A Journey Through The Old Testament - Elmer Towns

A Journey Through The Old Testament - Elmer Towns A Journey Through The Old Testament - Elmer Towns

elmertowns.com
from elmertowns.com More from this publisher
05.01.2013 Views

Philistines disarmed the nation so much so that the only known weapons in the land apparently belonged to Saul and Jonathan. While the Philistines continued to conquer Israel, Saul apparently took no action against the invading army. He moved into a defensive position and “was sitting in the outskirts of Gibeah under a pomegranate tree which is in Migron” (14:2). The name Migron means “fear” and describes not only the place Saul was hiding but also the emotional state of both Saul and his army. His son Jonathan, however, felt the best defense was a bold and daring offense. Without first consulting with his father, Jonathan and his armor-bearer scaled the steep ridge between Michmash and Gibeah and attacked the first Philistine garrison they encountered. In that initial struggle, the two Israelites killed about twenty men over an area of about half an acre. Though the victory was insignificant in light of the size of the invading army of the Philistines, it shook the confidence of the Philistines which was further disrupted by an earthquake occurring about the same time. “And there was trembling in the camp, in the field, and among all the people. The garrison and the raiders also trembled; and the earth quaked, so that it was a very great trembling” (v. 15). When Saul heard of the confusion within the Philistine camp and realized Jonathan and his armor-bearer were missing, he organized his small army and attacked. They were assisted in fighting the Philistines by a number of Israelites who had formerly supported the Philistine army. As word of the defection of these Hebrews spread quickly through the Philistine army, the Philistines began suspecting each other and began fighting among themselves. “So the Lord saved Israel that day; and the battle shifted to Beth Aven” (v. 23). In the heat of the battle, Saul forbade his army to eat until the sun set. So severe was the order that even though the men of the army saw honey dripping from honeycombs in the forest, no one even paused to sample it. Jonathan, however, had not heard the order and helped himself to the honey when he was hungry. At the end of the battle that evening, Saul finally allowed his men to eat. In the midst of enjoying his victory over the Philistines, Saul moved closer to God. “Then Saul built an altar to the Lord. This was the first altar that he built to the Lord” (v. 35). Saul realized he had the advantage in the battle and might lose his momentum if the battle was delayed. He decided the best course of action for Israel was to surprise the disorganized Philistines with a night attack. But when he sought counsel from God, God was silent. Saul perceived the silence of God was due to a violation of his earlier prohibition against eating during the battle. By use of casting lots, Jonathan was exposed as the guilty party. When Jonathan confessed to his action, a self-willed and stubborn Saul sentenced his son to death. Only when the people intervened on Jonathan’s behalf was he spared. The whole incident revealed the weak character of the king and led to constant struggles for the nation. Saul’s willingness to kill his son was not the sign of a leader but rather a dictator. Though some Christian leaders fail to remember it, there is a difference between a leader and a dictator. A leader is someone you want to follow. A dictator is someone you must follow. Because of his personal insecurity, Saul could not bear having his orders broken even when the guilty party was ignorant of the order at the time and was primarily responsible for the victory. Only when faced with what seemed a greater act of rebellion on the part of the army was Saul then willing to spare the life of his son. Before the controversy over Jonathan erupted, Saul was inclined to lead a night attack against the Philistine army before they had time to reorganize and recover from the battle of the day. But by the time Jonathan’s life had been spared, Saul had lost interest in fighting the Philistines. Probably his confidence had been shaken by the people’s refusal to let Jonathan die.

Regardless of the reason, Saul not only abandoned what was probably a wise strategy, (i.e., the night ambush), but also “returned from following the Philistines” (v. 46). But the limited victory over the Philistines did not mean the end of his struggles. Throughout his reign, Saul was engaged in constant warfare defending his borders on several fronts. “And there was fierce war with the Philistines all the days of Saul. And when Saul saw any strong man or any valiant man, he took him for himself “ (v. 52). For several generations, Israel had been engaged in conflicts with the Amalekites. They were the first nation to attack the Israelites, and did so shortly after the nation had crossed the Red Sea out of Egypt (Ex. 17:8-16). Finally the time had come when God determined to destroy the Amalekites once and for all. Samuel went to Saul and told him the message from God challenging Saul to “go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey” (1 Sam. 15:3). God intended to wipe Amalek and everything associated with the rebellious nation from the face of the earth. Saul and his army went out to fight against the Amalekites and won a decisive victory. “But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best of the sheep, the oxen, the fatlings, the lambs, and all that was good, and were unwilling to utterly destroy them. But everything that was despised and worthless, that they utterly destroyed” (v. 9). The incomplete act of obedience was the second major act of rebellion in the reign of Saul and would result in yet another rebuke from Samuel. Saul must have known what Samuel’s response to their compromise would have been, and Saul appears to have gone to great lengths to avoid any conflict with the prophet. The route of his return journey home led him to make a wide circle around Ramah, the home of Samuel, rather than the more direct route one would normally have taken. But Saul would not so easily escape the judgment of God. God told Samuel what the rebellious king had done and where Saul could be found. Once again, Samuel confronted Saul with his sin, and once again, Saul began making excuses for his rebellion. Samuel’s message of judgment on Saul was clear. “For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He also has rejected you from being king” (v. 23). When Saul later accidentally tore the mantle of the prophet, Samuel added, “The Lord has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today, and has given it to a neighbor of yours, who is better than you” (v. 28). Saul could have no question in his mind that God was displeased with his failure to utterly destroy the Amalekites as He had commanded. Though Saul seemed to repent on this occasion, his actions suggest his repentance was not genuine. It was Samuel who finally had to kill Agag, not Saul. Ironically, when Saul later died in battle against the Philistines, it was an Amalekite who came to David claiming responsibility for killing Saul (cf. 2 Sam. 1:1-16). Even though Samuel had delivered the message of judgment to the rebellious king, Samuel himself had grown to like Saul and mourned on the king’s behalf. The prophet continued

