It's Not Like This Surprised God

When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, and you possess it and live in it, and you say, 'I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me,' you shall surely set a king over you whom the LORD your God chooses, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman.  (Deuteronomy 17:14-15 NASB)

Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah; and they said to him, "Behold, you have grown old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint a king for us to judge us like all the nations." (1 Samuel 8:4-5 NASB)

There are multiple opinions of the monarchy in Scripture, not just one.  We assume there is one because One God inspired it.  But I believe we "presume" with God when we believe that His views are universal when it comes to His highly variable human creatures.  The only universal with His human creatures is that we are lost and dead without Him.  Other than that, we're as different from each other as our fingerprints.

So, when the people asked for a king, it offended Samuel because he was already their judge.  They rejected him in a very real, very personal sense.  They blamed it on his sons and on his age, but they also ignored his success.  The realities of the one eclipsed the reality of the other, and it hurt Samuel's heart. 

God saw it differently.  He saw it as another in a long line of usurpations of His Sovereignty over His chosen people.  But it didn't surprise Him.  He already had it lined out what would happen.  Back in the day of Moses, as the people camped on banks of the Jordan River, God described for Moses what should be done when the people asked for a king.  He even knew why they would ask, "...like all the nations who are around me."  So, this is not a surprise. 

Every once in a great while, I have a shining moment of brilliance, and I lay out my brilliant idea before my Master.  Sheer brilliance! I have a plan, an idea, a wonderful new method or way or procedure or something equally boring and uninteresting, completely underwhelming and irrelevant to my Master and His plans and ideas.  But He listens, completely unperturbed, as if I've just discovered the cure for cancer He's been trying to get everyone to find right under their noses or something.  But it's not like He's surprised.

Think about it.  What can I discover that He didn't create?  What can I imagine that didn't come from elements He provided?  What can I do or decide that isn't an amalgam of circumstances He orchestrated?  Sure I have free-will.  Of course I have real decisions to make.  It's clear that I have responsibility for my mistakes and correct deeds and decisions.  But none of that flies in the face of or in any way minimizes the complete sovereignty of my Master.

Why then do I think that what I achieve at work is about me?  Why when bad things happen do I take it personal?  What makes me think that the world, or the piece of it in which I live, has anything to do with me?  Why is it so easy to forget that my entire value is in the eyes of my Master, and my purpose is entirely His design.  Is there something more valuable I can imagine than the love of my Master?  Perhaps I can envision some loftier purpose than the one He designs.  Have I lost my mind? 

How hard is it to just simply fall back into the assurance that my Master has my life in His hand?  Bad stuff happens, bring it on!  Good stuff happens, thank you Master!  Difficulty at work, I work for my King, and this is His purpose.  Happiness at home, we will praise Him together.  Pain and sorrow at home, we will grieve together before His throne and be comforted by His presence.  It makes no difference as to the circumstances nor where they occur; nothing separates me from the foot of His throne.

Now, for the reality of my day.  Let's see if I can live out these words as easily as I have written them...

Why So Clear?

Abraham said to his servant, the oldest of his household, who had charge of all that he owned, "Please place your hand under my thigh, and I will make you swear by the LORD, the God of heaven and the God of earth, that you shall not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I live, but you will go to my country and to my relatives, and take a wife for my son Isaac."   The servant said to him, "Suppose the woman is not willing to follow me to this land; should I take your son back to the land from where you came?"   Then Abraham said to him, "Beware that you do not take my son back there!   The LORD, the God of heaven, who took me from my father's house and from the land of my birth, and who spoke to me and who swore to me, saying, 'To your descendants I will give this land,' He will send His angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son from there.   But if the woman is not willing to follow you, then you will be free from this my oath; only do not take my son back there." (Genesis 24:2-8 NASB)

Do not get a wife for Isaac from the Canaanites but from Abraham's family; and even more, do not take Isaac to Abraham's family.  Why so specific?  Abraham has met Melchizedek who he tithed to and who blessed him in one of the names Abraham used for his God.  Isn't he and his city, Salem, righteous enough to produce a wife for Isaac?  What about Abimelech, the king to whom Abraham lied about Sarah being his wife?  He demonstrated both character and faith, why couldn't his city produce a righteous woman for Isaac?  What is it about Mesopotamian women or ones from his clan that is so important?

