How Does David Look Now?

Now in the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it by the hand of Uriah.  He had written in the letter, saying, " Place Uriah in the front line of the fiercest battle and withdraw from him, so that he may be struck down and die."  So it was as Joab kept watch on the city, that he put Uriah at the place where he knew there were valiant men.  The men of the city went out and fought against Joab, and some of the people among David's servants fell; and Uriah the Hittite also died. (2 Samuel 11:14-17 NASB)

 When I visited the Dominican Republic some years ago we drove by a modern monument that was clearly tragic.  When I asked about it, I was told it was for the the men who killed Trujillo, the dictator of the Dominican Republic.  The story went that Trujillo had a group of men who would go through the city and kidnap women for him, once he slept with them, he would release them.  At one point he captured the wives of some of his top police leaders, and they refused.  So he jailed their husbands.  They still refused, so he killed them all and their husbands and threw them off this cliff where the monument stood.  So, 5 men (related to the victims) very high in Trujillo's court arranged for and carried out his assassination.  They paid for his death with their lives, but were remembered years afterward as heroes.

Trujillo was a tyrant, the worst of the idea of dictator.  He was an amoral thug, an evil ruler.  But, that's what we expect when someone has absolute power; absolute corruption.  We don't expect it from David though. 

Even knowing this chapter is coming, having gone through Samuel up to this point, it still shocks.  What David did as he sinned with Bathsheba is still such a deviation from his character to this point that it's hard to imagine.  Having Uriah killed is one thing, but to send the command by his own hand was a stroke of unusual cruelty for David.  It means that David knew he could trust the character of Uriah to not read the note while in transit.  It means that David knew the character of Uriah was above his own.  In fact, reading of Uriah to this point is tragically ironic as he consistently demonstrates more moral character than the king he serves so faithfully.  One of the saddest ironies of Scripture is the response by Uriah when David asks him why he did not go down to his house and hide David's sin with his wife.  He swears on David's life and the life of David's soul he would not do this thing.  He refers to the Ark and his fellow soldiers in tents, the army in the field.  Why was David not there?  It's a tragic irony, where you see his moral character and faithfulness to his king become his undoing.

David kills one of his own 30 faithful long-serving valorous body guards, one who fought beside him while running from Saul, while living in Ziklag, against the Amalekites, and in Hebron.  Uriah stands as one of faithfulness and character, highlighting these qualities lacking in David; at least right here.

It's true David seems devoid of these qualities right here, and that they are replaced with the worst of human qualities.  With David, the worst is never the end of the story.  With David there is another quality that remains at the bedrock of all the others.  He is willing to repent.  Chapter 11 is about his moral failure of epic proportions.  Chapter 12 is about his repentance, also of epic proportions.  Chapter 11 is the worst of David, where chapter 12 is arguably the best.

What this chapter does is bring David's rock-solid faith into sharp relief.  It's not a faith so strong he never fails.  It's a faith so strong he always gets back up and recovers from failure.  It's not amazing that David has this moral failure, it is shocking, but not amazing.  What is amazing is what Nathan is able to do in the next chapter.  And so you don't go all 'fearless-man-of-God' on Nathan, read chapter 11 carefully, and consider how many people knew exactly what David did.  I wonder how many of his faithful soldiers moved a few more blocks away from the palace.  While it wasn't amazing that Nathan knew, it was amazing that he had the courage, knowing what he did, to confront the king.  I'm sure he was afraid, but we'll get into that in the next chapter.

The hinge pin on which the life of David turns is the last verse of chapter 11.  From there a failure becomes a lesson.  But until that verse, it seems very dark, David seems in danger of becoming another despot, another malevolent dictator, another example of human depravity and the utter corruption of absolute power.

I wonder how many people, without the absolute power, hide from God wearing fig leaves, rather than approach the hinge-pin of their own lives.  I have lived from childhood comfortable with shadows and shades of truth.  I have seen it in my family (haven't we all?), but I never saw a real emergence from the shadows.  They weren't bad enough to really require some dramatic repentance, I suppose.  Or, like so many of us, denial makes living among them seem lit.  The gray semi-gloom becomes normal and we treat it like light.  Yet reading Scripture creates an uncomfortable feeling that all is not as light as it should be.