Philistines disarmed the nation so much so that the only known weapons in the land apparently<br />

belonged to Saul and Jonathan.<br />

While the Philistines continued to conquer Israel, Saul apparently took no action against<br />

the invading army. He moved into a defensive position and “was sitting in the outskirts of<br />

Gibeah under a pomegranate tree which is in Migron” (14:2). <strong>The</strong> name Migron means “fear”<br />

and describes not only the place Saul was hiding but also the emotional state of both Saul and his<br />

army. His son Jonathan, however, felt the best defense was a bold and daring offense. Without<br />

first consulting with his father, Jonathan and his armor-bearer scaled the steep ridge between<br />

Michmash and Gibeah and attacked the first Philistine garrison they encountered.<br />

In that initial struggle, the two Israelites killed about twenty men over an area of about<br />

half an acre. Though the victory was insignificant in light of the size of the invading army of the<br />

Philistines, it shook the confidence of the Philistines which was further disrupted by an<br />

earthquake occurring about the same time. “And there was trembling in the camp, in the field,<br />

and among all the people. <strong>The</strong> garrison and the raiders also trembled; and the earth quaked, so<br />

that it was a very great trembling” (v. 15).<br />

When Saul heard of the confusion within the Philistine camp and realized Jonathan and<br />

his armor-bearer were missing, he organized his small army and attacked. <strong>The</strong>y were assisted in<br />

fighting the Philistines by a number of Israelites who had formerly supported the Philistine army.<br />

As word of the defection of these Hebrews spread quickly through the Philistine army, the<br />

Philistines began suspecting each other and began fighting among themselves. “So the Lord<br />

saved Israel that day; and the battle shifted to Beth Aven” (v. 23).<br />

In the heat of the battle, Saul forbade his army to eat until the sun set. So severe was the<br />

order that even though the men of the army saw honey dripping from honeycombs in the forest,<br />

no one even paused to sample it. Jonathan, however, had not heard the order and helped himself<br />

to the honey when he was hungry. At the end of the battle that evening, Saul finally allowed his<br />

men to eat. In the midst of enjoying his victory over the Philistines, Saul moved closer to God.<br />

“<strong>The</strong>n Saul built an altar to the Lord. This was the first altar that he built to the Lord” (v. 35).<br />

Saul realized he had the advantage in the battle and might lose his momentum if the battle<br />

was delayed. He decided the best course of action for Israel was to surprise the disorganized<br />

Philistines with a night attack. But when he sought counsel from God, God was silent. Saul<br />

perceived the silence of God was due to a violation of his earlier prohibition against eating<br />

during the battle. By use of casting lots, Jonathan was exposed as the guilty party. When<br />

Jonathan confessed to his action, a self-willed and stubborn Saul sentenced his son to death.<br />

Only when the people intervened on Jonathan’s behalf was he spared.<br />

<strong>The</strong> whole incident revealed the weak character of the king and led to constant struggles<br />

for the nation. Saul’s willingness to kill his son was not the sign of a leader but rather a dictator.<br />

Though some Christian leaders fail to remember it, there is a difference between a leader and a<br />

dictator. A leader is someone you want to follow. A dictator is someone you must follow.<br />

Because of his personal insecurity, Saul could not bear having his orders broken even when the<br />

guilty party was ignorant of the order at the time and was primarily responsible for the victory.<br />

Only when faced with what seemed a greater act of rebellion on the part of the army was Saul<br />

then willing to spare the life of his son.<br />

Before the controversy over Jonathan erupted, Saul was inclined to lead a night attack<br />

against the Philistine army before they had time to reorganize and recover from the battle of the<br />

day. But by the time Jonathan’s life had been spared, Saul had lost interest in fighting the<br />

Philistines. Probably his confidence had been shaken by the people’s refusal to let Jonathan die.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!