Hurrying A Gift?

"Now therefore, know and consider what you should do, for evil is plotted against our master and against all his household; and he is such a worthless man that no one can speak to him."  Then Abigail hurried and took two hundred loaves of bread and two jugs of wine and five sheep already prepared and five measures of roasted grain and a hundred clusters of raisins and two hundred cakes of figs, and loaded them on donkeys. (1 Samuel 25:17-18 NASB)

We see Abigail in three 'scenes' in this story, and in each of the three (with her servants, meeting David in the desert, and with David's servants to become his wife) Abigail is in a hurry.  Here, she's in a hurry to get together a 'gift' to propitiate David.  Yet, when considering he has 600 men in his troop, the gift seems somewhat inadequate.  On a day when the wealth of Nabal is gathered, thousands of sheep, she takes 5.  There is also 2 jugs of wine, 200 loaves of bread and grain and raisins.  Still, not even the 400 with David would really find the gift enough to make their trip worth it.

As I read this account, I think the size of the gift is partly explained in the first statement made about Abigail in verse 18: 'Then Abigail hurried...'  I think the answer lies there, or at least the clue as why it wasn't bigger; she was in a hurry to put it together.  So, she found what was at hand for the shearing feast of her husband and household, took some of what was there, and sets off on her donkey.

What is also interesting is that she has this gift ahead of her as she reaches David.  So the first he hears of her is her servants arriving with a gift, and then she 'rounds the mountain' and rushes to fall at his feet.  I wonder, if looking at the little provided, he is still upset at first, or even more so.  The rest of what it took to calm David down may have been supplied by the presence of the lady herself.  Her demeanor is humble, her words wise and godly, and she has been described as 'beautiful of form'; in short, she is impressive, leaving an indelible mark on the warrior.

The result is that this gift, perhaps enough for those watching the bags, is sufficient to appease David; at least the gift along with the lady herself is sufficient.  David returns and waits, and God addresses his 'adversary' in a very permanent manner.  I thought it was interesting how Abigail introduces to Nabal what she did; and while his response is cryptic (was he afraid, shocked at his loss, shocked at his wife, or what?), I wonder if she knew what it would be.  There isn't much mourning for the husband, she and David are wed in what reads as a very short time.  Once again, she hurries to David.

So, what's the lesson?  I think the lesson here is about character.  The personal qualities of Abigail made up for what she was unable to bring or add to the gift.  So, it was less about her material resources and more about her personal resources that saved her household.  The point?  Material substance is less important than personality substance.

So, I learn from this that, as I approach my job, my family, friends, church, and so on; what I carry in my heart far outweighs what I carry in my pockets.  What is in my words is more important than what is in my bank account, or my home, my garage, or other form of storage.  It's not the gift I give, but the attitude, words, and actions I take that make a positive indelible mark; if I make one at all.

Therefore, my daughter doesn't need more stuff from me, she needs my time, attention, and love.  My wife doesn't need a bauble, but my gaze, my devotion, and my appreciation.  My friends need my listening ear, my church needs my family's committed involvement, and my Master needs all of me.  At that point, being a good employee will be easy.  So, there it is; problem solved, lesson learned, ready to move on...oh wait.  I almost forgot; I need to now practice.  Ah, I thought I was missing something.

Protection From Myself?

"Now therefore, my lord, as the LORD lives, and as your soul lives, since the LORD has restrained you from shedding blood, and from avenging yourself by your own hand, now then let your enemies and those who seek evil against my lord, be as Nabal." (1 Samuel 25:26 NASB)

Commentators make much of how God protected David from the sin of killing innocents in revenge for Nabal's insult.  I wonder about that though.  If it were such a huge issue, like something that might prevent or divert his ascending the throne, why does everyone else assume he's going to do it?

What I mean is, if this were such a terrible thing, and something detrimental to his future as king, then why is the assumption of the servant who tells Abigail, and the assumption of Abigail (the wise wife) that David will do exactly that?  In verse 26, Abigail does say that God has kept David from shedding innocent blood, but is that what's going on, or is it part of her negotiation for the life of her household?

I suppose what I'm getting at is the rest of the content of her plea is clearly made up of placating David's wrath: speaks well of him personally, provides a gift for his men, bows before him, and so on.  She speaks of his role before God among the people, but is that 'political' and 'prophetic' or simply an observation of recent events?

I suspect that, while God did act providentially to keep David from wiping out an entire household, I don't think that was the point here.  Perhaps Uriah would later take issue with such a view, asking why God didn't act 'providentially' in his case.  The understanding was that Nabal's actions in response to David would bring about the destruction of his household.  That Nabal didn't get that only reinforces his foolishness.

On the other hand, Nabal is in common company with the Ziphites, the people of Keilah, and others of the Judean countryside who are ready and willing to hand David over to Saul.  Yet, it seems Saul is not so quick to enter Judah to protect such people (as in the case of Keilah).  So, the loyalty seems more to do with fear of what happened at Nob than a character assessment between the two camps of Saul and David.  That being said, Nabal seems to have missed the point of that lesson if he thought Saul would protect him, again playing a fool.

It may be just me, but I think that the point of this story is that there is room for the vengeance of God.  It's not so much that David's vengeance was a moral problem, but that it was unnecessary.  David didn't raise his sword against Saul because that demonstrated to his men that no one raises there hand against the anointed of the Lord.  This Nabal is not an anointed one of the Lord; him David could kill.  This is not the same circumstance as the previous chapter.

But even when 'justified' or perhaps culturally accepted, sometimes my actions can be outside of my Master's plan.  When He intercedes for me, then He again takes center stage, and I fade to the background.  This is as it should be.  So, not everything I can do, should be done.  I think I needed this lesson last week.

I responded harshly to a co-worker last week.  Regardless of whether I had ample reason to be provoked, I allowed myself to act on my behalf, and I think I failed to leave room for my Master to act.  Sometimes I think there is a place to respond to slights and insults, but probably not to defend myself. 

I allowed the frustration I had let build concerning my work with a customer bubble to the top and pour out in my response to her.  I felt hurt and disrespected, relegated to the position of servant.  But isn't that what I am?  Am I not a servant of the King?  I felt the work I did was important, and warranted respect from my peers, and perhaps, in my culture I'm right.  But in the eyes of my King, my work is in His service, for His purpose, and for His pleasure, not my own gratification.  I was about me, not Him.  I lived instead of died, and lost an important opportunity to serve in humility rather than lash out in pride.

I don't want to give the impression that I believe my Master wishes me to be a doormat for the rest of the world.  On the other hand, the strength showed by my Master as He served was not in his ability to thwart insults, but in His ability to withstand them.  It was my Master Who used the insults of others, their persecution of Him, their lack of understanding and acceptance of Him to save all of humanity.  Now that is a reversal, and one from which I did not learn.  There was a better response, a response of humility, and one demonstrating the character of my Master rather than my damaged pride.  I missed that one.

So, the lesson I learn is to die to self, to accept the role of servant, and to permit my Master His place of center stage, where He belongs.  I can apologize, but I would rather respond initially in a way that needs no apology.  I need to stop having a 'crow lunch' and start serving others.  This, like other entries, is about submission, obedience, and acceptance of the position in which I have been placed by my Master.  Again...am I a slow learner or what?  So, die already...what the heck?  I want to live a resurrected life, not some sort of zombie version of my sinful past.  What an idiot.