David passes out of darkness and into light.  He pays the consequences and accepts from his Master what comes from his own sin.  The pathway to light is often paved with consequences.  And it is usually these consequences that keep me in gloom, and my fear of them keeps me from a light I can barely imagine.  I suppose in times like this, what I need is the courage to follow the path of consequences into the light.  But I have found that I also need patience, peace, and joy never hurts either.  These things are only found growing on the branches of a life filled with the Spirit of my Master.  So, really, what I have always needed was the presence of my Master in me; just like David.

Facing Two Armies With God

Now when Joab saw that the battle was set against him in front and in the rear, he selected from all the choice men of Israel, and arrayed them against the Arameans.  But the remainder of the people he placed in the hand of Abishai his brother, and he arrayed them against the sons of Ammon.  He said, "If the Arameans are too strong for me, then you shall help me, but if the sons of Ammon are too strong for you, then I will come to help you.  Be strong, and let us show ourselves courageous for the sake of our people and for the cities of our God; and may the Lord do what is good in His sight." (2 Samuel 10:9-12 NASB)

The character of Joab in Scripture is not one of those I would point out as one of great theological insight, not one of upstanding moral character, or one as a good example of anything but killing people.  He was really good at that.  His references to God aren't often and they aren't typically deep, but sometimes it's the practical piece that turns out to be so great.  That's the case here.

So, here Joab has brought part of the army; the good part, but only part (1 Chronicles 19 says all the fighting men).  We're not told how many enemies were here, and 1 Chronicles 19 only tells us part of the numbers involved.  It was still fighting front and back.  It wasn't a good tactical situation to address, but Joab was not in his first rodeo either.  He put the best against the 'attackers', and the rest against the 'defenders'.  That kept the defenders from becoming the attackers.  But then he rally's the troops.

Joab's words are actually very insightful, but only along practical lines.  They don't form a pattern I would necessarily follow every time I go to God or address Him.  Remember this isn't David and His insight into God, it's his 'pet assassin' he's not even that fond of.  So, consider the source as you consider the statement.

"Be strong and let us show ourselves courageous for our people and the cities of our God; and may God do what is good in His eyes."  The statement has three elements: 1) Be strong/courageous in action as we engage this bad situation.  2) Be inspired by our concern for our people and their daily life including worship. 3) Let God do His part, whatever He decides.

The lesson I learn is also made up of three parts: 1) My Master can work with courage because it demonstrates faith in Him. 2) My Master does not put in situations for myself alone, but to use me as a blessings in the lives of others. 3) My Master will do what He sees fit to do, BUT it would also be good to know what He would have me do as His designed role for me.

The third lesson may have been assumed for Joab because he already was the leader of the fighting forces, and he had a fight before him.  He just did his job the best he knew how.  But David would ask before battles, and sometimes do the battle differently at different times.  I think Joab's statement assumes that he can't know what God will do, nor what God would have him do.  I doubt that Joab thinks God doesn't have those insights, but I think Joab thought that they are inaccessible to him.  Keep in mind, David's not there.  Ordinarily, it would be David providing that insight.

So, I am to be courageous because I am convinced my Master loves me, has my back, and is using me for His service.  The work of my Master done through me isn't just for me, but for those I love around me.  The work of my Master done without me is even more important for His glory. 

Yeah, okay, I totally twisted that one around, but it's still true.  True, I need to do the work, be faithful in it, and know God will do as He sees best.  But really, isn't His part more likely to gain Him glory than my part?  I bring 'five loaves and two fish' worth of my own ability, and yet He feeds 5,000 hungry males worth of effective work.  Isn't His part more important than my loaves and fish?  Doesn't what He does bring Him more glory than what I do?  I believe it does.

Just When You Thought You'd Made It...

