Bible Studies

Lessons of Faith from Select Biblical Figures Part 1

by Walter Boswell
05/11/18
Free to Share
Author requests article critique

  Message Writer
  Hire Writer

Tweet

                     LESSONS OF FAITH FROM SELECT BIBLICAL FIGURES (Part 1)

MOSES THE LAWGIVER

                A Hebrew caught in a fight with his fellow kinsman asked Moses, “Who has appointed you ruler and judge over us?” No doubt Moses would ask himself this same question over and over again. Hearing God speak from the branches of a burning bush, Moses spoke up, “Who am I, Lord, that I should lead the Israelites out of Egypt? And who shall I say sent me; what is his name?” The Lord turned this phrase around, as he did many interjections into unknowable heavenly things, saying, “I am who sends you”; my word should be sufficient. Moses resisted this draft into sacred service, not just because he was raised as an Egyptian, but because he claimed to be a man of poor speech, ineloquent and slow of tongue (Ex 4:10; 6:12, 30). Still the Lord answered him, “Your brother Aaron shall be your speaker; you, Moses, shall act as God to Pharaoh, and Aaron shall be your prophet” (Ex 4:16; 7:1).

                There was not as yet, and perhaps never was, any noticeable display of affection between Moses and heaven. The Lord God was now his Master, his taskmaster to be sure, and a warrior, a fearsome power spewing his displeasure and wrath upon whom he willed (Ex 15:3-8). Moses was himself strong-willed and somewhat rebellious. On his way back to Egypt from Midian, the Lord would have killed Moses for failing to circumcise his son (Ex 4:24-26). Like the coming of a new day, the rising of the Lord into the Israelite world brought new light (laws), and a strict adherence to those laws. Pharaoh himself was but a tool from which God would exact his glory (Ex 14:4). His horses, his chariots, and his charioteers would all perish in the Red Sea, as per the lesson, ‘the wicked are ransomed for the good’ (Proverbs 21:18).

                Mount Sinai trembled, enwrapped in fire and smoke, lightning and thunder. The people also trembled, requesting, “Let not God speak”, for we are afraid; leaving Moses to be their intermediary (Ex 20:18-21). This was God’s way of ‘trying’ the people, the way metals are tested in a furnace fire, so that the Israelites could become his people, a holy nation (Ex 19:6-8; 20:20). Though these be now but words written on stone tablets, let “all these laws and words of mine” be remembered; “teach them to your children, write them on the doorposts of your houses, bind them at your wrist as a sign, and let them be as a pendant on your forehead” (Deut 6:4-9; 11:18-21). Build me a sanctuary also, that I may dwell in their midst (Ex 25:8; 29:43-46). At Horeb, you saw no ‘form’ of me; hence, make ye no idols of the spirit that guides you (Deut 4:15-24); for the Lord, your God, is a consuming fire, a jealous God.

                On many occasions Moses had to plead supplication and to beg the Lord not to destroy his own people. Truly no man could see the face of God and live (Ex 33:20); where then Moses approached with such closeness that his face shone with radiance (Ex 34:33-35). It was Moses who directed the building of the Dwelling compartments, then himself who initially erected the tabernacle and put the commandments inside the Ark of the Covenant (Ex 40:16-33). As surely as the heavens are above the earth, the Israelites knew that if they lived in accordance with God’s precepts and carefully observed his commandments, then the Lord God would watch over them and bless them (Lev 26:3-13); however, if they did not obey his words and follow his laws, they would be punished for their sins of disobedience (Lev 26:14-39). After all this, and in some future time, if the Israelites would just humble themselves and pray for forgiveness and begin to honor his statutes, then the Lord would bring them (back) into their own Promised Land (Lev 26:40-45).

                Not surprisingly, Moses, as the father of a new faith, had many duties to perform, some extraordinary, some quite mundane. Besides the plagues he wrought on Egypt, the miracle of springing water from out of bare rock, and crossing the Red Sea on dry land, Moses would listen to the people’s complaints and judged their legal disputes (Ex 17:1-7; 18:13-27). As needed, he expelled lepers and ordered the unclean outside of the camp, away from the rest of the community (Num 5:1-4). He sentenced to death various lawbreakers and idolaters (Ex 32:25-29; Num 15:32-36; 16:25-35). He called into motion the breaking and settling in of camp (Num 10:34-36). He participated in the consecration of the altar and in the ordination of Aaron and his sons, even washing them, clothing and girding them, putting blood on the tip of Aaron’s right ear, the thumb of his right hand, and the big toe of his right foot (Lev 8:1-30; Ex 29:1-21). Moses would often spark off his grievances directly to the Lord (Ex 17:4; Num 11:10-14). The Lord would react with his own anger toward a stiff-necked people and against Moses, forbidding him to enter the land he had so faithfully guided them for forty long years in the wilderness to claim (Num 20:1-13).

