Hate or Love?

2 Samuel 19:5-6 (NASB) recounts how Joab, the commander of King David's armies, came and gave him the old what-for regarding David's reaction to the death of his son Absalom:

Then Joab came into the house to the king and said, “Today you have covered with shame the faces of all your servants, who today have saved your life and the lives of your sons and daughters, the lives of your wives, and the lives of your concubines, by loving those who hate you, and by hating those who love you. For you have shown today that princes and servants are nothing to you; for I know this day that if Absalom were alive and all of us were dead today, then you would be pleased."

David mourning Absalom

What is the backstory here? The trap that Christians and non-Christians alike stumble into (or jump into on purpose) is taking single verses or passages in the Bible and using them as a hammer to prove their point. In effect, are we attempting to use the Bible like a common hand tool and beat people into submission?

In Matthew 5:44-47 (NASB) Jesus tells us, "But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?"

I wonder what Joab would have made of that instruction? Don't get me wrong. I totally get where Joab was coming from. As Commander in Chief of Israel's military, Joab was looking after the King's interests. And although he knew David had asked that Absalom be spared, Joab drove three javelins through the young man's heart while he hung helpless in a tree. There may have been malice between Absalom and Joab, but it was probably more an act of political expediency than outright spite and disobedience to the King. Absalom had attempted to usurp David's throne; David was God's anointed. Had Absalom been left alive, he would have always been a threat to the King, to Jerusalem, and to Joab.

Joab wanted to wrench David from his grief over Absalom so that the men who had fought and risked their lives to restore the throne to David would not be sitting around saying, "Well that's a fine thank you."

Joab was also family - as were many others in David's court - and those who supported David without question needed to know that he, in turn, supported them.

Going back to the New Testament again, Luke 8:19-21 (NASB) provides another interesting statement by Jesus, "And His mother and brothers came to Him, and they were unable to get to Him because of the crowd. And it was reported to Him, "Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wishing to see You."

But He answered and said to them, "My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it."

Our earthly families are important; what was Jesus trying to say? How does that differ from Joab's reaction in the Old Testament? Shouldn't Joab have understood that, even though Absalom had usurped the throne, conquered Jerusalem, defiled the King's concubines in full view of Israel, and previously raped the King's daughter (his own half-sister), the King would still mourn the loss of his son?

It sounds to me like, at least in this case, Joab was taking the longer view and acting as he believed appropriate to maintain and support God's chosen ruler. Joab knew that God had anointed David King - and that was more important than the death of (one of) his son(s).

Yet family or no, David was loving his enemy.

It was brought to my attention the other day that there was a group page on Facebook named, "Witches Must Die By Fire". The founder of this group was a self-professing Christian and he/she challenged other weak Christians to join his/her cause and fight the enemy. He/she said that if Christians united as strongly as pagans or Muslims, we [sic] would have already taken over the world.

First of all, as a Christian, I'd like to point out that it's not my job to take over the world. Naturally, I have reservations concerning witches and pagans. However, any thoughts I might have regarding their beliefs and practices fall into the same category as those regarding anyone who does not believe that Jesus is our eternal King. But seriously, die by fire?

The founder of this hate-filled page - which has since been (thankfully) taken down by Facebook - obviously skimmed over the love your enemy references that Jesus made in the Gospels. He/she must've also missed Paul's note in Ephesians 6:12 (NASB), "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places."

Paul doesn't mention a hate-filled Facebook page when describing the full armor of God.

I don't claim to have the Bible all figured out. God's Word is complex and He will speak to us in different ways through different passages at different times. However, there are some pretty straight forward passages, and I've tried to point out a few in this blog. Finally, Peter - that rabble-rousing, ear slicing fisherman that Christ used to start His earthly church - has an oft-quoted instruction in 1 Peter 3:14-16 (NASB) that bears repeating: "But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. AND DO NOT FEAR THEIR INTIMIDATION, AND DO NOT BE TROUBLED, but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame." [EMPHASIS from BLB text]

Thanks Peter; that's some good advice I needed to hear again today.

What do you think?

X

Obedience: The Ultimate Gordian Knot

What is obedience? Obedience is defined by the Oxford English dictionaries as, "compliance with an order, request, or law or submission to another’s authority."