Now there was a servant of the house of Saul whose name was Ziba, and they called him to David; and the king said to him, "Are you Ziba?" And he said, " I am your servant."  The king said, "Is there not yet anyone of the house of Saul to whom I may show the kindness of God?" And Ziba said to the king, " There is still a son of Jonathan who is crippled in both feet."  So the king said to him, "Where is he?" And Ziba said to the king, "Behold, he is in the house of Machir the son of Ammiel in Lo- debar." (2 Samuel 9:2-4 NASB)

Then the king called Saul's servant Ziba and said to him, " All that belonged to Saul and to all his house I have given to your master's grandson.  You and your sons and your servants shall cultivate the land for him, and you shall bring in the produce so that your master's grandson may have food; nevertheless Mephibosheth your master's grandson shall eat at my table regularly." Now Ziba had fifteen sons and twenty servants.  Then Ziba said to the king, "According to all that my lord the king commands his servant so your servant will do." So Mephibosheth ate at David's table as one of the king's sons. (2 Samuel 9:9-11 NASB)

 The story of Mephibosheth, and his inclusion in David's story is interesting.  One reason for the 'interest' in my opinion is Ziba.  Everyone forgets about Ziba, and I suspect that, in David's day, that's pretty much how Ziba wanted it.  He was the servant of Saul, and the detail in 2 Samuel is that he had fifteen sons and twenty servants of his own.  He was finally out on his own and doing well, when this happened.

Another interesting detail, Ziba has the distinction of being known as Saul's servant, but Saul's dead.  Also, Ziba knows exactly where Mephibosheth, the one crippled in both feet, is.  I think it's an important detail that this son of Jonathan wasn't with his family, but with someone else, outside of the territory of Benjamin.  Why isn't the servant of Saul responsible for taking care of one of the last survivors?  If Mephibosheth is lame in both feet, he's not that able of taking care of himself, so why isn't this servant of his grandfather taking care of him?

David calls for Mephibosheth and makes him like one of his own sons.  But he also gives to him all that belonged to Saul.  At first this sounds great.  But two things make this rather disruptive.  First, Ziba was doing great on his own, in his own right, and now he's back to being a servant.  Second, this wasn't the only survivor of Saul's household.  Read the confusing account of 2 Samuel 21.  There were actually at least seven additional children in Saul's house, two sons of Saul and five sons of one of his daughters.  What happened to them when David returned all that was Saul's to Mephibosheth?  And these are just the ones we know about.

It's at the point where David gives Ziba the responsibility to manage the lands and house of Saul on behalf of Mephibosheth that we are told he has fifteen sons and twenty servants of his own.  I think we're told this to provide some idea of Ziba's situation before he is again put in the role of 'servant' of a living master.  He's no longer 'master of his own fate'.  And he was doing so well at it too.

So here's a few possible motivating things in the back ground which could explain this kindness and Ziba's fate.  First, I suspect that everyone knew about Mephibosheth, but he was always the 'leftover' rather than the choice child.  I think that's why he was with this other, generous family.  I don't think his family was all that keen on his being with them.  He was lame, and therefore obviously 'stricken of God'.  He had a 'lofty' name (takes away shame), but clearly he's a constant reminder of the day Saul fell (that's when he went lame, that day).  The family had another "Mephibosheth" to take his place (who was later hanged by the Gibeonites).   So for David to show this kindness is unexpected, and I think that's one reason Ziba brings him up.  Who would show kindness to one 'stricken of God'?  Well, it seems David would, especially when the son is actually one of Jonathan's.

The second thing here is David's love for Jonathan that sees a son of his treated this way by the family.  So he reverses his fortune, and now he's on top.  Now the family works for him, and he's no longer dependent on the 'leftovers' if any.  It can't sit well with the rest of Saul's family.  When sons of Saul are required to atone for the Gibeonite atrocity by Saul, Mephibosheth (son of Jonathan) is spared, but seven others are not.  It can't sit well with the family that David spared the cripple.

This brings me, finally, to Ziba and Mephibosheth in the account of Absalom's rebellion.  As David is leaving Ziba meets him and claims that Mephibosheth thinks he's going to get the kingdom now (seriously?), and for this David gives everything to Ziba.  Then when David returns Mephibosheth is a wreck, obviously never having taken care of himself while David is gone, and claims Ziba never came to get him and he had no donkey (missed the last taxi out of town?).  David gives him half back, and Mephibosheth says Ziba can keep it, he's just glad David returned.  David didn't seem to know who to believe (neither sounds that credible), but I think Ziba was the liar of the two.