                Every stage of Moses’ life was a simile of Biblical production. As a babe, he had his own Noah’s Ark – the basket – to carry him safely down the Nile. The wooden staff he employed as a shepherd in Midian prefigured the ‘good shepherd’ Jesus spoke of who would always protect his flock and lead his sheep, his people, safely home (John 10:11-17). Crossing over the Red Sea served as a baptism for the Israelites (1 Cor 10:1-2). That first Passover feast in Egypt established the foundations of a new calendar, a new religion, and a new nation. In its wake the trusting hearts of the Israelites would keep a vigil throughout their generations for the return of the Lord (Ex 12:42). Such was the humility of Moses that he gladly let the Lord take some of his spirit and spread it amongst seventy elders (Num 11:16-17, 24-30), further bestowing some of his own glory and dignity upon Joshua, his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). Still another would be coming, a prophet like Moses, for “I will put my words into his mouth and he shall tell them all that I command him” (Deut 18:15-19; John 1:45; 6:14; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37).

                Moses abided in the palaces of Egypt, the son of Pharaoh’s daughter; the Messiah abided in the palaces of heaven, the son of the Most High God. But Moses chose to bear the reproach of God’s people, his people; and the Christ chose to humble himself so that all God’s people might find salvation. Moses led the ancient Israelites to become their mediator unto God. He was born to bring the Law as it is on earth – preparing for a Christ (unrecognized) and a Spirit (undescended) to reveal the law as it is in heaven. O Israel, you remembered the commandments, but you forgot the One who gave them to you!

                 For Moses accepted at face-value the truth and goodness of the living God, never presuming to think, as God’s original purpose for their lives, that they should ever really incorporate the words of the Lord ‘within’ themselves. Truth to the Israelites was the ‘Law and the Commandments’, and palpable goodness was merely an obedience to the law. Then insofar as they obeyed the Law, they also disobeyed it, given that the first law is ‘to love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength’ (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30); and the second is to remake yourselves into His image. Jesus accentuated the teachings of Moses when he noted that it is not through observance of the letter of the law that one is saved: an act commensurate with accomplishment, were it always possible, since one failing in a minor point voids the entire law (James 2:10). Realistically, it is only through conformity with the Spirit of the law that faith becomes attuned to its own bonded grace.

JOSHUA THE FIRST DISCIPLE

                For six days the walls of Jericho stood, but on the seventh they fell (Josh 6:12-27). With the trumpeting of ram’s horns and a shout from the Lord’s people, the dream of the Israelites entering in and possessing the Promised Land was finally coming true. Sadly, the troops’ holy-inspired visionary, Moses, would not live to see this day. However, such as there was a Moses, there must have been a Joshua, his loyal servant and aide, his military general, his appointed successor, and by genuine concern, his disciple (Ex 17:8-15; Num 13:8, 16; 27:12-23; 34:17; Deut 3:28; 31:7-8). When the Lord took, as a respite, some of Moses’ spirit in order to distribute it on seventy elders, and Joshua heard them ecstatically prophesying in the camp, he quickly became very jealous for Moses’ sake. But Moses assured him, saying, “Would that they all became prophets! Would that the Lord might bestow his spirit on them all!” (Num 11:16-30) From the start of Moses’ ascension, whenever he climbed the mountain to speak with the Lord, Joshua would travel along with him part-way unto a mid-camp of early bidding (Ex 24:13). Later, whenever the Lord descended in a cloud upon the meeting tent, Joshua alone stayed on guard as Moses went in and out the tent (Ex 33:7-11). Not long after the Israelites exited from Egypt, twelve scouts were dispatched to reconnoiter Canaan to assess its fertility, its suitability for habitation, and its vulnerability to invasion. Ten out of the twelve returning scouts gave disturbing and depressing reports; only Joshua and Caleb urged the Israelites to be strong and to obey God’s orders by going in and seizing the land. Failure to accede to God’s will resulted in forty years of wandering in the wilderness until their guilty bodies fell dead in the desert (Num 13:1-33; 14:1-38).

                The conquest of Canaan, after many years of culling the disobedient and testing the obedient, commenced with a literal roar at Jericho. The Lord had promised to be with Joshua as he was with Moses: no one can withstand you while you live (Josh 1:5). Having the Ark of the Covenant proceeding 2000 cubits ahead of the fighting column, when the soles of the feet of the priests carrying the ark touched the river Jordan, its flow from upstream was halted and the Israelites crossed over on open ground, reflecting Moses’ crossing of the Red Sea years before. Joshua set up altar stones to commemorate this miraculous crossing (Josh 4:1-11). Another angel of the Lord disclosed the plan for circumscribing the city of Jericho for six days, then blowing the ram’s horns with the people shouting on the seventh day (Josh 5:13-15; 6:1-25). Joshua reinforced God’s judgement against the city by imposing a curse on anyone who attempted to rebuild the city; which was realized by the death of Hiel’s two sons who tried to rebuild Jericho during the reign of King Ahab (1 Kings 16:34). Hebrews 11:30 declares that it was by faith that the walls of Jericho fell. The better angels within ourselves might say it was an exhibition of the power of the Word of God, acting in concert with the sound of trumpets and bolstered by the faithful that accomplished this end, for which swords and spears, ladders and siege engines, would have been want to do. The Apostle Paul associates this feat with the forthcoming blowing of God’s trumpets on judgement day when an archangel’s voice will bring life to the resurrection of the just (1 Thes 4:13-18; Matt 24:31; 1 Cor 15:51-52).

