Where Did You Say You Were From?

1 Samuel 16:14 Now the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord terrorized him. 15 Saul’s servants then said to him, “Behold now, an evil spirit from God is terrorizing you. 16 Let our lord now command your servants who are before you. Let them seek a man who is a skillful player on the harp; and it shall come about when the evil spirit from God is on you, that he shall play the harp with his hand, and you will be well.” 17 So Saul said to his servants, “Provide for me now a man who can play well and bring him to me.” (NASBStr)

One of the most problematic statements in all of Scripture for Biblical Theologians is 1 Samuel 16:14.  The statement that the 'Good Lord' sent an 'evil spirit' is a square theological peg in a round hole of God's character. At least it looks that way.

Here's what we know:

• The verse actually says this; there's no other way to translate it.
• In following verses uses, 'evil spirit from God' rather than 'from the LORD'; in other words, God's name is used initially, then references to Him.
• The servants know what has happened and what to do about it; a very specific solution, rather than a general search for any solution.
• Saul agrees with the solution, indicating either personal familiarity with the problem, or trust of those who serve him.
• This is the only known record of such a thing done by God.

There's much that can be deduced from this; it's more common in their culture than in the Scripture the record, music was found to help people God afflicts this way, and no one seems to think it is out of character for God. There's more that suggested, and then opinion and theory take over.  

Here's my theory: Everything comes from my Master, and I can trust that what He does does not contradict what says about Himself. I believe the problem lies with my lack of understanding, not His character.

So, my Master can send an evil spirit to torment someone, and He is still Love, sending His Son into the world to save all the ones believing in Him. 

That means that evil also comes from my Master.  That isn't easy to swallow or accept, that the All-Loving God of the Christian Scriptures would cause evil.  Consider this, the enemy, Satan, is a created being.  This creature is not on par with the Almighty, does not possess His power or knowledge, and is not the 'balance' for the 'goodness' of the True Creator of the universe.  So our enemy, this creature, is not 'deity' of any sort, but rather a rebel against Deity.

Just so we're clear, all things come from God.  So, how do I, a servant of the King, knight of the Realm, reconcile good and evil both being from my King?  By recognizing that while my King is not subjective, my understanding of Him can only obtain a subjective level.  In other words, I only know what He reveals to me of Himself, which includes the tidbit that there's more about Him I don't know.  In fact, when Isaiah 55:8&9 are unpacked in light of modern astronomy, then really, my Master is as far from my understanding as the width and breadth of the universe; not our galaxy, but the whole universe.  And so you know, by the way, the dimensions of the universe are unknowable from our perspective on earth.

Still, both good and evil coming from a Loving God?  Yes.  Again, as I've pointed out before, when evil and good are defined in the way the terms are used in Scripture, they aren't necessarily moral assessments.  They are wider umbrella terms for things generally affecting the writer/editor, the audience reading/hearing, or the objects being acted upon in the account recorded.  Let that sink in a moment, perhaps you should re-read it a few times.  

What I mean by that is sometimes the things we don't like are morally contrary to God's will, plans, and commands.  But sometimes what we think are bad things are merely inconvenient, we don't like them; and sometimes they are catastrophically detrimental to us, people die.  Scripture calls these things evil regardless; we don't like them, they're evil.  That should help clear up how both things can come from the same God, but not for everyone.

So the 'evil spirit from God' was His punishment on Saul.  It was 'evil' from Saul's perspective, and those around him could see that Saul wasn't enjoying it.  They didn't see what it was tormenting their king, so it had to be a 'spirit'.  That it was from God was a given since there could be no other source for such things in their minds. It is this last part where I believe I and others have deviated into error.

Like many I have ascribed to my enemy more power than he really has.  If all things come from my Master, then all my enemy can do is use what has already been created, and what he already has at his disposal.  He can't make something to torment me.  He can't 'send' something that isn't already his.  This creature desiring my separation from my Master is stronger than I am, but nothing compared to my Master.  My enemy only makes me more dependent upon my Master, he can't hurt me truly. 

So, in response to all things coming from my Master, I will praise Him all the more.  I will proclaim His power and majesty louder and with more fervor.  I will seek to honor Him even more, and I will tremble before Him.  I will wait on Him, worship Him, and walk before Him. 

Did The Rules Just Change?