So what's my takeaway here?  I think the lesson best learned from Mephibosheth is found when you look at all three characters, Mephibosheth, David, and Ziba.  I learn that God never discounts someone just because they're lame (the first recorded 'disabilities act').  I also learn that not following the first rule doesn't work out well (e.g. Ziba).  And finally I learn that whatever I consider to be my weakness, whatever may be considered my weakness by others, God still knows my name, where I am, and the number of hairs on my head.  Of course he also knows of every sparrow that falls to the ground, so I shouldn't get too proud of my status.

One of God's favorite things to do in order to show His glory and power is to reverse fortunes.  He loves to turn things around.  It's an element of His character that has found it's way into all our human stories.  The best stories have a reversal of fortune, and God 'writes' the best of the best stories.  The story of Jesus is a HUGE reversal, and we are the ones who benefit.  It's all over the place with David, the shepherd, priest, and king; Abraham, the landless, son-less, wanderer, and father of nations; Joseph the son, slave, ruler, and savior.  Just look at Hebrews 11, and this 'role call of faith'; they're all 'reversals of fortune'.  In fact the whole point of that chapter is that we have the biggest and best reversal yet to come: Heaven.

My lesson is that God reverses fortunes: the last shall be first, and first last.  The workers in the vineyard all got a denarius, even those who worked only an hour.  Weird Al Yankovic has a song that I really love, "Everything You Know Is Wrong".  I think God yells this constantly, but we still love our own reason and logic, and are still surprised when fortunes reverse.  Maybe, just maybe, this Creator of all matter truly IS in control.  Maybe? 

Frienemies of God

He defeated Moab, and measured them with the line, making them lie down on the ground; and he measured two lines to put to death and one full line to keep alive. And the Moabites became servants to David, bringing tribute. (2 Samuel 8:2 NASB)

 At the end of Ruth (4:21) we find that Ruth, the Moabitess was David's great great grand mother (third generation).  Then, in 1 Samuel 22:3, David asks the king of Moab to hide his father while Saul pursues him, and he does.  So, you would think that there would be some 'friendliness' between David and Moab.  Until this happens.

In 2 Samuel 8, David's victories are described without a lot of detail, but in summary.  It's possible that these victories were spread out along his reign, but they are all compiled together in a single chapter.  There are several difficult things to translate and understand in the chapter, but one that is fairly easy to translate, but hard to understand is David's treatment of Moab.

In our age of 'atrocities' bringing an outrage and shock, people are probably surprised by David here.  This is not the 'Christian behavior' expected of one with such a close relationship with God, who is thought to be a 'man after God's own heart'.  Was it in God's heart to kill two-thirds of Moab after the battle/war was won?

Some possible understandings here are that this was only the treatment of one city, possibly the capital, and not the entire nation.  But it doesn't say that.  It's possible that David did this elsewhere and it was more customary than it would appear.  But it doesn't say that.  It's possible that Moab was under some sort of curse by God for something they did when Israel was coming into the land of promise.  But this doesn't refer back to any such curse.

One caveat is a reference in Deuteronomy that anyone of Moabite descent cannot enter the temple until after 10 generations, where other nations were at 3 (Deuteronomy 23:1-8).  The explanation given is that 'they did not meet you with food on the way.'  Another note refers to Balaam, and it was the king of Moab who sent for him, and from whom came the sin of 'Peor' which caused such calamity for Israel in the desert.  So Moab wasn't necessarily a 'friend' as such.

But why, if they were supportive of David as he fled Saul, and why, if David was a near descendant of Moab, would David treat them as brutally as he does; more than he is with other nations?  I don't know.  Let's be honest, as I read Scripture, I see very little to support such treatment of this people.  I don't know why.

So, I have a couple of choices: 1) I can say that David was wrong to treat them that way, and it set off the problems with them that follow (and there are several).  2) I can say that there was good reason, but it's not included in the account.  Or 3) I can say that God was 'willing' to permit this even though He didn't necessarily require it.