                Because the Lord was with Joshua, the Israelites achieved many early victories in Canaan. Great hailstones fell from the sky in their battle with the Amorites, killing more of the enemy than the Israelites did with the sword. On this day also Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still in the middle of the sky until the victory could be completed (Joshua 10:11-15). This ‘sun (and moon) hasting not to go down’ phenomena has been related in a more colorful fashion to the end-times prophecy of the ‘sun shall be darkened and the moon turned into blood’ [Hab 3:11; Acts 2:20; Joel 2:10; 3:4; (2:31 KJV); 4:15; (3:15 KJV); Is 13:10; Matt 24:29; Mark 13:24; also Deut 4:19; 17:3 injunction against worshipping the sun and the moon]. Over time many more conquests would follow and the land would be divided up between the twelves tribes, and with the Levites, the 13^th tribe, receiving six cities of asylum and 42 cities of residence. Sorely, in many respects the pre-existing natives and the currently residing peoples of Canaan were never fully conquered or driven out of the occupied areas, eventually becoming enveloped within or subject to the rising Israel nation (Jos 13:1; 16:10; 17:12-13). Joshua too received his own city (Josh 19:49-50). Although the Book of Joshua proclaims that the Lord gave Israel peace on every side and fulfilled every promise he made to their forefathers (Josh 21:43-45; 23:14), the exposition of ongoing battles continues well into the first Book of Judges after the death of Joshua. The city of Jerusalem, which many consider to be the religious heart of Israel, while presumptively assigned to the tribe of Benjamin, would not actually be captured until the time of King David (2 Sam 5:6-9). And because the Israelites had violated their covenant by making pacts with the inhabitants and not tearing down their pagan altars, the Lord said he would not clear away any more nations, which Joshua had left at the time of this death (Jud 2:20-21).

                Chapter four of Hebrews suggests metaphorically that although Joshua led the Israelites successfully into Canaan, they would find no ‘sanctuary’ there, no real (Sabbath) rest, as intended by God. Such rest can only come by living in conformity to God’s perfect will, as did Christ in his crucified union with the Father. With ‘perfect union’ as our personal goal as well, it is nevertheless to be understood that the structure of any Christian life consists primarily of a hard-faith journey – as hard and as enduring as any Joshua-wandering – should we ever hope to be blessed with the grace to find our own Promised Land.

                In the parable of Job (next section of this article), the reader is accustomed to deliberate on the real meaning of life and the purpose of suffering in it. The present story of Joshua, as exemplified here, has been geared toward predestination or whether life is merely perceived as a juxtaposition of fate. Every description of Joshua in the Bible paints him as a noble and faithful servant of the Lord and Moses. By all accounts he was a holy man, shaded only to the extent, perhaps, of his militaristic frame of mind. Forswearing this personal devotion and his absolute trust in an Almighty God, why then could Joshua not persuade the ten disavowing scouts of Canaan to change their minds? Joshua’s fierce dedication to duty as the military leader of the Israelites did not bring about a series of unbroken and overwhelming victories. ‘If God is for us, who can be against us?’ (Rom 8:31) How could Joshua ever fall short of the spoken promise of God? If predestined to fail, was Joshua also predestined to say of his own volition after so many trials, ‘As for me and my household, we will serve the Lord’ (Josh 24:15)?

                To add further bewilderment to your human reasoning, the name ‘Joshua’ in Hebrew is ‘Jehoshua’, which was later shortened to ‘Jeshua’, which translates into Greek as ‘Jesus’. Moses said there would be a prophet coming after him.

WHY JOB?

                The meaning of Job is the meaning of life, if e’er we could know it. As proposed in ecclesiastic circles, Job is a man of righteous character, honorable living, and unshakeable faith, who is nonetheless overtaken by troubles and affliction he can neither fathom nor abridge. Job can scarcely realize how someone like himself, who has always led a just life in service to the Lord, to his family, and to his community, helping the poor and the sick, has now become subject to such hardship, suffering, and dissolution. At stake within his own fractious reasoning and conditional religious understanding is the tenet that the Almighty God, how ever distant and mysterious, always acts in marked goodness to support the righteous man while simultaneously punishing the wicked and those who do evil things to hurt others. Pursuant to this dichotomy of the only two possible motivational factors governing heaven, Job maintained throughout most of the book his undisputed membership in the first group of innocents. He may have on occasion failed on some legal note, maybe even have sinned (unawares), but under no circumstances did he deserve this misery that had befallen him. Come the sudden loss and complete destruction of all of his animals, along with their herders and tenders, Job’s faith in God remained resolute. Then through the tragic death of all of his children (seven sons and three daughters) whose lives he had carefully nurtured and watched over and sanctified from youth, Job kept his virtue and holy stance. What followed next was the affliction upon Job’s body of boils from head to feet resulting in massive sores and scrapings of flesh, spilled blood on the ground, and endless anguish. Gone were the former days of wealth and privilege. Now his wife despised and dismissed him. Most of his friends and acquaintances shunned him. All of the poor and needy people Job had once so generously assisted and sustained out of his (now spent) fortune looked on him with repulsion.