Now there was a man of Benjamin whose name was Kish the son of Abiel, the son of Zeror, the son of Becorath, the son of Aphiah, the son of a Benjamite, a mighty man of valor.  He had a son whose name was Saul, a choice and handsome man, and there was not a more handsome person than he among the sons of Israel; from his shoulders and up he was taller than any of the people. (1 Samuel 9:1-2 NASB)

When they entered, he looked at Eliab and thought, "Surely the LORD'S anointed is before Him."  But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not look at his appearance or at the height of his stature, because I have rejected him; for God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart." (1 Samuel 16:6-7 NASB)

There are times when I think I have the methods of my Master all figured out, and decide to move ahead with confidence that I know what He would choose in a given situation.  Thee are times when this is warranted, and there are times I'm totally missing it.

The people of Israel decide to accept the Gibeonite deception in Joshua because they don't consult God, they figure they know what He would say.  Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, and Ishmael is another good example.  It happens, and better people than I have done it.  But it still causes problems.

Here, Samuel is about to anoint the next king of Israel, and when Eliab walks in, he 'appears' to be the obvious choice.  He is probably a lot like Saul in appearance.  So, why wouldn't God choose him?  Isn't the standard like before: head taller than everyone else, most handsome, choice specimen?

Samuel is corrected here by God and told that actually God is weighing the heart, not regarding the appearance.  So my question here is, 'Is this a new standard?'

In other words, was God using appearance back in 1 Samuel 9 when Saul was chosen, then figures that this standard didn't work, so now decides to look at the heart first.  Somewhat like learning to buy a car: 'Better test drive first, should have done that last time and it cost us.'

It's my opinion that the rules haven't changed.  I suspect that even with Saul, God was looking at the heart.  I brought out clues prior to this that Saul had the characteristics of a good king, Saul just chose not to live out those character traits.  I still believe that God was choosing someone with the 'right stuff', but one who chose to use the wrong stuff also present.

So, today, when I look around me, what I see can be deceiving.  The character of the person can be difficult to see sometimes, and clearly judging by appearance is to miss my Master's standard.  I can compare what I see in who my Master uses with someone I think He'll choose, but I can't see as my Master sees.

So, when it comes to other people, while I may have my preferences, prejudices, and preconceived standards; it is the voice of my Master I should be seeking rather than my own counsel.  That's hard.  I consider myself a decent and good judge of character.  That's not enough.  It's not obedience.

This is one of those places where I don't need to wonder if I should wait for my Master or assume He's given me enough information to move ahead on my own.  He hasn't.  I don't have the information.  When it comes to other people, I am to PRAY!  How hard is that? 

I wish I could say it was easy, but I'm not that wise in this area.  I'm only learning now that I may be able to judge who I trust and who I don't, and my Master is fine letting me do that and learn at my own pace about other people.  But when it comes to someone He might be using, He does not want me 'figuring it out'.

So, once again, I need to check my pride at the door, slow down, and consult with my Master.  When I'm involved with assessing others who may or may not be someone my Master is going to use, I need His sight, His insight.  That may seem obvious, but it's something I'm still learning.

I Come In Peace...Why Do You Ask?

So Samuel did what the LORD said, and came to Bethlehem. And the elders of the city came trembling to meet him and said, "Do you come in peace?"  He said, "In peace; I have come to sacrifice to the LORD. Consecrate yourselves and come with me to the sacrifice." He also consecrated Jesse and his sons and invited them to the sacrifice. (1 Samuel 16:4-5 NASB)

Samuel has been sent to Bethlehem by God to anoint one of Jesse's sons to be king after Saul (or in place of...).  He is scared of Saul's revenge or attempt to prevent another king, so he obscures what he is doing by taking a cow to sacrifice in Bethlehem.  But as he arrives, the elders meet him with a strange greeting.

In the Hebrew text, they tremble as they meet him.  In the somewhat older Greek text of the Hebrew Scriptures (also known as the Septuagint), they are out-of-their-mind amazed at him being there.  In both, they ask if he has come in peace.  Whether amazed or trembling with fear, why would he not come in peace?  Why would they need to ask?

I wonder how much of the story of Samuel is missing?  He judged Israel for many years, but only a few things he did are included in this account, and none are included in Chronicles, and there are few references in other parts of Scripture.  But consider the character we do find.