Of the three, I personally like the second one.  It preserves the character of both David and God.  On the other hand, it seems that if an explanation were missing from the text, it would also have been missing for the 'editor' compiling these accounts.  He is so full of explanation for other difficult things (but not all).

So what's my lesson?  Well, as hard as it is, I have to fall back on my inability to understand my Master.  What I mean by 'fall back' is that rather than require an explanation, I have to instead rest on what I do know already.  In other words, even though I don't know here, even though this sounds harsh, I have to go with what I know of my Master:  He created all things, He sustains all things, He knows my name, and chooses to love me, and not only me.  Therefore, along with all the other stuff I don't know (how He creates stars, how He holds atoms together, how He can see all of the universe and still know where I am, etc.) I will include this, God loves and blesses David, who killed 2/3s of the nation of Moab.

But a God capable of such work is worth my attention, and I should be concerned to be on His good side.  Abraham was considered a 'friend of God', David was considered a 'man after God's own heart', so that's where I want to aspire to be.  This is not Someone I want as an enemy.  Therefore, I will worship Him.  And I will obey Him, and that means that one day, I might just be involved in measuring the enemies of God and leaving only 1/3 alive.  I seriously doubt that, but I'm just going with what I read.  Just the same, are you a 'Friend of God'?

The Right Thing Done Wrong

When they came to Nacon's threshing floor, Uzzah reached out to the ark of God and took hold of it because the oxen had stumbled.  Then the Lord's anger burned against Uzzah, and God struck him dead on the spot for his irreverence, and he died there next to the ark of God.  David was angry because of the Lord's outburst against Uzzah, so he named that place an Outburst Against Uzzah, as it is today.  David feared the Lord that day and said, "How can the ark of the Lord ever come to me?"  So he was not willing to move the ark of the Lord to the city of David; instead, he took it to the house of Obed- edom the Gittite.  The ark of the Lord remained in his house three months, and the Lord blessed Obed- edom and his whole family. (2 Samuel 6:6-10 NASB)

Sometimes God's behavior just doesn't make sense.  Sometimes there is simply no explaining away something He chooses to do.  So we need to make a choice.  It's sort of like a 'crisis of faith', but in another sense it's also an acceptance of a very obvious, but often overlooked, reality.  The fact is, there are no 'other alternatives'.  That's all in our head.

In John six, Jesus basically offends the people until they leave.  He then looks at his disciples left standing around, and says, "Will you leave too?" to which Peter answers, "Where will we go?  Who else has the words of life?"  Most of the time, we're not that smart.

It amazes me how people, including myself, believe that their obedience and faithfulness to God is somehow something we 'hold over him'.  As if we can modify and influence or control Him and His behavior by either promising to follow Him or threatening not to.  It's a behavior that, at its root, comes from a belief that the universe is all about me; and every 'me' is different, and all obviously wrong.

The inescapable truth is that there is only One God.  So what other options are there?  If we don't 'like' Him, it's not like we can simply follow another god or whatever.  There aren't any.  If we don't like Him or something He does, there's no sense in saying, "I'll never believe in a God who could do such things." Really?  As if there are other options?  What will we believe in if there's no God or we don't like the One speaking to us and doing these things?  I can choose to believe anything, that what I see is merely the projection into my dimension of something with other dimensions of existence.  I can choose to believe that blue is green, that read is black, and so on.  I can choose to believe anything, but that doesn't change what they are.  I can't change the nature of things through my belief.

God is.  He is as He is, and He is as different from us as we are from the clay pots and trinkets we make with our hands.  His ways are higher than our ways, and His thoughts are higher than our thoughts.  If this doesn't sound like it matters or makes sense, or helps accept the situation it's because it's so simple and obvious that we miss something equally as obvious but which we refuse to accept.

We are not at the center of the universe and this is not all about us.  God is not about us, He is for us.  There is a HUGE difference, and until we can wrap our heads and hearts around this truth we're hopeless.