                Before we become torn with dismay concerning this story, let us remind ourselves that the Book of Job is a parable. As such, not every event or person portrayed in it should be taken as realistic beyond its contextual configuration. Most parables attempt to convey a ‘moral’ – a point of being relative to a simple truth that might be hidden or otherwise overlooked within a more complicated scenario. Jesus often spoke in parables, not just because simple analogies enhanced and hastened understanding for the layman, but because his teachings had to reflect the image Scriptures cast for him (Ps 78:2; Matt 13:34-35). The Bible itself is an analogy of frail human existence responding to external or higher forces of influence that mankind collectively, or each of us individually, cannot fully comprehend.

                Were we to blithely take the story of Job as ‘gospel’, then the prospect of Satan just sauntering through heaven and being called over by God for, what else, a pleasant conversation, would immediately strike us as incredulous. Very well, let us proceed anyway. After the Lord ‘brags’ on his faithful servant Job, Satan convinces the Lord to allow him to test his faithfulness by removing God’s protective hedge from around him, that is, all of his wealth, possessions, and family heritage. The Lord agrees to this experiment, and so off goes Satan rushing back to earth (Job 1:6-12). Once all the oxen, asses, and sheep have been raided or killed, the Devil takes advantage of a family feast to crush all of Job’s children in a windstorm. Upon being notified of all this, Job fell prostrate, but not broken, and did not curse God or disavow his faith in the Lord. Whereupon Satan returns to heaven and, just to unravel God’s misplaced ‘pride’ in Job’s dedication, beseeches the Lord to let him afflict Job personally, skin for skin. The Lord relents and is thus ‘tricked’ into imparting even more agony and ruination upon Job without just cause (Job 2:1-6).

                Now poor Job is covered in boils, which he tries to scrape off with a potsherd; and then his wife, seeing her husband in this disgusting situation, offers up, “Why don’t you just curse God and die!” Job, to his credit, did not; testifying instead, “we accept the good things from God, should we not also accept the bad?” (Job 2:7-10) It is at this point that three of Job’s former associates, having journeyed far with the hope of giving him sympathy and consolation, begin their individual dissertations. Over the next thirty five chapters or so, these three men, along with a young protégé, try to convince Job of (a) his probable, if unacknowledged, guilt, and (b) the insuperable majesty and indefatigable power of the Lord giving him the right to create, mold, and destroy any or all of his creations. Finally, in the 38^th chapter, the Lord steps in to defend himself. In respectful submission, Job declares, “I had heard of you by word of mouth, but now my eye has seen you; therefore I disown what I have said, and repent in dust and ashes” (Job 42:1-6). As a consequence, Job is restored back to his former health and station in life, regaining the blessings of body, property, and possessions. Job’s three debaters were about to be punished by God, despite their good intentions, for falsely accusing Job of impropriety and for lamely defending the magnificence of God; but were spared by Job’s prayers and sacrifice (Job 42:1-17).

                All throughout the debates, Job longingly pleaded to take his case directly before the Lord. Since he did not think this would ever be possible, he cried out for an arbiter or daysman so that he and the Lord could come together in judgement (Job 9:32-35). As Christians, we could say this request would be prophetically answered twice over with the advent of Jesus and the forthcoming Intercessor (John 14:16-18). Religiously speaking, Job described his sad plight as though God was constantly punching him in his back with a rod or staff while having his feet tied in a (punishment) stock. Correspondingly Job sounded out, “I wish I could reason with God” (Job 13:3), despite the odds against him, acknowledging that whatever the evidence he managed to amass, the Lord could easily turn it around on him. “Even though I were right, my own mouth might condemn me; were I innocent, he might put me in the wrong” (Job 9:20). Job little thought that this confrontation would be like Jacob wrestling with an angel, over which heaven would concede some advantage. How can a man ever be just in God’s sight? (Job 25:4)

                If after having read the Book of Job studiously, we feel somewhat perturbed by its conclusion, that may be because we are predictably ‘human’. A parable is not meant to be taken literally, and whatever apparent relief or resolution it may proffer almost certainly will not be practically conducive to easy implementation like a step-by-step instruction manual. Relative to Job, we may try to elicit some personal meaning for ourselves. In our poor and miserable life here on earth, it seems we have no savior to call upon; we have only a God above who is completely detached and uncaring – as distant as the Sun in the sky, which can never be actually visualized behind so many layers of our cloud-filled doubt (Job 37:21). The provisions of this story also break hard upon anyone who might wish to call himself a ‘Christian’, a citizen of the Kingdom. A person must put his self away at the mercy of God, think himself ‘lucky’ to be under the Lord’s chastisement and reproof. Jesus’ command to ‘turn the other cheek’ bids us, going much deeper, to comply with the rules of residence in heaven. To be sure, even servants in the kingdom will suffer at the Lord’s hands, owing to and respective of God’s necessary manhandling of our mal-formed souls.

                Putting aside those bitter implications, we may yet derive more beneficial lessons of morality or precautionary measures for ourselves.