• Hears from God and his words do not 'fall to the ground.'
• 'Directs' the people against the Philistines and they stay out of Israel during his time of judging
• Thinks the choosing of a king by the people is a rejection of him as judge
•  Helps Saul and the nation through the coronation process even though he personally disagrees with their decision - he does so at God's command.
• He publicly corrects Saul each time he makes a mistake
• He tells Saul to his face that God has rejected him as king and will give the kingdom to another
• Completes God's command to Saul by hacking Agag, king of the Amalekites, to pieces before God and the people (public correction of Saul and the people).
• Seems afraid that Saul will kill him if he goes to anoint someone else

So where is the support for the elders being afraid or astonished?  For one thing, the route Samuel takes in 'judging' never went this far south from Ramah.  So his being there would mean something very different was going on.  Secondly, the people of Judah have supported Saul and fight in his army, so they were also involved in disobeying God's commands against the Amalekites.  And possibly, there are some things Samuel has done as judge that involved the destruction or punishment of cities or towns for which we don't have a record.  After seeing him hack some foreign king to pieces, it doesn't take a vivid imagination to believe 'evil' comes with this prophet.

While I do view Samuel as the 'nerd' leader of his people.  I think it's a big mistake to consider him 'wimpy'.  He faces Saul, but fears to 'conspire' against him.  That alone doesn't make him a coward.  I think it takes great courage to face a king clearly obtuse enough to believe he's obeyed God when he obviously hasn't.  Such people wouldn't know God's will if it bit them in the butt, and may do horrible things thinking they are doing them for God.  They're dangerous.  To face someone like that, in the midst of that mindset, and tell them, convince them, they are wrong takes great courage.  To demonstrate the error to the people takes even more, and to then just walk away...Yeah, Samuel doesn't strike me as the timid sort.

I can easily make the intuitive link between Samuel showing up unexpected in Bethlehem, and the elders wondering if he comes in peace.  Samuel is one who leaves a big footprint behind, whether he wants to or not.  It isn't hard for me to imagine that he is considered the '800lb Gorilla' by many, even though Saul is king.  Things happen around Samuel that are of God, the Maker and Sustainer of the universe.  He can be very scary at times.

But what's the lesson?  Where is what I can take away here?  Well, for one thing, respect for the leaders my Master has placed in my life; especially the religious ones (i.e. church leadership).  God may not destroy cities and peoples around my pastor; some of my pastor's words may fall to the ground; I may not really like my pastor's views on some theological topics; but he is the pastor my Master has placed in my life.

This is true for the other ministers, children, youth, small-groups, associates, assistants, whatever they may be called.  They are ones my Master has placed in my life, and I should treat them as such.  When was the last time I met my pastor and asked if he came in peace?  When is the last time his arrival made me nervous?  When I look at my pastor, do I see my Pastor standing with him?  I wonder what would be different with pastors in our churches if we saw them and kept in mind that our Pastor stands with them (hopefully the other way around).  If I think of them together, my Master and my pastors, my treatment of my church leaders might be different.  At least, it should be.

Even Prophets Fear Sometimes

Now the LORD said to Samuel, "How long will you grieve over Saul, since I have rejected him from being king over Israel? Fill your horn with oil and go; I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for I have selected a king for Myself among his sons."  But Samuel said, "How can I go? When Saul hears of it, he will kill me." And the LORD said, "Take a heifer with you and say, 'I have come to sacrifice to the LORD.'  You shall invite Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will show you what you shall do; and you shall anoint for Me the one whom I designate to you." (1 Samuel 16:1-3 NASB)

"Samuel! You've just confronted King Saul and told him God has rejected him, you've just finished hacking the captured King Agag to pieces before God and the all the elders of Israel.  What are you going to do now?" Somehow, it never works out that the prophet says, "Go to Disneyland!"  Great courage, shown in the work of God, major victory for the righteousness of God, and then comes some sort of wavering of faith.

It's weird, but I do it too.  Samuel faced down Saul and yet now, when God tells him to stop mourning the wayward king and go anoint someone else, Samuel is afraid of Saul.  Why does faith evaporate? Further on in the story, one of my favorites: Elijah and the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel.  He faces them down, humiliates them, God sends fire, and he and the people slay all the prophets of Baal.  Then he runs away from the Queen who won't even come out to face him.