On the surface, pagan beliefs and practices would seem to be the cause.  Yet examples of places in Canaan where those were not practiced were also found.  So it had to be something else as well.  I believe Abraham is thinking about his "descendants".

What if his concern is that his descendants become 'Canaanite' rather than a distinct people who will dispossess the Canaanites?  I think this might be more toward the issue with Abraham.  Another clue to that being so prominent in his mind is the other charge, 'only do not take my son back there.' 

Isaac needs to remain in Canaan, but not integrate with them.  If he goes back to Abraham's family then the danger is he will not return; the promise would fail.  If he marries among the Canaanites, he will loose his distinction and become yet another Canaanite tribe.  But really, what's the big deal?  As long as descendants of Abraham inherit the land, who cares who marries whom?

The only way I can meander through some sort of understanding of this is to follow Abraham as he follows God.  God tells him his descendants will inherit the land, yet Abraham doesn't have any.  God tells him that the promise will be for children of his.  So he tries to fix it with a "non-barren" wife, Hagar, and it seems to work.  God rejects this one.  Hagar is an Egyptian, part of the line of Ham.  God promises to bless Ishmael, but the promise of the land is not for him. 

Part of the lesson Abraham learns from Isaac's birth is that this blessing he has been given will not be through any line but his family's.  It is a thoroughgoing rejection of the line of Ham (Genesis 9:20-27) which includes a curse on Canaan.  This is even though Canaanites demonstrate moments of lucid worship of God (i.e. Melchizedek, Abimelech, Shechem, and perhaps Mamre and Hebron).  That amount of good "seasoning" were not enough to overcome the rejection.  It's sobering to consider the total rejection of an entire 'branch' of humanity by their Maker.

So what do I learn from this 'possibility'?  Well, I see my Master a bit differently.  He can choose to reject entire branches of humanity, even though they demonstrate some degree of righteousness.  I see this as indicative of His complete knowledge of all things regardless of time.  Sure Melchizedek and Abimelech demonstrated righteous understanding of God, but their influence is gone in a few generations.  The 'remnant' left over is actually recovered by my Master, but out of that line, and into the line of His chosen people.  So, while the entire 'branch of humanity' is rejected, my Master reserves a remnant for Himself; it's not a total and complete rejection.  There's hope for me in that.

But in the midst of this rejection on such a wide scale I see grace at work.  While it may be shocking to think that the Maker of the universe would "have mercy on whom He will have mercy, and wrath on whom He will have wrath;" the real wonder is that He doesn't have wrath on everyone.  We all deserve it, we have all failed Him, there are none righteous, no not one.  Yet not all are destroyed.  Why not?  If I focus just on the ones under His wrath, then I miss a key element of His character.  Even among those rejected, He still pulls out an remnant.  Even in the midst of His wrath, He still saves some. 

It is arrogance that sees this as unfair to those rejected.  It is the height of rebellion against the Maker to call Him to task for the destruction of His wayward and apathetic creatures.  And yet, it still bothers me.  That some are destroyed makes me uncomfortable because I see that there is little distinction between myself and them.  I stand before a Master Creator Sovereign King, and I see that it is only by His work I stand there.  People fall to either side of me, and I should be among them.  It's not about me, I diminish into the background of His mercy and grace; elements of His glory and holiness.