1)      Practice Humility: Job’s friends were right in saying, “Job is righteous in his own eyes” (Job 32:1). While Job did aid the needy, comfort the afflicted, and so forth, prior to his downfall, he accomplished these things probably through superficial means by skimming portions of his wealth and appropriations of time. For Job had secured over time many possessions and many servants to do his work for him. He had great standing in the community. People would stop their conversations and listen attentively to Job’s wise words of counsel. By stature alone, he sometimes took the king’s place in local proceedings (Job 29:7-25). In his mind Job’s life was a clear affirmation of what most ancient Hebrews believed regarding God’s good graces. Wealth and good health were signs of good favor; whereas poverty and sickness were signs of disfavor or manifested wickedness. [Recall how they asked Jesus whose sin this was that caused a boy’s blindness since birth (John 9:2-3).] This could also explain why Job’s family and friends shunned him and why many of those with whom Job had associated himself now deserted him. They feared that whatever distemper God held against Job might ricochet on them. Having ten heirs and thousands of animals, a large estate, and public ranking, Job vainly thought he could just sit in his well-feathered nest and live comfortably for the rest of his life (Job 29:18). [Recall another parable from Jesus about a rich farmer with a bountiful harvest who thought to tear down his old granaries and build larger, newer ones, so then to sit back, eat, drink, and be merry for years to come (Luke 12:13-21).] More poignantly, in sync with those ancient beliefs, Job may have thought that his overt charity and simple obedience to the law was justification enough towards his eventual salvation. If so, Jesus would be calling out Job, like he did the hypocrites in the synagogue (Matt 6:1-6), for his insincere or showy observance.

2)      Loosen Pride: Appearing simultaneously with his lack of humility, Job seems to have exuded a certain feeling of pride over others. Prior to his downfall, Job had once looked upon some of his fellow citizens indignantly, in his mind thinking of them as less than ‘dogs’ (Job 30:1). Job claimed that he would always treat his slaves and servants kindly and well, but did he take into consideration their economic plight and social well-being as religiously as he, no doubt, did his own? In his sickness and depravity Job still called upon his servants to come and serve him, but they did not answer (Job 19:15-16). Were their lives and circumstances taken into account when Job did his initial evaluation of himself as a just and innocent man? This may be referred to as the pride of indifference. Another more obscure type of pride is made apparent by his persistent plea to set his case before God himself, such that ‘the upright man might reason with him, and I should once and for all preserve my rights’ [(Job 23:7) alternative translation of ‘delivered forever from my judge‘]. No man may judge God; like seeing God’s face, it comes at the cost of your life. Beyond all judgement, what Job was asking for did not qualify as a ‘humble’ request. Humility does not mix well with anxiety, and grace is not an exponent of exclusive personal rights.

Imperceptibly, maybe Job’s real learning bounty was gained in surplus. This terrible trial might have affected him deeper and more spiritually than addressed anywhere in the basics of the story itself. What God gives, God may take away just as easily – and there is no guarantee of holding on to any gift, not even our lives. Similarly, I have never seen the sky above discriminate, making the clouds rain on both the just and the unjust (Matt 5:45). The hapless falling tower claimed as its victim the innocent as well (Luke 13:4-5). In Jesus’ parable of the weeds wherein the Devil sowed bad seed amongst the good seed (Matt 13:24-30, 36-43), so it is we do not always reap what we sow. As impious as it may sound, topping that unfortunate list would be the Lord himself, who sowed the seeds of a ‘chosen’ people, but did not bear the bumper crop he had hoped. In conclusion, then, is Job’s down-and-up life symbolic of the fall and rise of mankind?

The storybook ending for Job has him being ‘resurrected’ (another analogy) into a new life, grander than it was before. Or was it fully? The Lord blessed Job in his latter days (however long that might have been) with 14,000 sheep, 6,000 camels, 1,000 yoke of oxen, and 1,000 she-asses, which turns out is exactly twice the number he initially possessed. Job was also blessed to live 140 years, much longer than the average life span of that era, coincidentally twice the length of King David himself (2 Sam 5:4). During that extended life, he managed to generate ten more children. This celebrated outcome may delude us into thinking that everything turned out well in the end. At cross-variance with this wonderful recovery is all the collateral damage caused thereby – apparently just to render Job a ‘teachable moment’. Being so narrowly focused on Job’s troubled situation may have blinded us to the lives and families of the shepherds and the herders who died – mere tokens then, and now just uncounted casualty figures from the past. An even more egregious paucity of concern bestrode Job’s first set of ten children, who were crushed so terribly in a windstorm (for Job’s sake?). Their dispensation, we hope, occurs in heaven and not justified on the balance scale of life by the spawning of ten more children (for Job’s sake). How could one life, much less the lives of an entire set of children, be equated with another life or a completely different second set? What countervailing measure in heaven or earth will ever bring them ‘recovery’, much less justice and redemption? Without the actual resuscitation of one and the same life, there can be no true equity or justified conclusion to the message of Job.

Thereto, our reckoning of Job’s life has ended more or less where it began: in a parable quandary. Yes, Job was ‘guilty’ insofar as he sought to judge God; but more selfishly because he thought his own righteousness entitled him to a more favorable and luxurious existence. At the same time, its meaning, like the meaning of life itself, is not exclusive or doomed. Job must also have been ‘innocent’ inasmuch as what was taken from him was (mostly) restored two-fold, as would be in accord with Moses’ law for the compensation on theft.