So, why do great demonstrations of faith in the face of powerful foes wind up followed by demonstrations of fear?  Moses gave every excuse imaginable and some not to be excused from leading the people of God out of Egypt.  It's a character of the prophet that there is this fluctuation between faith and fear, and in some cases, obedience and compromise.  But like I said, I do it too.

The other day, I had a great encouraging meeting with our pastor to discuss the marriage mentoring ministry God is putting together using my wife and I.  That night I can't sleep, and temptation is nearly overwhelming.  The next day, I'm really tired, don't have coffee to make, and have to constantly fight off temptation all day at work.  It was brutal.  What was going on?  Why the fight?  Why all of a sudden do I have this struggle when it hasn't been for almost a year?  Oh yeah, victory and progress against the enemy; he's worried and attacking at full strength.  Duh.

We think if spiritual warfare in terms of casting out demons, but more often than not, it is much closer to daily life.  More often than not, the spiritual warfare I face is the concentrated attacks of the enemy when I'm weak: Hungry, Angry, Lonely, and/or Tired (HALT).  Sometimes temptations are of my own making: wrong place, wrong time, wrong thinking, and compromise of any sort bring them on.  But other times, it's an attack of the enemy, sometimes subtle, and sometimes not.

I suspect that this "mourning of Saul" that Samuel was going through was the wearing on him of the enemy.  He was "sulking" in a sense because he had become attached and invested in who he knew had become a failed king.  It was more than just worrying about what Israel would do for leadership without Saul, it was about mourning a hope and a person.  He was attached to what God did not what He was going to do.

God regretted.  And then He moved on.  Samuel mourned, but couldn't get out of it.  That is why I think he was under the attack of the enemy.  He had just hewed to pieces one of the enemies favorite pawns, King Agag.  His whole nation was unable to be redeemed, they were so under the sway of the evil one.  Of course Samuel was a target; one of revenge.  And for whatever reason, even with all his demonstrations of faith, the attack of the enemy was working.

But God didn't stop using him.  And He won't stop using me, even though I struggled with the old me, the old struggles, the ones that no longer characterize me.  I am not that person, so why does the old thinking and behavior reemerge and threaten to overwhelm me?

I notice something about resurrection and spiritual warfare.  When my Master raises the dead, their new lives are better than the old ones were.  When the enemy raises deadness, old ways and thinking, it is more like a zombie; neither alive, but not yet dead.  The resurgence of the old ways should be expected as this new ministry progresses.  And I need to remember two important things: 1) this is normal, all people of great or small faith encounter these struggles when things are good; 2) it is the enemy using my dead nature, not the 'real me'.

Sometimes, in my life, I have found that the best tactic in spiritual warfare is re-framing my circumstances in their correct spiritual warfare 'frame'.  Once I admit what I'm going through is spiritual warfare and not what I suspect it is, the energy and power goes out of it.  The enemy tries to hand me a 'frame' to use in understanding my experiences, and I too willingly take it; "it's their fault", "it's my fault", "it's about who's at fault", "it's hard", "it's scary", "what if ___", on and on.  When I'm able to re-frame what's happening as an attack of the enemy ("this is not from my Master", "this is the enemy", "this is not who I am", etc.) I can feel the energy level change, and peace comes.

The real indicator is that the 'frames' of my Master bring peace, and the 'frames' of the enemy destroy peace with fear and confusion.  So, perhaps the most powerful tool of spiritual battle is a spiritual 'framing hammer', big, heavy, cross-hatched head, long handle, you know the kind.  Used in prayer and study of the Bible, such a 'hammer' can demolish the frames of the enemy, and construct frames based on my Master's views.  Now, where's my tool belt and hard hat?  I've got some frames to replace...

Does The Immutable God Regret?

Then the word of the LORD came to Samuel, saying, "I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned back from following Me and has not carried out My commands." And Samuel was distressed and cried out to the LORD all night. (1 Samuel 15:10-11 NASB)

As Samuel turned to go, Saul seized the edge of his robe, and it tore.  So Samuel said to him, "The LORD has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today and has given it to your neighbor, who is better than you. Also the Glory of Israel will not lie or change His mind; for He is not a man that He should change His mind." (1 Samuel 15:27-29 NASB)

Samuel did not see Saul again until the day of his death; for Samuel grieved over Saul. And the LORD regretted that He had made Saul king over Israel. (1 Samuel 15:35 NASB)

One of the peculiar things about the story of Saul in the Bible is that while Israel asks for a king, it is God who chooses Saul, not the people.  I find it difficult to believe that God would choose an inferior product, one that had no chance of success.  But there are qualities of God that make this questionable.