God struck Uzza and killed him when what he was doing appeared good and right.  The whole thing was wrong though.  The Ark should never have been on a cart (the Philistines did it that way and they were pagans).  Uzza and his brother were not who was supposed to be tending it.  Uzza's death was not a sign of God's displeasure with David over all, but rather His displeasure of what David was doing at the moment.  David's response was to be angry, and to be afraid of God.  He then thought God did not want him to bring the Ark to Jerusalem, so he put it aside.  So, God blessed where the Ark was, just as He had previously blessed Kiriath Jearim where David was 'carting' it from.

The problem God has was with the 'mode' in which His Ark was being carried, and His solution was to strike Uzza for touching it.  That seems excessive, capricious, makes God a bully, a brute, an 'angry child' and so on.  The reality is that while we don't like the solution God chose, while such a Person may not be Who we would 'choose' to follow, believe in, or have faith in; He's the only One we have.  You don't like that God struck this guy with good intentions?  Tough.  You don't think you can trust a God who strikes down those serving Him in ignorance? Get over it. 

Face facts.  Get real. What we are missing is that we're afraid of God when He does such things.  We fear for our lives.  And that makes us very uncomfortable, unsafe, and insecure.  Part of God's point is exactly that, not to put us on the defensive; that's what we do because we believe we have a right to be safe, secure, and comfortable.  We don't any such right.  We should be uncomfortable, insecure, and afraid to stand in the presence of the One forming the universe out of nothing, creating stars, forming planets, and tracing the patterns of subatomic particles we haven't even found yet. 

Doesn't it seem odd that creatures described in such a way that to see them would so terrify us we would loose control of our bowels, spend all eternity declaring God's glory?  It does, but we don't pursue it.  We simply leave it at 'odd'.  If we were to pursue it we would be faced with Someone more magnificent than we can imagine.  We would be confronted with the God Creator, Warrior, Destroyer, and Savior.  If the creatures worshiping Him for eternity are frightening to behold, shouldn't we then consider that the One they worship would be terrifying?  Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.  Yet we find all sorts of reasons to not be afraid.  Well, good luck with that.

We are Uzza when we worship without fear.  We are the ignorant servant well-meaning but doing the right thing wrong when we come so boldly before the throne of God we do so with contempt.  We risk death to do so, and yet we blissfully go along our way as if God has some sort of obligation to maintain our physical existence. 

So what do we do?  Do we enter into worship like we're about to be killed?  Do we walk around on 'egg shells', tip-toe around the One who may spontaneously obliterate us?  Read the rest of the chapter.  David dances in worship like a wild-man.  He pours out everything in his expression of the value of God to him.  God is all those things, including Savior.  Think of it!  The terrifying One worshiped by the frightening beings knows who you are, where you are, and sent His Only Son, Deity in flesh, to make sure we can have an eternal relationship with Him.  Grace means that we can worship Him at all!  So worship will all the power within us!  That meager expression of worship to such a One is His desire.  Every day, He takes a lunch for two and feeds 5,000; we just call it 'worship'. 

Half A Decade Gone?

Ish-bosheth, Saul's son, was forty years old when he became king over Israel, and he was king for two years. The house of Judah, however, followed David.  The time that David was king in Hebron over the house of Judah was seven years and six months. (2 Samuel 2:10-11 NASB)

David was thirty years old when he became king, and he reigned forty years.  At Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months, and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty- three years over all Israel and Judah. (2 Samuel 5:4-5 NASB)

 One of the curious things about the Bible, sometimes a criticism, is the funky math.  In this instance, we have a king in place over eleven tribes for two years, and David over Judah for seven years and six months.  So what accounts for the five years and six months there was no king over the 11 tribes while David was still over Judah in Hebron?

There are theories about this in various commentaries.  One I have says that the five years were actually when David was over all the tribes but still in Hebron, he just hadn't moved to Jerusalem yet.  But that's not what it says here.  It says over Judah for seven years six months...in Hebron.  The other commentary I have totally ignores the issue, which I wasn't happy about.

