A Man After God’s Own Heart (Part 1 of 2)

—by David D. Herring

The prophet Samuel told King Saul that his kingship wouldn’t endure and that the Lord had selected a man after His own heart to be Israel’s next king. (1 Samuel 13:14)  Samuel was referring to David, the youngest of Jesse’s eight sons, in the tribe of Ephraim, whom he hadn’t even met yet.  In Hebrew, David’s name means “beloved.”  Yet, in my view, David committed sins that were despicable and far worse than Saul’s.  How was David’s heart like God’s?  Why was David deserving of a kingship that would endure whereas Saul was not?  (I address that first question here, and will tackle the second question in my next blog.)

As a young man, David was zealous in showing love for and faith in the Lord.  In this regard, he was a fractal image of Jesus Christ — many events in David’s story were symbolic foreshadows of the story of the Messiah.  For example, when we first meet David we’re made aware that he was an unlikely choice to be king.  He was physically smaller and more humble in appearance than his brothers.  Indeed, Samuel was surprised God chose David, but God told him: “Do not consider his appearance or his height,... The Lord does not look at the things people look at.  People look at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.” (1 Samuel 16:7)  Likewise, by appearances, Jesus was an unlikely Messiah.  He was born in a stable and laid in a feeding trough for a crib — humble digs for the King of kings.  

Both David and Jesus were born in Bethlehem, which is Hebrew for “house of bread.”  Both were from the tribe of Ephraim (Hebrew for “doubly fruitful”) which is considered to be the branch of Israelites that became Christianity, whereas the tribe of Judah (Hebrew for “praise”) represents Judaism.1

David not only didn’t look kingly but he was a shepherd, which was among the lowest and least honorable stations a man could attain in society.  Yet, David’s role as shepherd taught him to be faithful and brave in serving his father.  David told King Saul how he put his life on the line to protect his sheep. He said: “Your servant has been keeping his father’s sheep.  When a lion or a bear came and carried off a sheep from the flock, I went after it, struck it and rescued the sheep from its mouth.”  Similarly, Jesus said, “I am the good shepherd.  The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.” (John 10:11)  And later: “My sheep listen to my voice… My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.” (John 10:27-29)  So, both men were shepherds.

Both David and Jesus were merciful.  A jealous King Saul relentlessly hunted David and tried to kill him.  The Lord delivered King Saul into David’s hands several times and so David could easily have killed Saul but instead spared his life out of respect for the Lord’s anointed.  Jesus forgave people’s sins and healed the blind and the sick and lame.  He even restored the cut-off ear of one of the soldiers who came the arrest Him.  Ultimately, Jesus came to give His life as a ransom for ours (who believe in Him).  Moments before He died on the cross, Jesus prayed for his murderers: “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” (Luke 23:34)   

Both David and Jesus made humble entrances into Jerusalem as king-to-be.  When David first went to Jerusalem to meet King Saul, he was riding on a donkey.  Three things to note about this fact: (i) when we first met Saul in The Bible, he was pursuing his father’s lost donkeys, which he never found.  This foreshadowed how Saul would later go astray in pursuing Earthly desires rather than following the Lord.  Conversely, David went to meet Saul riding on a donkey, which shows precisely the reverse: he would master and control his stubborn earthly tendencies.  

(ii) In addition to being stubborn and earthly, donkeys were regarded as humble, gentle, and peaceful creatures, in contrast to horses which were regarded as noble, bold, and powerful.  To have ridden in on a horse would have been to strike a warrior’s posture, whereas riding a donkey showed peace, gentleness, and humility.  Also, David carried bread, wine, and a young goat — all symbolic elements of the sacrifice made at Passover (which, I suspect, was the time of year that David went to Jerusalem).  We know that it was just before Passover when Jesus made His triumphant entry into Jerusalem, hailed by the people as King while riding on a donkey. (Matthew 21:1-11)  Indeed, Jesus was THE Passover Lamb (more on that in a future blog).     