Just underneath the Oxford online dictionary's definition of obedience are a few usages:

• children were taught to show their parents obedience
• obedience to moral standards 
• observance of a monastic rule: vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience

As a parent I know first-hand that teaching obedience to children can be maddening at times. From current events we can derive that obedience to moral standards can be widely interpreted. In fact, I would hazard a guess that the majority of people on Earth would deem the observance of monastic rule to be peculiar, if not downright pointless.

The Rule of Law which typically is held up as our beacon for an orderly society, by definition, demands obedience from all citizens. Throughout history - especially recent - we have engaged in a tug of war over laws by and for the majority vs. laws by and for the minority. I could write for years on these subjects alone but that is not my purpose today.

Representation of a Gordian Knot

The legend, myth, fable, history (call it what you will) of the Gordian Knot comes to fruition in the 4th century BC when Alexander the Great arrives in Phyrgia and, in a bit of a slippery timeline, learns of a prophecy wherein the solver of the so-called Gordian Knot shall rule Asia. Encompassing eagles, ox-carts, various empires and oracles, the Gordian Knot has come to represent that which is unsolvable. In fact, the Gordian Knot has become so ingrained in our society that even those who may not know the original legend might certainly know it in a more modern guise:

Was Captain Kirk a cheater, or just creative?

I suspect college students from the late 1960's onward have tried to employ the Kobayashi Maru defense, when confronted with their own cheating, to little avail. It's doubtful that University ethics committees are Star Trek devotees.

If humanity will ever live together in harmony - and freedom - as a global society, there must be some set of laws that govern us. By definition, we - all of us - must be obedient to a common set of instructions (Pirates will think of them more as guidelines). According to the Roman statesman Cicero, "We are all servants of the laws in order that we may be free."

In the Gospel of John, Jesus seeks to illustrate the ultimate freedom to His followers:

So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” [John 8:31-32 (NASB)]

And further along, "So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed." [John 8:36 (NASB)]

Critics of Christianity will point out that having to follow a bunch of meaningless rules and customs that (they believe) are arbitrary and capricious is an impingement on their freedom, not to mention their free will. Heck all of us believe that about the speed limits, don't we? If we all had our way, the speed limit wouldn't be...

To infinity and beyond...

One of the most powerful examples of obedience in the Bible smacked me in the mouth this morning during my morning study. David had been anointed King in place of Saul (who had his own ideas about obedience) and after a time, had the opportunity to bring the Ark of the Covenant back to Jerusalem. 

Didn't you guys ever go to Sunday School?

Apparently, the script writers for Raiders of the Lost Ark didn't go to Sunday School. Either that or they took some serious poetic license. The message from the movie was that basically the Ark could act as an army's own little portable Death Star - which is why Hitler wanted it. The facts are a little different - okay, A LOT different. In 2 Samuel 6, David takes thirty thousand of his chosen men and heads off to pick up the Ark of the Covenant and bring it back home to Jerusalem. They put the Ark on a new cart and during the ride the oxen threaten to tip the Ark over. A man named Uzzah reaches out to steady the Ark, places his hand on it, and BAM, he dies.

David gets his crank on about it and decides to leave the Ark right there, at the house of Obed-edom the Gittite (surely one of the happiest men in the Bible after this incident).

After a while, David cools his head and takes stock of what happened. In 1 Chronicles 15, we see that David finally does what he should've done in the first place and goes to get the Ark with the Priests and the Levites as God had originally instructed.

• Exodus 25:14-15 - “You shall put the poles into the rings on the sides of the ark, to carry the ark with them. The poles shall remain in the rings of the ark; they shall not be removed from it."
• Deuteronomy 10:8 - At that time the LORD set apart the tribe of Levi to carry the ark of the covenant of the LORD, to stand before the LORD to serve Him and to bless in His name until this day.

And this brings us back to Obedience. David, Uzzah and everyone else either forgot or ignored God's instructions concerning transportation of the Ark of the Covenant. Whether we want to believe it or not, there is only one Holy being in the Universe, and that is God. He told Moses, and Moses told everyone else, "Don't touch the Ark or you will die."

No complicated rules or rituals there; if this, then that. Cause and effect. 

Obeying God is something we have to work at every single day. Even David, a man after God's own heart, had to be continually reminded of who God is and how He wants us to live. There are no shortcuts, no Alexandrian Solutions, no Kobayashi Maru, when it comes to seeking God's will and being obedient to His instructions.