Left to my own devices I used Google...again I came up empty.  And I did try to use Scripture to comment on Scripture and went to 1 Chronicles 10, 11 and 12.  That editor completely skipped the whole issue, and doesn't even mention Ish-Bosheth (or Eshbaal) reigning at all.  In fact there, after listing four sons previously, it says all three sons died and all of his house (1 Chronicles 10:6), leaving very little room for any such problem.

So what happened to five years?  That's half a decade, you can't just leave it out can you?  It's not just 'water under the bridge' or 'the blink of an eye' or some other cliche.  It's five circuits around the sun.  It's five harvest times, sixty-something new moons, and at least twenty major feasts among the people.  It's nearly the whole time a person can indenture themselves as a slave to pay off a debt.

Okay, so here's my spin on it, within the vacuum of comment or complete failure to notice: I think the other tribes were in nearly complete disarray after Saul's demise, and it took five years to pull something together and put it in place.  I think David waited patiently for God to bring the other tribes over to him, and in that time Abner went around putting together support for Ish-Bosheth, and it took five years.  Well, five years and six months anyway.

Here's why:  Time for us happens fast, and we filter everything through that experience and expectation.  But these people went through longer periods of time with no leader.  As one Judge would die, there would be another 'power vacuum' and eventually another Judge would arise.  So, Samuel dies, as Saul is king, but when Saul dies, there's confusion as to what to do next.  Did the whole king thing fail?  Do we get a judge?  Meanwhile, 'there was no king in the land and everyone did what was good in their own eyes' (Judges 21:25). 

I guess my point is that to us, five years is this big deal.  To them though, things moved slower anyway.  Sure David went from Ziklag to Hebron, but even that probably took time after Saul's death.  David probably used that time to send 'bribes' to the leaders of Judah which smoothed his assumption of power there (1 Samuel 30:26-30).  David bides his time.  He's not worried.  He won't force the issue because he has faith, and I'm sure he doesn't relish trying to take the throne by force.  That would set a precedent of chaos between kings.  He's wise.  He's taught his men that they do not raise their hand against the Lord's anointed, and the lesson stuck.  Why would he turn around and endanger the eventual succession of his own throne through violence?

Faith and patience are not my strongest suits.  I get impatient and wonder what happened to God.  I've been in my job for over 8 years, and haven't been able to jump ship.  What I know is that my Master has me here in this position.  I need to be patient, and diligent as I wait.  David was patient and diligent as he waited for God to bring about what He promised.  And eventually He did.  David didn't complain, "What took you so long?" He didn't look at the chaos of the other tribes (if there was any) and complain, "How long will you wait while this madness continues?"  He did none of that.  I probably would have.  Of course he fought a bear by grabbing him by the beard and clubbing him to death, and I wouldn't do that either...we are quite a bit different really.

My point here is that the lesson of five missing years is patience and faith.  Or it's faith and patience.  Or it's love, which includes both (1 Corinthians 13).  I need to relax into my Master's mighty hands.  I need to stop trying to make much out of my little, when the One making everything out of nothing has me in His view.  It's okay, He's got this, whatever this is.

So critics will look at five missing, unaccounted for, ignored years and yell 'foul!', 'major biblical error!', and so on.  But I take it as a note of encouragement that my view of time is so vastly different from my Master's view of time.  The adjustment I need to make isn't to find an account for the time, but rather to submit to the view of the Master of all time.  If it doesn't bother Him, I shouldn't let it bother me.  Now, about those commentators totally ignoring the issue - THAT I still have an issue with...

Secrets Versus News

Now when they came into the house, as he was lying on his bed in his bedroom, they struck him and killed him and beheaded him. And they took his head and traveled by way of the Arabah all night. (2 Samuel 4:7 NASB)

David answered Rechab and Baanah his brother, sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, and said to them, "As the Lord lives, who has redeemed my life from all distress, when one told me, saying, 'Behold, Saul is dead, ' and thought he was bringing good news, I seized him and killed him in Ziklag, which was the reward I gave him for his news.  How much more, when wicked men have killed a righteous man in his own house on his bed, shall I not now require his blood from your hand and destroy you from the earth?" (2 Samuel 4:9-11 NASB)

 In this modern information age, the age of instant news, satellites, cell phones, texting, email, the internet, and social media we think we're so smart.  We think we know everything, that there are no secrets, and that privacy is something to be guarded by firewalls, passwords, and  PIN's.  Why do we continue to forget that our Master (regardless of whether we acknowledge Him as such) knows everything?