(iii) David was a foreshadow and Jesus was the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy by Zechariah: “Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion!  Shout, Daughter Jerusalem!  See, your king comes to you, righteous and victorious, lowly and riding on a donkey,... I will take away the chariots from Ephraim and the warhorses from Jerusalem, and the battle bow will be broken.  He will proclaim peace to the nations.” (Zechariah 9:9-10)

David loved the Lord greatly; in this regard he was also an image of Jesus.  David wrote Psalms proclaiming his love for the Lord.  Jesus told the Pharisees that the greatest commandment of all is to “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” (Matthew 22:37)     

David is perhaps most famous for defeating Goliath.  David displayed a bold faith by eagerly going to battle the well-armed, well-trained, 9-foot-tall giant when no one else would dare to. In Hebrew, “Goliath” derives from the Hebrew verb gala, meaning “to uncover, remove, or go into exile.”2  True to his name, Goliath offered a “deal” to the Israelites: “Choose a man and have him come down to me.  If he is able to fight and kill me, we will become your subjects; but if I overcome him and kill him, you will become our [Philistines] subjects and serve us.” (1 Samuel 17:8-9)  With this taunt, Goliath showed himself to be an image of satan.  

Goliath taunted the Israelites for forty days.  In The Bible, the number forty represents a period of time in which God calls a person or nation to go on a spiritual journey with Him.  (Noah was on the ark forty days, Jesus was tempted in the desert forty days, etc.)  David’s confrontation with Goliath was a pivotal moment for both him and the nation of Israel.  For David, it was a life-or-death situation.  For the Israelites, it meant possibly going back into exile and enslavement again after God had freed them from Egypt and set them apart in a covenant relationship with Himself.

David trusted the Lord completely and went boldly into battle.  He said to Goliath: “You come against me with sword and spear and javelin, but I come against you in the name of the Lord Almighty, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied.  This day the Lord will hand you over over to me, and I’ll strike you down and cut off your head… All those gathered here will know that it is not by sword or spear that the Lord saves; for the battle is the Lord’s...” (1 Samuel 17:45-46)  Indeed it was, and so it happened just as he said: David, in the image of Jesus Christ, slew Goliath, the image of satan, with one well-slung stone.  

Interestingly, as Saul watched David going out to meet Goliath in battle he knew well who it was, yet he turned to one of his commanders and asked: “Whose son is that young man?” (1 Samuel 17:55)  We see an echo of this question when Jesus rode into Jerusalem and everyone in the city came out to greet him, shouting: “Hosanna to the Son of David!  Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.”  But the very next verse says: “When Jesus entered Jerusalem, the whole city was stirred and asked, ‘Who is this?’” (Matthew 21:9-10)    

In both scenes, eyewitnesses were probably experiencing “cognitive dissonance” — they saw clearly what was happening in the material world but were also getting a glimpse of the deeper spiritual truth of what was happening, which would have disoriented anyone who was not in the right relationship with God.  Scholars note that the verb gala (to uncover or remove) also denotes the uncovering of a sensory organ, such as the ear or eye.2  The word is used in contexts when something or someone is being revealed, such as a secret, or a message, or a truth of God.2  

True to His Word, God fought Goliath for David and Israel.  David’s improbable defeat of the giant foreshadowed the bigger story of The Bible: that Jesus would ultimately defeat satan and sin, and thereby save us all from exile and death.    

David was indeed a man after God’s own heart.  He loved the Lord and acted boldly in his faith and service to God.  Thus, the Lord helped David defeat a great evil that he almost certainly couldn’t have overcome on his own.  Later, King David would face an even greater challenge: himself.  

(To be continued…)  

---

1  Chumney, Eddie (1999):  Restoring the Two Houses of Israel. Serenity Books.  

2  Uittenbogaard, Arie (2000-2011): “Meaning and etymology of the name Goliath.” Copyright www.abarim-publications.com.  (Accessed on January 20, 2014)

---

Discussion Questions:

1. In what ways do you think David was “a man after God’s own heart”?

2. Why do you think David gathered five stones when he would only need one to slay the giant?

3. Why do you think David was deserving of a kingship that would endure whereas Saul was not?

Saul: A Picture of Salvation

— by David D. Herring

It struck me as odd that Jesus Himself came back to deal with Saul of Tarsus.  After all, Jesus had completed His mission on the cross, He had proven Himself resurrected to His followers, He had given them their instructions on what to do next as His disciples, and He had ascended into heaven right before their eyes.  So that’s a wrap, right?  Wrong.  Jesus returned again a short time later to confront Saul.  Why?

And why Saul?  Why not confront any of the other Pharisees who persecuted Jesus and His followers?  Indeed, why not confront the whole assembly all at once?  Or, if Saul was so important, why didn’t Jesus deal with him during His lifetime, or perhaps in the days after His resurrection?  Why go to the trouble of coming back specifically to confront Saul?  Was it merely an “I forgot” on Jesus’ to do list?