SAMSON, PERSONAL JUDGE

                Of all the judges who stood up for Israel, Samson was the most powerful and also the least respectful. Ever since the judgeship was conceived through Moses more than 300 years prior to Samson, judges were never intended to be national leaders, rather just secular magistrates listening to the complaints of the community at large and handing down decisions in particular cases for the people. Ordinary, run-of-the mill problems were assigned to these decision-makers while more difficult cases would be referred to Moses himself (Ex 18:13-27). Over time the judge’s position evolved into one of more importance, ceding to them greater authority, to the point they often took on the title of ‘Lords’, if for no other reason than they held people’s lives in their hands (Deut 1:17; 17:11-12; see also Ps 82:1, 6; John 10:34-36). Depending on the circumstances, Moses would assume the role of prophet, priest, and judge. Joshua was primarily a military leader who acted as a judge when needed. With his death Israel became essentially leaderless. In the vacuousness of their lives, ‘consultation with the Lord’ (e.g., Judges 1:1) probably consisted of no more than casting lots or seeking consensus of the elders. An oft-repeated phrase in the Book of Judges is ‘There was no king in Israel; everyone did what he thought best’ (see for example Judges 21:25).

                Appertaining to the official ‘age’ of Judges, between Joshua and Samuel inclusive, some judges like Othniel and Gideon were noted military leaders; some like Abimelech fancied himself a (murderous) overlord or king; Deborah epitomized the prophetess-magistrate, issuing decisions while sitting under a palm tree. One trait they generally had in common was their origins – rising up in response to ongoing cries of Israelites seeking relief from external or home-grown persecution and oppression. To the extent that their bonds were broken and the oppressive forces were stayed, the people blessed the Lord, but would soon fall back into pagan worship. Sometimes in apparent frustration the Lord would say, “Go and cry out to the gods (you now idolize) …, since every time I save you, you only sin again” (Jud 10:14-15). Still the Lord would grieve for Israel.

                Samson’s birth was very reminiscent (with 20-20 foresight) of John the Baptist’s birth. His mother was barren until the time an angel appeared and announced that she would be with child. The disbelief or awe expressed by his father and mother were solicitous of the angel who ordered the mother-to-be not to drink wine or any strong drink, not to eat anything unclean, and never to shave the child’s head since the son was to be a Nazarite – one consecrated to God – from the womb (Jud 13:2-25). The most offending nation of this era was the Philistines which had been oppressing regions of Israel for nearly forty years. Samson’s wild life and love of danger began when he requested that his parents arrange a marriage between him and a Philistine woman. During the wedding banquet, Samson proposed a riddle to the Philistine men in formal attendance for a wager of thirty tunics and thirty sets of garments. At length the Philistines could not answer the riddle of ‘Out of the eater came forth food, and out of the strong came forth sweetness’, so they coaxed his new wife to importune Samson for the answer, which she did. When  Samson discovered that they had ‘plowed with his heifer’, instead of doing the honorable thing by going out into the wilderness, killing and skinning the necessary animals for furs, he slaughtered thirty other Philistines, despoiled them, and gave their garments to the male wedding attendants (Jud 14:1-20).

                After burning the Philistine grain using foxes whose tails were tied with torches, and perhaps committing a host of other misdeeds as well, the Philistines vowed to take Samson prisoner. It was his own kinsmen of Judah who then bound him voluntarily with two new ropes and turned him over to the Philistines. As the spirit came upon Samson while in the custody of the Philistines, the new ropes just snapped and fell away like flax. Then picking up the fresh jawbone of an ass, he killed a thousand men. The Lord was not incensed with Samson’s actions, even drawing up water from the hollows in order to give Samson much-needed refreshment (Jud 15:4-19).

                Subsequent attempts at capturing Samson failed dramatically because his great strength would always manifest itself and effect his escape. Meanwhile Samson’s new love, Delilah, was quite beguiling and equally disingenuous. She constantly plied Samson for the secret to his supernatural strength so she could receive a substantial reward from the Philistines. Across numerous nights of presumably drunken rapture with Delilah, Samson lied his way out of revealing the real secret behind his great strength. Finally one night, as he lay asleep in Delilah’s lap, she had Samson’s seven locks of hair shaved off. The Philistines then rushed in, seized him, bound him, and gouged out his eyes (Jud 16:1-21).

                The Philistines put Samson to use as a draft animal, chained to the grinding wheel. Time passed and Samson’s hair slowly grew longer. As part of the celebration for their god Dagon, the Philistines brought Samson out purely for the sport of amusement. Samson specifically asked to be tied to the support columns of the temple. Samson cried out to the Lord for the last time, “O Lord God, remember me!” He pushed hard against the columns, separating them, and the temple fell killing everyone inside, including himself. Up to this point Samson’s service to the community as a judge was lost in a patriotism of self; now he would find redemption in death (Jud 16:22-31).

                Like many parabolic retellings of otherwise historic figures, the story of Samson is filled with many incongruences. Why was Samson completely inured to Delilah’s numerous attempts to steal his secret and have him captured? Why did he constantly vex his family and earn the contempt of his people by continually cavorting with the Philistines, their oppressors? Why did he not use his formidable strength and great status to save the Israelites, win battles, or at least broker a peace settlement? Besides these concerns, there is a great inconsistency of character for Samson to have remained true to his Nazarite vow of having no razor ever touch his head since birth [neglecting a modest shorn or trimming that might have occurred over the course of at least forty years (Jud 16:17, 31)]. According to Nazarite law, every time a person died in his presence, he would have to shave his head and start the dedication period anew (Num 6:1-12). Surely the killing of thirty men, then a thousand men, and many more besides, must have entailed the repeated shavings and cleansings required for his vow, thereby robbing him, at least temporarily, of his immense strength.