So, 3,000 years before any of that stuff I mention in the first paragraph, these two soldiers get tired of following the "man of shame", Ish-Bosheth.  And in order to get things moving, murder him in his own bed, cut off his head, and bring it overnight (overnight shipping 3,000 years ago?) to David in his capital.  They travel over night by the fastest route to the guy they think would be most interested in knowing what they've done, and yet...he already knows.

They tried to impress the king with the head of his enemy, and instead only succeed in incriminating themselves in murder.  Yes, three millennia before the cell phone, the news of their crime was faster than the current method of communication.  Why now do we think it's any different?  Why do we think that now, of all times, we can outrun the news of our sin?

The Apostle John tells us that if we confess our sin, our Savior is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sin and cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9).  So, why do believers still think that we can fool the Master of all the universe?  Why would someone still think that knowing all things, this one thing He doesn't?

Actually, I don't think we do.  I think, or suspect, that we simply don't care that He knows.  I know with me, that more often than not, I sin knowing I'm sinning but simply choose to do so anyway.  I then don't confess it because I know He knows, and don't care; at least not at first.  The hold of my Master doesn't let me rest that way for long though.  He doesn't leave me alone, even in my sin.  So, when I sin, and I do daily, I bring my Master with me; not because He does my bidding, I'd rather He wasn't with me when I sin.  He chooses to go with me out of love and mercy, and I choose to go where I have no business going.

Lately it has been arrogance, apathy, resentment, and probably fear that have been my preferred places to go.  Arrogance denies the mastery of my Master.  Apathy denies the worth of my King.  Resentment denies the sovereignty of the Prince of Peace.  Fear is a direct challenge to the will and reality of the King of kings.  Faith is really the answer to all of these, and for some reason it's the first thing I jettison when I encounter stupid stuff, stupid people, and my own stupidity.

When, instead, I let my Master reign (as if I somehow prevent it) everything eventually starts to make some sense and I have peace.  Or, more often, nothing ever really makes sense, and the peace is there anyway.  Truly my Master reigns, but I pretend to rule my own life.  All I accomplish is an embarrassing futile rebellion against He who loves me without limits. 

Here's what's really happening:  Within the infinite space of this universe there is a spec in one corner comprised of several galaxies grouped together.  Within that group is one particular galaxy which has, toward one of the outer spiral arms, a loose cluster of stars.  One of those stars has a system of planets, one of which has enough solid material, spins slow enough, is close enough, and tilted just so as to support the fragile life forms crawling about on its surface.  In the scheme of the universe, their life-spans are ridiculously short.  Yet their attitude is so shockingly arrogant that they behave as if all the universe is really about them.  I am such a specimen.

While this entire construct we refer to as a 'universe' is probably no more than the decoration on the workbench of its Creator, many claim that it is the height of arrogance that He should want us to worship and praise Him.  It's ironic really.  We miss that it is the probably the height of mercy that He would choose to inhabit the praise of such people.  We seem to completely miss that worship merely helps us place ourselves within the real shape and scheme of this universe.  It gives us a clearer sense of scope and scale without the overwhelm of actually trying to fit the universe into our tiny pea brains.

So there's nothing to be gained by hiding my sin from my Master.  I see no value in pretending that I'm not arrogant, that He didn't see it, or that the Creator and One sustaining my life doesn't care. Since the Maker of the vastness of all time and space has it all under His control, and is aware of all of it, why then am I afraid of a future I can merely perceive as dim and insubstantial?  If He loves me, what do I have to fear of anything clear or dim?  Am I not some ridiculous pair of soldiers carrying a grisly secret sin already known to the very one I was trying to impress?  They were killed, how much more do I expect from my own failures to hit the mark of my Master?  Isn't it much more sensible to simply confess my sin and let Him forgive and cleanse me from all that mars our relationship?  Watch me now:  It will probably take me about 10 minutes to make the same mistakes all over again...