God’s place in our mistakes (1 Sam 9:15-27)

Given the question marks around Saul, it is troubling that God deliberately chose him as Israel’s first king (1 Sam 9:16-17). Could He not see the weaknesses in Saul’s character (I would imagine He could and did) and if so, did he just set up the poor man for failure to teach Israel a lesson? Our passage confirms that Saul’s kingship is not a failure in guidance. Samuel did not just think that God spoke, Scripture tells us that He did (1 Sam 9:15). Samuel takes God seriously reserving a special portion of meat for the banquet ahead of time (1 Sam 9:23). Saul may also be quietly prepared for what is to come in that he already seems to have something more on his mind than donkeys (1 Sam 9:19-20 – Samuel promises to tell him [i.e. respond to] all that is on Saul’s mind the next day, whereas he answers his query about the donkeys straightaway).

Neither is this a set-up for failure. God intended Saul to deliver Israel from the Philistines (1 Sam 9:16). He responds to His people’s plea for help, as He did at the time of the exodus and the judges (Exod 2:23; 3:7; Judg 3:9, 15). When we are in trouble and cry to Him, He hears us too. A fuller answer to what went wrong will come in the course of the story. Suffice it to say that Saul had free will and could have succeeded in the same way that Adam and Eve could have chosen to trust God and obey Him, but he (and they) did not.

There is another aspect to this question alluded to in Samuel’s enigmatic statement to Saul. Literally the Hebrew reads ‘and to/for whom [is] all the desire/desired things of Israel? Is it not to/for you…?’ (1 Sam 9:20). Either it means that Israel’s desire is for the kind of qualities that Saul embodies or that all the desirable things of Israel will belong to him. Reading with hindsight, this is not merely a hint that Saul will be king. It also points to the problematic context in which the king was promised. Israel’s desire for security, centred in a visible, tangible individual was a rejection of the invisible God as their king (1 Sam 8:7). What will appeal to them in Saul will be his powerful physique and handsome appearance (1 Sam 9:2; 10:23), while the statement that the wealth of Israel will belong to Saul echoes the ominous warning issued about the king’s abuse of power (1 Sam 8:10-18).

Thus, what God is doing cannot be detached from the particular circumstances in which the king is given. This is a people with misguided, even idolatrous desires who stubbornly rejected God’s warning of the consequences. When our heart is not right, even with God’s guidance things may go awry simply because we cannot navigate the temptations that come our way despite being on the right path. While God consented to give Israel a king and wants Saul to succeed, his later failure to be a godly ruler stems from the same attitude that Israel had when they asked for a king. Kingship in itself is not the problem, Israel’s and Saul’s disposition are. Because of it, Saul’s reign will prove a dead end.

A friend of mine once lamented her mistakes and wished wistfully that things had been different in her life. Yet her faults created the very situations where she could learn from them. God, in His mercy, gives us second chances, and in His wisdom ordained the world in such a way that the very mistakes we make often produce the training ground for developing the qualities we lacked in the first place. Even when we are obedient, we may experience dead ends: a ministry we tried that never worked out into a long-term path, a project we started that fizzled out. Yet, if we love the Lord, all these things can work together for our good (Rom 8:28), teaching us about ourselves, developing our character, clarifying God’s call. Whether mistakes or not, seeming dead ends may be necessary for long-term growth.

If you enjoyed this post, please share it with others.