Little Thoughts on Big Questions

The troubling tension came to light again today in 2 Samuel 24:1, where God's anger is cited as the reason for David's fatal mistake of ‘numbering’ his men, and so costing Israel 70,000 lives within days:

“…the anger of the LORD burned against Israel, and He incited David against them, saying, ‘Go, and take a census…’”

Why would God stir up David to something which would not only be a prideful act, but would also bring about such destruction – except that He had ordained judgment, and found in David a tool by which to execute it?

Ezekiel 3:20 also touches on the thought of God’s instituting a stumbling block so as to bring about a downfall: “‘… when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I place an obstacle before him, he will die…’”

It isn’t that God would tempt anyone to evil (see James 1:13-14), but that – like when He gave permission to a “deceiving spirit” to ‘entice and prevail’ against Ahab, already condemned (1 Kings 22:22-23) – He is implementing what look like less-than-righteous tools to bring about a righteous result.

...which leaves me puzzling. It was Pharaoh’s hardness of heart which brought the liberation of Israel; Joseph’s imprisonment which preserved Egypt in famine; Christ’s crucifixion which delivered us from death. The tools God chooses are rarely pleasant to behold.

And yet, does that make God Machiavellian in nature? A ruler who, disregarding the brutality of the “means,” is occupied only with the final outcome? And how could He – unless He had relinquished some of His authority – maintain total benevolence while having full control over every evil action?

Perhaps the flaw is in thinking that the tools must reflect the nature of the One using them. Perhaps it is my own short-sightedness which argues that, in order for God to preserve His righteousness, He could not “dirty” His hands with those aspects of our Fall - hardness of heart, deception, prideful scheming – which He despises, and which are so contrary to His nature.

But perhaps what I miss is that God omnipotent, whose judgments are righteous (Psalm 7:11; Psalm 96:13) and whose kindness is over all His works (Psalm 145:9, 17; Psalm 119:68), has taken hold of His prerogative to wield any tool He wishes. He does not give His approval to pride and deceit, any more than He does to nails and thorns. Nor does He “resort” to utilizing such hateful tools, as though He must salvage good through some lesser means. Instead, He chooses to use those very items of darkness as pawns in its unraveling.

For He yields the most thorough victory, not in destroying the Enemy with weapons of righteousness, but in defeating him with the very ammunition the Foe had brandished against Him. For in wielding His power over those destructive forces which have most opposed His righteousness, God presents proof that there is nothing within His hands which He cannot masterfully employ for good. As Psalm 119:91 says to our Risen and Righteous Lord with utter persuasion: “All things are Your servants.”

Misconstrued

Hannah is one who experienced cruel provocation from one closely acquainted with her struggle over barrenness (1 Samuel 1:6-7). She knew great distress from both the [public] stigma of her condition and the unfulfilled [personal] desire (v. 15). She even knew the sacrifice of walking through the fulfillment of her vow to the Lord (v. 22, 24, 28).

Yet, what strikes me as perhaps the most acute sting lies not in the way she was tormented by a rival, or grieved by a sharp longing, but how it was when she was most raw before her God that she was accused of wrongdoing. “As she kept on praying to the LORD, Eli observed her mouth. Hannah was praying in her heart, and her lips were moving but her voice was not heard. Eli thought she was drunk and said to her, ‘How long will you keep on getting drunk? Get rid of your wine’” (1 Samuel 1:12-14).

When all of the outside pressures – the ridicule, the hopelessness, the shame – seemed to pound in on her, she laid herself before the Throne, with the hope of being heard, and of making sacrifice. She had made God her refuge, had sought His face (Psalm 119:58); had stood in vulnerability, not questioning God for His withholding. Humbled before her Creator, she was willing only that she could give back to Him (1 Samuel 1:11).

And yet, it was as she stood there with an audience before her Sovereign, that her earnestness was viewed as immorality. Hannah’s heartfelt cries were construed as drunkenness; her fervent petition somehow perceived as delusion. She was rebuked by one who was close enough to witness her tears, but who was unable to discern that her heart was right with God.

At first it strikes me as a lamentable and needless form of salt to an already tender wound.

And yet, God had specifically ordained that Eli react to something which he saw in Hannah. Perhaps the Lord exposed Eli to Hannah’s vulnerability to have him witness that raw transparency before one’s Maker; or perhaps even to challenge him later with the tangible answer to Hannah’s prayers (1 Samuel 1:26-27). Whatever the case, God had pulled him near enough to Hannah’s grief to catch a glimpse of pure surrender, and later, the power God is permitted through such an offering.

Maybe God's greatest purpose in her tears was not even in readying her to become the vessel He wanted, but in providing the avenue by which He could speak to the one beside her. For she became testimony that God will accomplish the impossible; but, perhaps even more powerfully, she also became evidence that sometimes man hastily perceives as delusion that which is the very manifestation of God’s desire within us ~

Time Stamp

Had some work to do in downtown San Jose this morning, and pulled into a rather empty parking lot. There were bags covering the ticket machines, and, not sure if there was a fee for parking on Saturdays, I left my car there – a total of 49 minutes – then pulled away with a horrible, nagging feeling. Even as I was leaving the lot itself, there was this sense that something wasn’t right –

I drove nearly all the way home, then – on San Tomas Aquino, two minutes from my house, made a U turn. I had knowingly stifled the Spirit’s tugging; I had to make the trek back, for the sake of being right with the One who kept pulling in on me – I had to at least see if the machine in the middle of the lot would have taken my money.

The only problem, I could reckon, was that – even if I could get a ticket with a time stamp for the same amount of time my car had originally been there, I’d have to wait that length of time again to “clock out,” which would mean I’d still not be paying for that first stint. Still robbery.

I was justified in returning. The machine took my money. But what I marveled at was how simple: I only had to pay a flat rate, which meant that the time I’d spent there was “paid in full.” No having to wait around; neither would I be driving away only having rendered a partial amount.

And several elements of Christ’s forgiveness grew apparent:

➢ The nudging of the Spirit cannot be ignored without a (gracious!) sense of guilt; the inward uneasiness has to be deliberately fought for us to sin (1 Thessalonians 5:19).
➢ We can trust fully the promptings which God lends us by His protective Spirit. There is no path which He does not fill with either His favor or His warning (Isaiah 30:21; Deuteronomy 11:26-28).
➢ It is only in the trek back to where we had made that decision that our sin is righted; it is only in our willingness to re-enter that place of wrong-doing that we can watch God’s justification be exhibited through us (Zechariah 1:3; Hosea 6:1; Hosea 14:1).
➢ He has supplied us a way to be made “righteous” before Him; He has carved out the exact path we’re to take to be brought back into communion with Him (Acts 2:37-38).
➢ Once that transaction is made, there is no longer a payment to be received; the full amount has been accepted (John 19:30).

Yet, undoubtedly what I marvel at the most is the time stamp – for it was when I arrived home, having been washed of the guilt that I couldn’t be released of without that return, I peered at the stamp. I had decided to turn around at about 10:00 AM, and by the time I got to the lot, it was probably about a quarter past, but the ticket I had in my hand had registered my payment as being made, not at 10:15 AM - but at 9:42 AM.

Praise be to the One who not only presses in us, but has already forgiven us long before we heed His voice --