                Prophetically, the killing of a thousand evil henchmen with just the jawbone of an ass, pray, symbolizes ‘with what foolish instrument God delivers his people’; that is to say, the wooden cross of Jesus. ‘Professing themselves wise, they became fools; for the wisdom of this world is foolishness unto God’ (1 Cor 1:18-25). Thereto, when all Israel was expecting the sword of God or legions of warrior angels to break the ropes of (Roman) oppression, freedom would come by Jesus’ death on the cross. Regarding Samson’s end, the destruction of the temple by pushing aside the support columns bespeaks ‘by what two columns shall the Lord undermine the false wisdom of this world’. Social critics might point to technology and the many fearful aspects of amoral science as one column and the creation of today’s motivation-less and perverse lifestyles as the other. From a religious perspective, we have already to witness Christ’s own testimony that the law and the prophets were being supplanted by the Spirit of Truth and by grace (John 16:7-15).

SAMUEL, THE LAST JUDGE

                As much as Samson denied his role as spiritual leader of Israel, Samuel personified it. Perhaps that is because Samson’s parents, after wishing so long for a child, may have doted on him. Samuel had no effective parents, except an old priest named Eli and a woman who occasionally brought him clothes as presents. They were both fruits of a still life called barrenness. Both Samson and Samuel were dedicated to the Lord from birth as life-long Nazarites (1 Sam 1:11, 22), the difference being Samuel was always in service to the wants and needs of the Lord, whereas Samson ventured as he willed and only found time for the Lord usually at the end of a long road of captivity, personal frustration, and remorse. Let us choose which of these roads be better for us (our first lesson).

                Eli, the priest, tried to bring up his own flesh-and-blood sons rightly (1 Sam 2:22-24); but at least he succeeded in raising Samuel to be mindful of the sacred. While sleeping in the temple at Shiloh next to the ark of God, the Lord called to Samuel, who wist not the voice of the Almighty, for he was still a child inside (1 Sam 3:1-18). Much later Samuel began his official term of judgeship by preaching reform: if the Israelites would put away their foreign gods and turn their whole hearts unto the one true God, he would deliver them from Philistine domination. The Lord thundered loudly against the Philistines at the battle of Mizpah, thereby fulfilling Samuel’s promise (1 Sam 7:2-13). From then on, Samuel judged Israel in a circuit of cities throughout the nation.

                As Samuel got older, he and the whole community hoped that his sons would follow in his footsteps. His sons, however, were not as honorable as he, so the elders of Israel beseeched Samuel to appoint a king over them, like the nations that surrounded them. Displeased and feeling rejected, Samuel tried to dissuade them from such a reckless and irreversible decision. He prayed to the Lord; but the Lord told him, ‘It is not you they reject, they are rejecting me as their king’ (I Sam 8:1-9). As the Lord directed him, Samuel composed the law of royalty and the rights of kings (1 Sam 8:10-18; 10:25). He then proceeded to locate and anoint Saul, a Benjaminite, by kissing him and pouring oil over his head (1 Sam 10:1). Any doubt or misgivings Samuel may have felt were cast aside when the Lord confirmed the choice of Saul by prophetic sign and by the casting of lots; moreover, the people seemed to like Saul’s looks, for he was young, handsome, and tall, standing head and shoulders above the crowd (1 Sam 9:2; 10:23). Samuel, after citing all the great things the Lord had done for Israel, upbraided the people for rejecting the Lord and for choosing to follow the ways of pagan nations (1 Sam 12:1-25).  Samuel’s speech, recollecting back to the Lord’s many wondrous deeds and blessings while projecting forward to his promise of threats, would set the manner and tone of many of the prophets which came after him.

                Saul became a very good soldier and military leader, considering his lack of basic training and experience. His impulsiveness and self-appeasing attitude, however, soon invited the Lord’s reproval and regret. When Saul was ordered to punish Amalek for their treatment of Israel, he was supposed to put the entire city to the sword, animal and people alike. Instead he and his soldiers cleverly doomed only what was worthless while keeping as booty anything of value (1 Sam 15:9). Saul also erected a trophy of his victory at Carmel to honor himself (1 Sam 15:12). Saul’s excuse to Samuel upon seeing all the fresh animals roaming about at Gilgal was that they spared the animals and brought them home to be sacrificed to the Lord. It is then that Samuel uttered the famous line: “Obedience is better than sacrifice, and submission than the fat of rams” (1 Sam 15:22). Even if Saul had been sincere in his intentions of securing these animals purely for sacrifice, which is unlikely, he is being rebuffed for trying to whitewash outright disobedience up front by simply offering a guilt sacrifice afterward. Taken out of context over the centuries, Samuel’s rejoinder of ‘obedience is better than sacrifice’ has been interpreted to mean that all sacrifices are in vain if your heart was not in the right place from the start. Going further, it suggested the futility of any and all (animal) sacrifices (Prov 21:3; Hos 6:6; Matt 9:13; 12:7; Heb 10:6-9).