For instance, I believe Scripture teaches that God is Master of time (Rev 22:13, Psa 90:4, 2 Pe 3:8, Isa 44:7) and He is Master of all knowledge (Isa 40:13,28, 55:8-9).  So, if He is Master of time and knowledge, then He would know that Saul would fail even before He chose him to be king.  He chose him anyway.

But there is a difference between choosing someone in order for them to fail, and choosing someone who you believe will fail.  I choose to believe that God chose Saul knowing he would fail, but also that Saul had the capacity to succeed.  He knew where Saul's choices would lead, but He chose him anyway.

But there is another quality of God known as immutability.  It means that He doesn't change (see 1 Sam 15:29 above, Psa 55:19, 110:4, Mal 3:6).  But there is a problem with human understanding of this quality.  For instance, if God cannot change, He has limited power.  Something external to Him would have power over Him if He could not change.  That is unacceptable so I go with He chooses not to change.  But is that always true?

In this chapter is an excellent example of when this may not be the case.  It seems that the unchangeable God changes, and changes His mind.  There is a contrast (contradiction?) inherent in the presentation as well.  If you read the three passages above there is a consistent word used but it is translated differently.  In verse 11, it is translated as "regret", in verse 29 it is translated as "change His mind", and in verse 35 it is translated again as "regret".  They are the same word, but in two cases (translated as 'regret') God does do this, and the third case (translated as 'change His mind') He does not do this.  So which is it?

Well, consider that the two positives refer to God's regret over His choice of Saul as king.  The one negative refers to God's rejection of Saul as king.  Unfortunately we can't simply select the 'negative' option and say that God never regrets rejection or punishment.  We have times in Jeremiah where God clearly says that's not the case.

I suppose that I have to rest in faith that my Master changes whatever decision He wants whenever He wants for whatever reason.  And that my Master chooses to not change whatever decision He makes for whatever reason.  It sounds like my Master is capricious, random, whimsical, and unreliable.  But those terms only mean that we don't understand the reasoning behind something.  Even when we use these terms with people this is true.

So, going back to His mastery of knowledge, I believe that as His thoughts are higher than mine, I can trust that what doesn't make sense to me about His changeability makes perfect sense to Him.  What I don't get about His choices He understands completely.  When things change, He's still working His purpose.  But where do I find my route, my purpose, within a 'changeable' framework of my Master's decisions?

In the family I grew up with, I was taught to 'go with the flow'.  In a sense this is the answer here as well.  I will have to let my Master be Master of all things, and simply obey, faithfully trusting that He has it all under control.  If He seems to change His mind, I will simply go with it.  It is a challenge to submission, but really should be expected that I do this, behave this way, and believe this way if He is truly my Master.  He commands me to raise my sail, and let Him take care of the wind.  If I have to tack, I'll tack; if I don't, I won't, but I'll keep the course He chooses.  Random as that may seem.

So does the Master of all knowledge regret?  Yes.  And I suspect that it has more to do with the sinful nature of His human creatures wounding His heart than that He chooses to use them.  So, will I wound the heart of my Master with disobedience, with doubt in His knowledge and power?  I certainly hope not.  Not today.  I wish not ever.  But I have less trust in myself than in my Master's knowledge and faithfulness.

You Were Serious About That?

"Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he set himself against him on the way while he was coming up from Egypt.  Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'" (1 Samuel 15:2 NASB)

But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best of the sheep, the oxen, the fatlings, the lambs, and all that was good, and were not willing to destroy them utterly; but everything despised and worthless, that they utterly destroyed.  Then the word of the LORD came to Samuel, saying,  11 "I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned back from following Me and has not carried out My commands." And Samuel was distressed and cried out to the LORD all night. (1 Samuel 15:9-11 NASB)

There are several things here on which I could spend several entries. This is one of the richest chapters for theology and life with my Master in Scripture.  But one in particular is one I have been quick to judge and slow to really appreciate.  Because of that, I have missed that I make the same mistake Saul and the people make.

Essentially God gives a command that was not carried out during the time Israel was in the desert and coming into Canaan.  Since the Amalekites weren't destroyed in the desert, they continued to harass the people after they entered the land.  They would sweep in, plunder, and sweep back out again.  Rather than produce anything other than sheep and goats in the desert, they stole from other nations who had farming.