I doubt it.  I’ve learned that these types of “anomalies” are there to attract our attention.  There is a rhythm in the repeating patterns of the history recorded in The Bible and God uses the beat, and irregularities in the beat, to get our attention.  He wants us to prayerfully bring our questions to Him.  He uses stories like Saul’s to teach us.  Earlier, when I had been re-reading the story of King Saul and considering how my character was like his, God called another thought to mind:

There was another Saul.  Consider his story too.

By all the standards of his day, Saul was a fine and upstanding Israelite.  He had a good reputation, high status in society, and came from an affluent family.  He was among the best educated of the Pharisees, itself an elite class of scholars and spiritual leaders.  (The word “pharisee” comes from an Aramaic root word meaning “to divide and separate.”)  By all accounts, and by his own reckoning at the time, Saul was a true man of God.  Everything was going great for him.

Except for those pesky so-called “followers of the Way” — it was intolerable to Saul how they talked about Jesus as if He had been God in the flesh.  Everyone knew that when the Messiah came, He would build a new kingdom.  The Israelites expected the Messiah to topple Rome and set up Israel as the greatest kingdom on Earth.  But Jesus hadn’t done that so clearly He wasn’t the Messiah.  And so Saul set out in the name of God to destroy the burgeoning bunch of blasphemers.

See the irony?  You could reword that previous sentence to say: Saul set out in the name of Jesus to destroy Jesus.  It means the same thing.  If Jesus is who He says He is then Saul’s actions were illogical.  He thought he was doing right but he was acting out of ignorance.  He was spiritually blind.

Indeed, Jesus had confronted the Pharisees on this very point.  They had accused Jesus of breaking the law by healing a blind man on the Sabbath.  He called their attention to the fact that their intellectual fixation on the scriptures — letters of the law, as it were — had blinded them to God’s deeper, more important spiritual truths.  Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.”  “What? Are we blind too?” they asked.  Jesus replied, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.” (John 13:39-41)  

Ironically, the Pharisees believed in the resurrection and the Messiah, but they didn’t believe in Jesus.  Little did they know at the time, Jesus would come back after He ascended into heaven to bridge the gap that “divided and separated” them from Him.       

Jesus came back to confront Saul, who had been arresting and killing His followers.  Saul was on the road to Damascus with papers from the chief priests in Jerusalem authorizing his persecution when a light from heaven flashed around him and he fell to the ground.  He heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me?” “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked.  “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” He replied.  “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.” (Acts 9:2-6)

When Saul got up and opened his eyes, he was blind.  He would be blind for three days. (Acts 9:9)  The number three is always important in stories of The Bible.  To the Israelites, the number “3” signified a third value used to reconcile two opposing or contradictory values.  In other words, three brings stability — it mediates, connects, and strengthens the two.1  For example, Abraham’s journey to Mt. Moriah took three days; Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days; Jesus was in the tomb three days; etc.  In such contexts, the number three signifies a period of passage through death into life.  

Saul’s blindness represented his failure to see the truth, and it represented the inevitable consequence: death.  The Hebrew spelling of his name has two meanings:  pronounced sha’ul it means “asked for; prayed for” but pronounced sheol it means “grave; pit; or abode of the dead.”  Jesus was sending Saul into a situation in which he would have to die, spiritually speaking, and then be born again.  He would transition from a state of relying upon his own wisdom to a state of relying upon Jesus’.  Jesus had previously explained this point to the Pharisees: “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the Kingdom of God unless they are born again.” (John 3:3)  Jesus had told them, now He would show them.  He had literally died and risen again; would they still doubt He is the Messiah?              

There’s no doubt Jesus has a sense of humor.  The next scene is steeped in dramatic irony.  Get this: Jesus blinded Saul then sent him down Straight Street, to the House of Judas where he was to meet a man named Ananias — whose name means “the Lord is gracious” — whom Saul had been going to blind or kill.  Consider the scene also from Ananias’ perspective: Jesus appeared and told him to go to the House of Judas (whose name had become synonymous with betrayal) to meet Saul (abode of the dead), who Ananias knows has been arresting and killing Jesus’ followers.  Jesus called both men to walk by faith and come together.  What could go wrong, right?  The stage is set... Dante himself couldn’t have penned a more divine comedy!   

