Reading in the shadow of the cross, all week long

It hasn’t escaped my notice that so far in Holy Week we’re reading about David killing an enemy giant and Saul getting jealous of David’s successes (we kind of skipped that part, but that’s why Saul is upset now) and then trying to kill David. Maybe you’ve noticed it too. And death is going to continue to be a theme this week in our Message readings, until on Saturday things begin to turn joyful again.

I didn’t plan it that way, but there it is. As we remember the Son of David’s journey toward, through, and back from death, we read about David’s journey from joy to being hunted and nearly killed back to triumph and a new covenant.

These stories don’t depend on the story of Jesus for their meaning – they were holy and important for Israel centuries before Jesus ever came on the scene and they are holy and important now even apart from Jesus’ story.  But this week, try reading them in the shadow of the cross – that is, see what stands out to you in these stories as you read them during this Holy Week. We won’t have separate blog entries for each day – instead, watch each day for parallels and differences you see between the two storylines.

• Are there common themes you see between Jesus’ story and this early part of David’s story?
• How does Jesus’ kingship influence how you see David as king?
• David is considered the greatest king of Israel. Why do you think it took so much death, hiding, and struggle for him to become that great king?

David, Goliath, and rapping hamsters

If you’ve watched any tv at all in the last six months, you’ve probably seen the commercials with the rapping hamsters. If you haven’t, don’t worry, you haven’t missed out.  They are incredibly annoying, and their raps get stuck in your head.

I bring it up only because today I discovered that the advertising agency responsible for these commercials is called David & Goliath. Their website describes them as “a creative agency who helps challenger brands fight their way to market leadership.” They “seek aggressive clients looking to outmaneuver” the market leaders.  “It all comes down to who wants it more, who’s brave enough to push, fight, and rise to the occasion.”

• Do you think this is what the story is about?

• If so, why? If not, what is the message?

David and Goliath, part I

Ok, we’re only halfway through the story of David and Goliath. As far as we know, David is just an inquisitive kid who annoys his brothers.

But I’ll bet a whole lot of you already know how this story turns out.  For one thing, “David & Goliath” gets used a lot to describe any situation with an underdog.  But also, it’s often one of the first Bible stories kids learn.  I don’t spend a lot of time in our church’s Beginners church school class, but I’d bet a whole lot of those kids can tell you who David and Goliath are already.

• Why do you think this story is so popular in general?
• Why do you think it gets taught to children so early?
• If you were picking a few Bible stories to share with a younger child, would this be one of them? Why or why not?

Identifying the anointed

I am grateful for the gift of sight. I am grateful to be able to enjoy the variations of color in a rainbow or a garden, to be able to tell from a distance who is coming toward me, to be able to read and look at paintings.

But sometimes our eyes get us into trouble. Like when Samuel looks at David’s oldest brother and thinks “This man looks to me like a king.”

We do the same sort of thing, often – we decide “That girl looks like a cheerleader.” “That man looks like a businessman.” “That frog looks like a prince in disguise.”  (Ok, maybe not that last one so much.)  The problem is that it’s not a terribly reliable way of deciding these things.  If you only anoint people who already look like leaders, you get a lot of leaders who all look the same.

For example:

It’s bad enough when it’s a matter of forgetting that people who don’t look like this could be president. But it gets worse, when we think that just because someone looks a certain way, they are dangerous. In Trayvon Martin’s case, it got him killed – not because of anything he did, but because someone decided what he was like based on the fact that he looked like this:

I am grateful that “the LORD doesn’t see things the way [we] see them. People judge by outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart.”

• Can you think of a time where you thought a person appeared to be one way, but was actually something different? What made you think the first thing? What changed your mind?
• How can someone keep from judging people on appearance?
• What kind of things does God use to judge a person?

Whose job is it?

There are moments in Scripture when it seems like things are very clearly arranged.  Mostly I think this happens in the writing of the Law: Levites will be priests, so-and-so will have this parcel of land, no one will marry a foreign woman, etc.

Then there are moments when a person might wonder if there is any structure at all to how things get done.  This is one of those, for me.

Samuel is very mad at Saul for making the sacrifice himself.  This much is clear. It’s less clear why Samuel was late, whether there had ever been any instructions for what Saul should do if Samuel was late, or how Samuel came to be offering sacrifices in the first place (since he wasn’t a priest by birth, and most prophets and judges weren’t priests – in fact only Samuel was ever all three).  It’s also unclear in the text exactly what command of the LORD Saul broke by offering the sacrifice – all we have heard is a command of Samuel.

Whatever the occasion, this is sort of the end of Saul’s turn to be a favorite, either of God or of Samuel.  But it’s hard to generalize any sort of lesson for the rest of us from this bit when so much is unclear.

• Why do you think it was wrong for Saul to do the sacrifice himself when Samuel was late?
• Why do you think it was such a big deal?
• Have you ever done something with good intent that made someone else upset? How did you and the other person work things out in the end?

A good man

Sometimes when we look at the mess of attack ads and predictions of doom that are so much a part of our political landscape, it’s hard to see a way out.  Is this all there is?

That’s one of the big questions that writer Aaron Sorkin asked when he created the show The West Wing. Here’s a clip that’s about ten years old now, but still speaks to this question that is in a lot of people’s hearts:

Yesterday Samuel warned the people what would happen if they got a king. Today, Samuel goes out and finds the LORD’s pick for king and anoints him. And just like Jed Bartlet in the clip above, Saul isn’t so sure. “Why me?” he asks.  He isn’t an important person in Israel’s political landscape.

But while all kings and all presidents are likely to screw up now and then, it helps if we start with a good person – someone with a good heart and a good mind and a desire to do right.

• Do you think it matters whether a person wants to be a leader or not? Why or why not?
• Do you think we can tell who God would like to be our leaders? How?
• What do you think is the best way for us to choose our leaders?

The world’s oldest attack ad?

Politics is a messy business, whether you’re running a presidential campaign in 21st century America or negotiating for the political structure of ancient Israel.

And when politicians are down, that’s when the claws come out.  That’s when the attack ads start.  And that’s when we start to hear the doomsayers telling us “If you elect this person, the world will fall apart in the following ways.”

Here’s a great example:*

Compare that with what Samuel says to Israel in 1 Samuel 8.  “This is how a king will reign over you…”

• Why do you think Samuel’s speech to Israel sounds so much like this attack ad?
• Why do you think politicians make this kind of ad?
• Why do you think the people of Israel say “That’s ok, give us a king anyway”? How do you see people today saying “That’s ok, we’ll take our chances”?
• What do you think is a faithful response to this kind of debate?

*Just so we’re clear: this is an example of how politicians on both sides of the aisle use threats about the future to win voters. You are free to draw your own conclusions about which candidates in any given election seem most fit for office.