                “Because you have rejected the command of the Lord”, Samuel announced to Saul, “the Lord has rejected you as ruler” (1 Sam 15:23). From there onward, Samuel was guided by the Lord to search for a particular ‘man after his own heart’ (I Sam 13:14). Samuel found him in Bethlehem by the name of David, the youngest son of Jesse. Compared to his brothers, David had not much to recommend him as king: small, fairly good-looking, with a ruddy appearance; but Samuel was cautioned by the Lord not to judge persons by their appearance as the world does.  By such association in the world, praise and selection come propertied to the beautiful like power and control to the rich. ‘Not as man sees does God see’ (from the outside), because ‘the Lord looks into the heart’ (1 Sam 16:7; James 2:1-9). Samuel anointed David in the midst of his family and the Spirit of the Lord immediately rushed upon him. ‘The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away’, as from thence forward the spirit of the Lord departed from Saul. Now Saul was tormented with rage and jealousy against David (1 Sam 16:13-14). Samuel died leaving the two men he had anointed as king(s) over Israel to wage their political conflict (1 Sam 25:1).

                The story of David (coming next) will bring a conclusion to this struggle for (divine) kingship. Until then, let us critically examine, at the risk of being overly presumptive, the extent of heaven’s own ‘complicity’ in the king-affirming process. Two anointed kings now reign over Israel, both at the Lord’s approval. Such duplicitousness, literally, bids us ask, how is it that God can, through certain means and confirmation signs, clearly designate one ‘permanent’ king (Saul), then a short time later, relatively speaking, move to revoke that anointing by replacing him with a new personal favorite (David)? [Note – The actual span of time between the two anointments is indefinite. Because chapter 13 in the first book of Samuel has missing material, Saul’s reign as king is suspected to have lasted anywhere between two years and 42 years (see Acts 13:21). There are many scriptural inconsistencies, which I cannot annotate here, in assuming a lengthy reign; rather the evidence leans toward a fairly short reign of several years.] A similar problem of ‘withdrawn status’ befell the house of Eli, whose family was promised a ministry in the Lord’s presence forever. Then ‘away with this’ says the Lord; and the promise is abruptly withdrawn. What constitutes grounds for the abrogation of a heavenly vow or promise is to be found in 1 Sam 2:30-31: “For I will honor those who honor me, but curse those who spurn me”. ‘Toward the faithful you are faithful; toward the wholehearted you are wholehearted; toward the sincere you are sincere’ is what David sang [2 Sam 22:26-27; Ps 18:26-27; (18:25-26 KJV)]. Is not this moral parlay in keeping with Jesus’ teachings of ‘Treat others the way you would have them treat you’? (Matt 7:12) Apparently the eye-for-an-eye principle takes reference from this tit-for-tat concept, even if it flies in the face of Jesus’ admonition to ‘turn the other cheek’ (Matt 5:39; Luke 6:27-29). Surely it is not within the province of man to ever judge God (re: Job); but within our realm of reasoning is the ability to adjudge the worth of contracts or promissory vows. A contract ‘stamped’ by God, in this case an everlasting appointment as king, is meant to happen, both in its set-up and in its inevitable effect: guaranteed to endure forever. Should any contravention occur on either side, it would constitute a breach. On God’s side a promise made is sanctioned reality; fulfillment comes embedded with the offer or else is already known by God as bound to fail (planned nullification). It cannot be otherwise. Either sense of this makes the Lord a signatory of false pretenses.

                Therefore, our reasoning of this dilemma must be faulty. Rather, let us say, that the Lord strikes a bargain with no man. Any ‘pact’ between you and heaven above, ostensibly holding God in accord to some promise, always comes with a contingency clause attached, whether explained in the prophecy or not – contingent upon you and only you fulfilling your part (1 Sam 13:13-14). As for the Lord’s part, it is pre-ordained; so then only you can bring about its failing. [Note – None of this precludes the notion that Eli may still be, as I write this, ministering to the Lord amongst the heavenly servers, or that Saul’s kingdom might still be ongoing there, or generationally here on earth, as did David’s kingdom in the form of Jesus and all those who believe. A man may die, but the spirit that indwelt him lives on forever … whither to behold life seeded into future bodily resurrection.]

                A startling gasp (and speculation) is lastly stirred within me for the manner by which the ark of God was handled! Brought out of Shiloh, it was captured in battle by the Philistines (1 Sam 4:4-11), who moved it from city to city trying to avoid its accompanying curse. Wisely they decided to return it to Israel (chapter 6). Years later, Solomon would give it due reverence by placing it in his Temple in Jerusalem (1 Kings 6:19-28; 8:1-9); from thence it was thought to be stolen, lost, or destroyed during the Babylonian invasion. Maybe it is just personal longing on my part such that if I were ever to have touched a heavenly object, or even slept in proximity of the mercy seat of God as Samuel did, how much I would have treasured and protected it. Should not the nation of Israel have posted legions of soldiers all around the holy site? Conversely, was it just to be widely assumed that its own preeminence and holy power provided sufficient coverage, as demonstrated by only a handful of priests watching over the ark at Shiloh? Might not the Lord of the universe hold in calibration the measure of its own home security? (re: 1 Sam 5:1-7; 2 Sam 6:6-7)  Proper analysis of that conundrum must await a future article.

Dr. Walter Boswell