Ananias went and found Saul, who had been praying and waiting for three days in the House of Judas.  He put his hands on him and called him brother.  Ananias said, “Brother Saul, the Lord — Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here — has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”  Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul’s eyes, and he could see again.  He got up and was baptized. (Acts 9:17-18)  After spending several days with Jesus’ disciples in Damascus, he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God — the long-awaited Messiah!    

Later, in accordance with his change of character, Saul changed his name to Paul.  I looked up the Hebrew meaning of “Paul” and found… nothing.  The term has no meaning in Hebrew, but in Latin the name Paul means “small” or “humble.”  His name change represented two important things: (i) Paul surrendered and humbled himself before Jesus to walk in His Way, and (ii) Paul fulfilled what Jesus foretold to Ananias: “This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings…” (Acts 9:15)  Indeed, Paul became the most prolific of all New Testament authors.  

Also note the repeating pattern in the events recounted in Acts, Chapter 13: Paul traveled to the island of Cyprus where he encountered a jewish sorcerer — a false prophet — who styled himself “Bar-Jesus” (literally translated “son of Jesus,” or “son of God who saves”).  Interestingly, this is where The Bible records Saul’s name change to Paul.  Paul rebuked the false prophet: “You are full of subtlety and mischief, you son of the devil, you enemy of righteousness.  Will you not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?  And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon you and you shall be blind, not seeing the sun for a season.”  Immediately the false prophet was plunged into darkness.  

Talk about turnabout!  We don’t know how the false prophet’s story played out but we see clearly that Jesus was working through Paul now that he’d been born again.  And we see the influence of Jesus again later, when Paul was arrested and tried by the Pharisees in Jerusalem.  Paul was accused of blaspheming against God and defiling the Holy Temple by bringing gentiles in to be purified and to worship God. (Acts 21:25-26)  This leads to the scene that may best portray the purposes and outcomes of Saul’s transformation.  Paul told the story of his transformation to the Pharisees and the Sadducees, causing an uproarious debate among them.  The assembly was divided in its beliefs — the Sadducees did not believe in the concept of resurrection, nor in angels, nor in spirits, but the Pharisees believed in all of the above.  Some of the Pharisees shouted: “We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or angel has spoken to him, let us not fight against God.” (Acts 23:9; KJV)  

Now the circle was complete.  Whereas Saul had been a Pharisee, with all the cultural and social trappings that go along with it, he no longer valued those things.  He said: “But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. …I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things.  I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ — the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith.” (Philippians 3:7-8)

The New Testament Saul had become a counter-balancing mirror opposite of the Old Testament Saul.  Whereas King Saul was a picture of sin, Saul-who-became-Paul was a picture of salvation.    

---

Discussion Questions:

1. Why do you think Jesus Himself came back to deal with Saul?  

2. Do you ever experience periods in which you feel “spiritually blind”?  What does The Bible teach us to do in such times of darkness?

3. Do you think Jesus purposely used the stories of the two Sauls to teach us about their contrasting character types?  Which of the two Sauls is most like you?  

King Saul: A Picture of Sin

— by David D. Herring

King Saul got a raw deal; or so I thought the first time I read his story (and the 2nd and 3rd times too).  God made Saul king — the first king of Israel — and then voided his kingship.  Why?  It’s true, Saul disobeyed God’s instructions but he wasn’t unique in that regard.  Other kings, like David, disobeyed God and didn’t have their kingship voided.  What did Saul do that was so wrong?    

Good questions!

God called me to re-read Saul’s story.  He showed me that Saul is a picture of sin, and that Saul’s story serves as a warning to me, and others, who arrive at this decision fork:  will I rely upon God’s Word or upon my own wisdom?  

In this re-reading, God suggested to my mind that Saul’s character was a picture of my character.  Needless to say, that got my attention.  (But I’m getting ahead of myself…)

The Hebrew spelling of “saul” means two different things.  The Israelites pronounced his name “sha’ul,” which means “asked for” or “prayed for.”  But, in another context, the term is pronounced sheol, which means “grave,” “pit,” or “abode of the dead.”  This double meaning is dramatic irony, to use a literary term — it foreshadows how Saul’s story would unfold, which is itself symbolic of how the nation of Israel’s story would unfold.  (But I’m getting ahead of myself…)  

Here’s what happened: The Israelites saw that all the other nations had kings and so they too wanted a king, to be like the other nations.  God didn’t call the Israelites to be like the other nations; He called them to be set apart in a special relationship with Him.  But the Israelites demanded the prophet Samuel appoint a king over them, even though this went against God’s will and desire.  Samuel was displeased and went to God for guidance. “Do everything they say to you,” the Lord replied, “for it is me they are rejecting, not you.  They don’t want me to be their king any longer.” (1 Samuel 8:5-7)  