These two things help me understand my Master better.  They help me see myself more truly as I am (powerless), not as I wish I were (powerful).   I can't change this world, the people around me, or the circumstances I find myself within.  I can only change how I respond to the One truly able to change this world (which He created), the people around me, and the circumstances I find myself within.  I respond in worship.  He is worthy of all my praise, my adoration, the focus of my entire life, and all within my grasp.  He is worthy of it all.  The problem is that I am so often unwilling to give it.  That is where my lesson is; school is now in session (does it seems early this year?).

The Righteous Request for Proof?

Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.  And He said to him, "I am the LORD who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to possess it."  He said, "O Lord GOD, how may I know that I will possess it?"  So He said to him, "Bring Me a three year old heifer, and a three year old female goat, and a three year old ram, and a turtledove, and a young pigeon."  Then he brought all these to Him and cut them in two, and laid each half opposite the other; but he did not cut the birds.  The birds of prey came down upon the carcasses, and Abram drove them away.  Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, terror and great darkness fell upon him.  God said to Abram, "Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, where they will be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years.  "But I will also judge the nation whom they will serve, and afterward they will come out with many possessions.  "As for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you will be buried at a good old age.  "Then in the fourth generation they will return here, for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete."  It came about when the sun had set, that it was very dark, and behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a flaming torch which passed between these pieces.  On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your descendants I have given this land, From the river of Egypt as far as the great river, the river Euphrates: (Genesis 15:6-18)

Abram has just had his belief credited to him as righteousness by the Creator of the heavens and the earth.  The statements of God continue, and Abram asks, "How may I know that I will possess it?"  How may I know?  Show me a sign.  Prove it.  Things I would consider gutsy to ask of God.  Abram's just been credited with righteousness for belief, so did he just use up his credit?


It seems that God doesn't have a problem with the question, and proceeds to provide the proof.  It is an odd way to do it for our culture, but essentially what God does is bind Himself in a Suzerain Treaty.  What He has said with the divided carcasses is that, "If I don't make good on my promise, may this happen to Me."  God would be destroyed, laid in half, before He would break this promise.


But when I consider the One making this promise and binding Himself to it in such a dramatic fashion, I understand better the sense of verse 12, "Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, terror and great darkness fell upon him."  God had arrived.  The One forming stars and laying out the patterns for quarks shows up.  Unimaginable awesome and utterly destructive Presence emerges into His creation, clothed in darkness to preserve His servant, but the terror remains.


This was not some earthly king laying out victims of his latest battle for those who remain to walk between; binding them to a covenant of servitude.  This is the King of Kings moving between the victims.  The smoking oven and flaming torch passing between the divide carcasses seems to bind Him to Abram, as if Abram is the king, and God serves Abram.  


How does my "theology of God" incorporate this concept?  How does this not threaten or negate the "Sovereignty of God"?  How is it that the Maker of all Matter will bind Himself to one of His human creatures in such a fashion and not give up His status and place as Ruler of all?  Who is this Abram that he should witness such a thing, preserve such a story?  And why would it be recorded, inspired by the One binding Himself?  This is something that the King of Kings wants me to know about Him.


One reconciliation that I can make between this event and the Sovereignty of God is that the King of Kings binds Himself to His promise rather than Abram.  Yet, the form of this event matches the form of such treaties among men, and that is not the case for them.  Did Abram understand this as his God binding Himself to a promise or to Abram?


I believe God bound Himself to the promise, and that Abram understood this.  Here's why: After this, Abram continues to submit himself to his God as Lord.  He doesn't change his view and understand God as submitting to him.  Secondly, Abram asked how he would know the promise would be fulfilled, and this is the answer God provides.  The connection would make sense to him as an answer to his question.


So why does my Master want me to know this about Himself?  Does He still do this?  Does He still bind Himself to His promises?  From this account, and others, I believe that the King of Kings, my Master, still considers Himself bound to His promises.  I believe that my Master would cease to exist  before He would break a promise.  I can be more sure of Him and His promises than of the sunrise, even the one I witness now.  Though I can see His creation, He is more sure and trustworthy than what I see.  I believe.  Perhaps that will be credited to my account like Abram's.