In chapter 14, they are referred to as the ones plundering Israel.  So consider what the people find when they attack Amalek.  They find all sorts of things, some which they may have owned at one time.  This has to incite anger.  In obedience, they devote most of it to God; but in disobedience they keep the best, they plunder the ones having plundered them.  They intend to bring it back and offer it in sacrifice to God, so they'll use in worship, and that should make up for having kept it.

The problem is that in sacrifice of the type they describe, the people share in the sacrifice, it's not wholly consumed in the fire.  They intend to share with God what they plundered, even give Him the good parts, but not all of it.  God required all of it.  In fact it was supposed to be considered so holy, no one was to touch it at all, but it was to be completely destroyed in place.  No herding, no trading, and certainly no eating.

Would it have seemed a waste to them?  Would it have seemed "excessive" to them?  Would it have seemed unreasonable to them?  It probably would have to people today.  In fact, I believe such a sin is committed by people professing faith in Jesus today, in church, all the time.  We tend to have a dysfunctional concept of holiness today.  This dysfunctional holiness means we find it easy to disobey.  The two go hand-in-hand.

My last entry was about being terrified of my Master.  This terror, I claim, leads to obedience.  I believe this is true partly because the wrath of God punctuates His holiness.  He is 'other' than us, inexplicable, powerful beyond measure, and with unimaginable thoughts and reasoning.  We cannot see from His perspective unless He shows us a part of it.  All we have of Him is what He shares with us, and those parts are pretty peculiar, and sometimes very scary.

But when believers, such as myself, make the Master of the universe a warm fuzzy 'nice guy', or loving kind sweet old man, we've set up an idol of our own making.  This idol we can disobey, this idol looks a lot like the god of the world, the god of atheism, the god projected out of the sinful selfishness of frail faulty human creatures.  This is not the same as the God having spoken the universe into existence. 

To the degree that this sort of distorted image of God exists in our minds, we are able to easily disregard certain rules asked of us by God.  Certain Scriptures can be taken lightly or ignored all together.  But there is a price for such a profane view of the Master of galaxies and quarks.

It is not easy, once having setup such an idol, to then go back and change it.  We set expectations of continued comfort when we begin with such an idol.  I have.  When I realize what I've done and try to change it, it get's thrown back in my face.  My failures, my mistakes, and sin are dredged up, and shown to me for what they are.  So how then can I judge who have done the same things?  How can I teach Scripture who have lived my life deviated from the teachings of Scripture?

I can be honest about both the failures and the consequences, the most common of which is the dredging up and resulting shame.  It's both a failure and a consequence (you have to love a double whammy like that).  The reality is that I have to teach that Scripture reveals that God does not tolerate fornication; but that I have been guilty of it, and have paid a price for it (and will continue to pay I'm sure).  I have to teach that God reveals through Scripture that He desires me to be a good diligent worker; but I am guilty of poor work quality, and sometimes really struggle with giving a good days work for a days pay.

It's not excusable that others do the same thing. It's not okay that I'm not alone in this.  Those are the same things said by Saul.  He blamed the people, but he was their leader.  It was on him to lead well and in obedience.  I'm not a king (thank you, my Master, for that!), but to the extent that I have leadership responsibilities, I too have the responsibility to lead people in obedience.  I must teach the truth of Scripture, not just the comfortable ones I like and I know others will like, but all of them.  And I must do so, knowing and owning that I am a "law breaker" just as all the rest.

So the answer is to worship my Master as holy and powerful beyond measure.  A certain degree of absolute terror is in order.  To honor Him in Scripture is to consider Him 'heavy', His words 'weighty', and in practice, myself as crushed by His presence and His words.

Now, the obvious error here is to run to the other direction and become so focused on the "laws" of Scripture that I judge on legalistic grounds.  What Scripture also teaches is that the holiness of my Master is transferred by Him to me.  I don't get it by working for it, as part of His grace, He gives it.  He is able to transform the ignoble, the common, and the profane into objects and acts of holiness.  So, He can use my failures to redeem others.  I can become an example of His grace and redemption as people see what I was and what He has made me. 

