Why Even Go There?

Then Abishai said to David, "Today God has delivered your enemy into your hand; now therefore, please let me strike him with the spear to the ground with one stroke, and I will not strike him the second time."  But David said to Abishai, "Do not destroy him, for who can stretch out his hand against the LORD'S anointed and be without guilt?" (1 Samuel 26:8-9 NASB)

So David took the spear and the jug of water from beside Saul's head, and they went away, but no one saw or knew it, nor did any awake, for they were all asleep, because a sound sleep from the LORD had fallen on them. (1 Samuel 26:12 NASB)

This is somewhat a repeat of chapter 24 where Saul goes t relieve himself in a cave and David and his men do not take the opportunity to kill the crazed king.  Here the setting is out in the open, Saul asleep in the middle of his 3,000 men with Abner, his general, at his side.  It sounds fairly safe.

David and Abishai simply sneak right into the ring of soldiers, and right up to the sleeping king.  The immediate question is how were they able to do that?  The answer is provided on their way out when the writer tells us at that point (guessing it was on everyone's mind) that God had put everyone under a sleep, a sleep of the LORD.

In a very real sense, the writer here acknowledges that Abishai was right; "Today God has delivered your enemy into your hand," just as Abishai said.  David just didn't do with the opportunity what Abishai expected.  Why put David in that position at all?  Why sneak down into the camp?  Why even be there?

We're taught, and continue to teach young people to 'flee' sin, not to put themselves in tempting situations.  It makes sense, and is good advice.  I think we should continue to do so.  My confusion here is why my Master doesn't agree with my assessment when it concerns His man David.  Here, my Master seems to encourage David to come right in and be tempted by the sleeping king.

James tells us in 1:13, that God is not tempted, nor does He tempt anyone.  Yet here, it would seem He didn't prevent it either, in fact, a case could be made that He enabled it, and therefore not only encouraged it, but is actually responsible for the temptation (okay, not a great case, but good enough for the US court system).  David wants to sneak into the camp, Abishai goes with him, and God makes it possible.

I know, and I strongly believe in the quality of my Master that He knows everything without respect to time.  So, past, present, future all appear to Him as the same.  So, for Him to permit David to sneak into the camp isn't a problem since He knows David won't kill Saul.  But let's put this where it really belongs: in the category with all the other things my Master asks of me that seem silly if He knows the past, present, and future.  For instance, why pray if He already knows what He will do, how, with/through whom, and the eventual outcome?  What exactly would I be praying for?  Why send me into ministry?  Why have me train for 10 years after leaving the Army only spend 18 months or so actually on the field after finishing?  If He knew what would happen, why would He do that?

So, why permit David to go into the camp?  What is the point of having David stand over the sleeping king, and not kill him?  Is it a point to be made with David, with Abishai, with Saul?  Perhaps this is where the inspired words cannot fail in their purpose; a purpose somewhat different with each person involved, David, Abishai, Saul, and whoever reads them.

My point is this; not everything my Master permits me to do, enables me to encounter, or directs me into is a mandate to a particular action.  Submission to my Master does not mean taking every action provided by each opportunity He provides.  This is a problem for me precisely because I have contented myself that if He permitted it, seemed to be orchestrating it, then it must be His will.  So, try something; if it works, if He makes the details come together, if He seems to enable its completion, then it must have been His will.  Wrong!

If you're wondering, this is where the answer to my previous question about prayer fits.  But it's only half the answer to the problem.  The importance of prayer isn't to change events or my Master, but rather to enable me to be changed by Him.  Only then can these sorts of 'opportunities' be sorted out correctly; only when I have spent so much time with Him that I know His will.  It seems so 'iffy', so nebulous and dangerous, lacking the firm soundness of irrefutable proof that I know His will.  It is much like swimming through cloudy water, or seems so before I actually swim through it.  The other half of the answer will provide the 'goggles' for swimming. 