Meanwhile, young Saul, son of Kish, had been sent by his father to retrieve his donkeys which had wandered off and gotten lost.  To the Israelites, donkeys symbolized “material things.”  In Hebrew, the word for donkey is chamor, derived from the word chamar, which conveys these concepts: “a primitive root; to ferment (with scum); to smear with pitch.”  This insight suggests that Saul was sent on a fool’s errand — a red herring, as it were — which is precisely how God regarded the Israelites’ demand that someone other than He should be king.  In short, to be seeking donkeys (material things) is to be distracted from what matters most (Godly and spiritual things) and to become fouled up in the process (chamar).  This foreshadows the stories of both Saul and the nation of Israel.  (But I’m getting ahead of myself…)   

While on his errand, Saul met the prophet Samuel who told him that God had chosen him to be king over Israel.  This was surprising news to Saul, who hadn’t set out to become king.  Samuel was pleased because Saul was handsome, a full head taller than the average man, and he came from an affluent family.  In short, Saul looked the part!  (This set off a red flag in my mind: God doesn’t look at people the way we do.  He tends to do great things through humble people, not people who look kingly.)  Sure enough, after Samuel anointed Saul and prayed over him, the power of the Lord came upon Saul and he prophesied and did some great things.  He mustered an army and defeated the Ammonites, who had been oppressing the Israelite city of Jabesh Gilead.    

Later, heading into what should have been one of his finest moments in leading the Israelites to a resounding victory, Saul was rebuked by Samuel, who had instructed Saul to wait seven days for his arrival.  Their plan was to present a sacrificial offering to God together before Saul attacked the enemy.  But Saul didn’t wait.  He feared the enemy was closing in so he grew impatient and offered the sacrifice before Samuel arrived on the seventh day.  “You have done a foolish thing,” Samuel told him. “You have not kept the command the Lord your God gave you; if you had, he would have established your kingdom over Israel for all time.  But now your kingdom will not endure…” (1 Samuel 13:13-14)

“Whoa!  Wait, what?” a voice in me protested. “One minor slip up and that’s it, you lose your kingdom?!  The enemy was coming!  Saul had to prepare his men for battle!  If I was Saul, I might have done the same thing.  Taking away his kingdom over that seems like harsh punishment.”  

That battle was Mine, not Saul’s.  But the issue wasn’t the battle; the issue was trust.  Saul didn’t trust Me.  Would you have trusted Me?  Or, would you have acted hastily, in the image of Saul / sheol?  Would you have fought that battle in your own strength?  Or, would you have waited for My appointed time and relied upon My strength?    

I have to admit, I generally don’t wait for God’s appointed time, nor do I generally rely upon His strength and wisdom.  I tend to shoot first and take aim later.  In my haste, I often speak or act foolishly.  (But I keep getting ahead of myself…)

When reading The Bible, I’ve learned to always pay attention to numbers, especially the number seven, which is always significant.  In Hebrew, seven is sheva, which also means “vow” or “promise.”  The number seven (sheva) is used in contexts to signify the fulfillment of a covenant; and not at random but at a specific time appointed by God.  (God rested on the seventh day, the sabbath day fell on the seventh day, there are seven appointed festivals to the Lord, etc.)  Saul did not wait for God’s fulfillment; rather, he acted in haste according to his own wisdom.  Saul disobeyed by putting his will ahead of the Lord’s and so he thwarted the relationship-building process with God.  A bit later in the story we read that Saul again disobeyed God by sparing the Philistine king’s life and by allowing his men to keep the best of the Philistines’ livestock as a reward, contrary to God’s very specific instructions.  

“So what?” a voice in me cried.  “What was the harm in sparing their king and keeping their cattle as a reward?  Saul and his men had earned it.  And wasn’t sparing the Philistine king an act of mercy?  Anyway, Saul did most of what God told him to do.”  

Are you satisfied with being mostly right?  To Me, that standard is entirely wrong.  You are not called to be self-serving and self-righteous.  Rather, you are called to serve Me and rely upon My judgment of what is good and right.  Look again at Saul’s character; and then your own.   