Uzzah forgot that, and in a moment of perhaps unconscious reflex, he was disobedient. To our modern sensibilities that is horrible. But go back to the time of your childhood. Think about a rule that your parents gave you that, maybe, you didn't always adhere to. How about, "Don't cross the street without looking both ways."?

What were the possible consequences of (even unconsciously) breaking that rule? One would be a small child getting hit by a car and dying.

None of us wish for a child to die. David didn't wish for Uzzah to die. But both of these illustrations speak to the need for obedience. Remember Oxford's second usage that I noted above:

Obedience to moral standards...

I have heard people outraged by the cruelty of God - a God who would kill Uzzah just because he was trying to steady the Ark. When we try to wrap our modern moral interpretations around an immutable law, oftentimes it just doesn't compute. In fact, we don't even like the idea of immutable laws. Humans always look for the loophole; we try to find a reason why a particular rule should not apply to us. 

When questioned about his solution to the Kobayashi Maru test, (soon to be) Captain Kirk said, "I don't believe in no-win situations."

Sorry Jim; sometimes you just have to play by the rules.

What do you think?

X

This just in...

[Approx. 1003 BC - Threshing Floor of Kidon] A servant of King David, Uzzah, was struck dead today. Eyewitness accounts are consistent and reveal that in the moments leading up to his death Uzzah did nothing that could have been considered sinful in the eyes of the Lord. After interviews with members of the King's entourage, it appears that just before his death, Uzzah had been walking next to a new cart carrying the Ark of the Covenant. Although details are few, the brother of the deceased - Ahio - and other witnesses say the cart tipped sideways and, fearful that the most holy Ark would fall to the ground, Uzzah reach out a hand to steady the heavy wood and gold object. It is believed that immediately after touching the Ark, Uzzah died.

       Uzzah falls to the ground just before his death (anonymous photo)

King David has declined all interview requests but is reported to be furious that God would strike down one of His servants, especially one who was a member of an elite team bringing the Ark back to Jerusalem. Our sources have also indicated that David will leave the Ark with Obed-Edom, the Gittite, while the King considers the situation and mourns the loss of Uzzah.

Attorneys for the deceased are considering options on behalf of Abinadab and his family.

© Jerusalem Press International

==============================================================================

Of course, this press account of the events detailed in 2 Samuel 6 and 1 Chronicles 13 is fictional. As I studied 1 Chronicles 13 this morning, I wondered how our modern culture would react to such an event occurring today.

No doubt there would be reporters from major news sources on site; there would be satellite trucks, microphones, make-up artists and other accoutrements of the modern news engine. Eyewitnesses would be telling their stories to anyone who would listen; some with an eye toward turning a profit. 60 Minutes would no doubt be there with special access interviews and disturbing inside information.

But what of the real story?

I've heard several comments over the years about how (and why) God would kill someone who was just trying to help. David, Uzzah and all of the people in this procession were bringing the Ark of the Covenant back to Jerusalem. Wouldn't it be sacrilege to let the Ark fall to the ground? After all, this was the holy chest in which the Ten Commandments were kept. The Mercy Seat, where God Himself appeared to the High Priest, was the lid of the Ark, sculpted with two cherubim, outstretched wings touching above the surface.

What seems to be lost in the modern world we inhabit is the nature of obedience. It is untenable for some to be placed in a position where absolute obedience is required. God had told Moses and Aaron that no one could touch the holy things [Numbers 4:15]. But our (human) instinct is to believe that there are exceptions to every rule, no matter what. There will always be circumstances where a rule can be bent, circumvented or completely broken - and for good reason.

On the surface, this seems to be one of those circumstances.

Uzzah was merely trying to keep the Ark from falling. However, what is overlooked by our modern interpretation is that God's rules are absolute. Despite the fact that this rubs against the grain of our sensibilities, there was no room for interpretation.

Has anyone considered the hubris inherent in Uzzah's actions? If the Ark was the object of God's presence on earth, wouldn't it be presumptious of us to assume that God needs help?

Something else that may often be overlooked by those who read the Bible is that while God may seem harsh in His dealings with us, He is not capricious, He does not act on a whim. If He said it, we can bank on it. As harsh as it may seem, this is a silver lining we can take away from Uzzah's death: God keeps His promises.

So what's the point of this event in history? For me, today, the point is we can know that some things in life (and death) are absolute. Truth is not something we can interpret for our own benefit. And there are indeed times when we just need to do what we've been told - even if it doesn't make any sense at the moment.

What do you think?

X