The second piece is Bible study.  Without it, prayer is directionless.  The Bible contains the record of my Master's work among people He chose.  From it can be discerned His character, His purpose, His methods, and His mind.  This is so because He has revealed those things through the inspired words.  So prayer and Bible study make up the process through which opportunities can be judged to be within or outside the will of my Master.  I need both.  Otherwise my prayer isn't intimate, it's selfish.  Otherwise my study is impersonal and sterile.  I fail without both.  Which I believe is also part of His purpose.

Seeing my Master through a Legal Lens

One of the criticisms of the Book of James by Martin Luther was that it discounted the role of faith.  The problem with his assessment is that what is left is law.  Yet in the second chapter, James says that the law cannot save.  So, what was misunderstood by Luther is that James is saying that faith has a resulting change in the person which is evidenced by good deeds.  If the deeds are not present, the faith that led to change may not be there either.  So James is not discounting the need for faith or saying that faith does not save; but rather is saying “put up or shut up” about your faith.  So faith is evidenced more by deeds than words.

The role of the “law” in my life is probably not what it is for some.  I know there are Ten Commandments separated out, and lots of believers think of that only when thinking of the law.  But James refers to the “whole law” when he discusses keeping the law.  If one is broken out of the whole law, that person is guilty of all of them.  There are a lot more laws than those found in the Ten Commandments.  So what is the purpose or value of those?  I believe there is value for believers in those esoteric and forgotten laws.  It’s not to save a person from separation from their Creator, it’s to better understand Him and His character.

The major bodies of law texts are found in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy.  They are not the most riveting reading.  Once past much of the drama of Exodus, it becomes hard to get through the legal parts.  Part of the difficulty though is the difficulty in reconciling what is being read with a modern paradigm.  It sounds so foreign that is hard to visualize or imagine what it would look like today.  Therefore it makes little sense to modern readers.  This is where a technique I learned from my wife becomes helpful.  She would constantly ask me, “What’s the point?”  That’s the key question when examining a set of laws on a particular topic.

A lot of or most of Leviticus, the point is consistently the holiness of God requiring a subsequent holy behavior in His people.  Right down to what they wore and how they did their hair this concept was consistently, “Be Holy as I am Holy.”  In Deuteronomy the layout and structure is that of a Hittite Legal Contract or Covenant between a power and those under that power.  It could be the king or a prince, or a chieftain in power, but someone in power.  Once they conquered another people, this is the document the conquered ones were forced into complying with.  The nice thing for the conquered people is they knew what to expect.

Those two contexts make addressing their contents somewhat easier.  There are other historical issues to be addressed, like the setting of the writing and so on, but the essential over all context is a lot of help in understanding the paradigm it come out of.  The book of Exodus is not as easy.  This one is sort of a precursor to the other two, and provides some foundational sets of laws and lots of what is known as “sundry laws” in most modern translations (that is what the heading reads anyway).  The laws defy a particular categorical definition.  This makes the sets of legal matter in Exodus a bit more difficult to understand in one sense.

The key to any of these legal texts is the one consistent truth about them all.  The Deliverer of Israel provided His people with a glimpse of what was important to Him, and therefore of His character.  All of Scripture can be seen this way, but especially the legal texts.  In no other place do we see the Master of the universe giving direction so clearly and so distinctly.  It is one of the places I see a clearer glimpse of my Master.  It is one thing to see Him and His character in the poetic and prophetic texts of the Hebrew Scriptures, but those stem from these.  The legal texts give life and depth to the rest.  These lay a foundation for the Christian Scriptures.

Well, this is all well and good, but what would it look like.  I’m out of time this morning, so I’ll need to demonstrate it later.  In the meantime, I will be spending some time in those texts to refresh my memory (that’s right, I haven’t been there is a while, I know).  Perhaps I will discover something new.  Fortunately I don’t need to pass the bar or find my “powdered wig” to search through these laws.

Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest, December 1