I can't be as I was and expect Him to use me.  In fact, in the example of Saul, it was his unwillingness to change that brought on his eventual rejection by God.  So, even then he was used by God, but as a bad example.  God redeemed Saul's mistakes within His divine purpose, but the man was lost.  So my failure to submit to my Master's commands will not thwart my Master, but may thwart my usefulness in His Kingdom.  In fact it has.  The continued submission to my addiction meant that I have been sidelined from ministry.  As I have emerged from this idolatrous submission to my selfish passions, He is able to use me more.  Yet His use of me always has the requirement to own that life I lived, and the different life I live now; as long as it is different.

So, today, I will walk as a crushed man before my Master.  I will walk as an example of His grace and mercy, and also His wrath.  I will live my life with the understanding that my life is not really mine and never has been.  I will obey partly out of fear of Who I obey and the consequences of disobedience.  And I will teach what He reveals to me in Scripture, owning my own failures to live it out, but striving to obey.

The Terrifying Extremes of God

"Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he set himself against him on the way while he was coming up from Egypt.  Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'" (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NASB)

There are many theological statements about the Maker of the universe, statements about His character, His characteristics, His divine qualities.  In Biblical Theology, the 'categories' used to describe the Master of all things that are derived from Scripture rather than 'systematic' categories from philosophy.  Whichever set of categories is used, this passage falls into one of the most uncomfortable.

In Genesis 19, God destroys two cities and those around them on the valley floor by the Dead Sea.  It's a dramatic display of the destructive forces used by the Maker of stars to punish His human creatures.  While that is a brutal display of His wrath, it's also a display of mercy (Lot and his family).  It's also something the Master does Himself.  This passage of Scripture is different.

This Creator of all matter now delegates the complete destruction of a people to people He has chosen as His own.  It is an amazing unimaginable demonstration of grace and mercy for a people to be chosen by their Creator.  It is an amazing unimaginable act of brutality to completely wipe out an entire people from before their Creator.  I suppose it just goes with the benefits of being chosen.

This command is part of what is known as the ban, or "kharam".  It is a Hebrew word related to the Middle Eastern concept of a herem, a king's personal collection of women to which only he has access (or at least that's the most popular image).  It refers to something (anything really) completely devoted to one person.  In order for this to be accomplished with the One having chosen Israel, the 'thing' must be destroyed, thereby preventing anyone from having access to it.  It was completely 'devoted' to God.

This is done in the sacrificial system of the Hebrews when they conducted a 'whole burnt offer' which completely consumed what was being offered and no one partook of it.  It was not an uncommon sacrifice, but it was only done on special occasions for special reasons.  The kharam was sort of like doing that but in warfare and it included people, all the people.

As the People of Israel traveled through the desert east of the Jordan river, they conducted several of these sorts of attacks on the kingdoms they encountered. Others they spared entirely.  When they entered the land of Canaan, they conducted many of these attacks on the people in the land.  It sounds horrific, and it was, if you were involved, on either side.

So why the horror?  Why command such a thing?  What sort of "Maker of humanity" commands that these human creatures treat each other in this way?  To say that it is difficult to reconcile the God who is Love in 1 John with this same Destroyer is a wild understatement.  These bracket the immense range of character of the One about Whom we make any sort of theological statement. 

So, I will step back, and not attempt to justify or apologize for my Master.  I will not attempt to make the connection between the two extremes of character.  The one extreme means that I enjoy His attention, the other extreme means that His attention is not always pleasant for me.  In order to be in the presence of One so magnificent as to completely overwhelm and crush the words used to describe Him, I will endure the uncomfortable extreme.

My rationale for such a position is really simple.  I should expect that One capable of creating such a universe that I can only just barely grasp, barely see, characterized by the detail of quarks and stars, to be inexplicable.  I think that these two extremes should, instead of confusing me, lead me to watch my step in His presence; to consider carefully as I speak to Him; to easily bow myself before Him; and above all else, obey Him.  Perhaps only as often as I allow myself to wander among these two extremes of my Master will obedience really begin to characterize my life.

Why should I be afraid of One Who sacrifices Himself on my behalf?  Why should I feel horror or terror from the One having made my relationship with Him possible?  Why, if He has chosen me along with His people should I tremble in His presence?  Because He causes both life and death.  It doesn't make me feel "warm and fuzzy", it causes me to tremble; these extremes define His grace and mercy.  And it is a terrifying thing to behold.  That's one of the ways I know I'm beholding more of the truth of my Master, I tremble.