Clearly, Saul was self-serving, as am I.  But was Saul “self-righteous”?  Am I?  What does this term mean?  The Israelites understood there to be three kinds of sin, each significantly worse than the one before:

(1) khata, Hebrew for “sin,” means to miss the mark by doing wrong out of ignorance or by accident, not necessarily due to wickedness or ill intent.  A khata is any act, word, or thought that is sinful because it falls short of the glory of God.   

(2) pesha, or “transgression,” is to knowingly do wrong or disobey God’s law or instruction.

(3) avon, or “iniquity,” refers to sinful acts that are premeditated, deliberate, and ongoing without repentance.  Iniquity is open rebellion against God, in the image of satan, typically characterized by deciding for oneself what is good while cultivating an image of moral superiority over others — self-righteousness.       

Saul transgressed (pesha) against God when he disobeyed His instructions.  Then, worse, Saul committed iniquity (avon) in how he responded when confronted by Samuel.  Saul said: “I know I have sinned.  But please, at least honor me before the elders of my people and before Israel…”  This statement shows that Saul is less concerned about his relationship with the Lord than he is about his image and stature in the eyes of his people.  Saul was not truly repentant and therefore he became self-righteous and entered into a state of iniquity.  

Later, we see Saul again act foolishly in his haste when he refuses to allow his men to rest and eat.  In his folly, Saul speaks a curse of death on any man who eats that day before he has his vengeance on his enemies.  A short time later, his eldest son Jonathan, who is famished from his exertions in battle, eats some honey he finds in the forest.  Saul is angry when he finds out what Jonathan did, and says to him: “May God deal with me, be it ever so severely, if you do not die, Jonathan.” (1 Samuel 14:44)  Saul’s willingness to needlessly sacrifice his firstborn son, and again later in the story (1 Samuel 20:30-33), is symbolic of Saul forfeiting his kingdom.  

“Well, why would an all-knowing God appoint someone to be king who would make such choices?” countered that accusing inner voice in me.  “Doesn’t this mean that God either isn’t all-knowing, or that He went back on His Word?  This is all really God’s fault!”  

No, it means none of these things.  Consider that Saul was 30 years old when he became king, and he reigned for 40 years. (1 Samuel 1:13)  Forty is another important number that recurs often in The Bible.  It signifies a period of time in which a person or nation is called to go on a spiritual journey with God.  This is a time in which God allows the person’s / nation’s faith to be tested.  (Noah was on the ark 40 days; Moses led the Israelites through the desert for 40 years; Jesus was tempted in the desert for 40 days; etc.)  The point is God didn’t wrest the kingdom away from Saul so He didn’t go back on His Word.  Rather, Saul acted in ways that frustrated the fulfillment of God’s Word by persistently acting foolishly, in haste in his own wisdom, and by valuing his own image of himself above his relationship with God when God rebuked him.  Thus, Saul forfeited his kingdom.   

God gave Saul (and all of us) free will.  He gave us His standards for good and righteousness but He allows us to choose.  Saul chose to sin, then justified his sinful behavior, and then chose to persist in his state of iniquity.  Saul’s choices are an after-image of the original sin committed by Adam and Eve in which they forfeited their right to live in God’s presence.  Thus, they doomed themselves and their descendants to death (sheol).  This is the repeating pattern, and inevitable outcome, of humanity’s sinful nature.  We see the same theme in the story of Esau, who foolishly forfeited his inheritance for a bowl of stew.  To value and choose material things of this world above a spiritual relationship with Our Heavenly Father is ultimately to miss out on God’s glory.  

King Saul is a picture of sin.  He is the image of satan, who became self-righteous and rebelled against God because he valued his image of himself more than his relationship with the Creator.  Saul’s story serves as a warning of how a king can go astray seeking their own glory rather than seeking God’s glory, even while thinking they’re serving Him.  

There are many contrasting characters in The Bible who are pictures of sin, salvation, and sanctification.  In this regard, God’s Word is fractal.  I will explore some of their stories in my next several blogs...

---

Discussion Questions

1. Do you think Saul got a raw deal in being made king without seeking it, and then later in being rebuked by Samuel for the choices he made as king?

2. Can you see your own character, or perhaps the character of someone you know,  reflected in Saul?

3. What do you think is the significance of the double meaning of Hebrew word for “Saul / sheol” in the story of his life?  In the story of Israel?  In the story of your life?

4. Have you ever arrived at the decision fork of whether to rely upon your own wisdom or to surrender to God’s wisdom?  Which way did you walk?