joining the study is a vow to submit to and learn from the director; and, to do the work he or she assigns. (Think of it like taking a college class without the fees.) The primary relationship entered is between student and teacher. Each study has one and only one teacher. This is a learning environment, not simply a discussion group.
We agree that anyone may voluntarily leave a study or the group at anytime without shame.
We expect approximately 1-3 hours/week of independent guided study. We commit to the work and will voluntarily drop the study if we cannot make time for it. We will be studying 1 and 2 Samuel from the sacred scriptures mostly known as the Hebrew Scriptures or the Old Testament.

The first series tackling the opening chapters of 1 Samuel will be a 4-part, 4-week study entitled: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. This study series will be our first. It's a trial run and we will work out the bugs as we go, so please be patient. Comments are welcome and encouraged. I will seek to respond to comments directed at me within a few days times. Please leave an e-mail address in all comment questions for me, for I may reply to everyone in the comments section, or I may reply to you personally via e-mail.

Thanks and I am looking forward to our interaction,

Steven Hamilton

Teacher and Facilitator for Vineyard Bible Study blog (Spring, 2009)

Vineyard Bible Study blog

2009-03-30T05:35:00.000-07:00

This is the website for the Central Maryland Vineyard's web-based Bible Study. We will begin in May 2009, with several series of bible studies, beginning in 1 Samuel. More details to follow.