Adversity is the trial of principle. Without it a man hardly knows whether he is honest or not. -- Henry Fielding
When next we see David, he was: the celebrated hero of the masses, a courageous general, married to a princess, and fleeing the wrath of King Saul.
Saul had already been warned by Samuel that his kingdom would be given to someone else. It was not difficult for Saul to imagine David as his successor(1 Samuel 20.31-33). So, on several occasions, Saul tried to kill David in cold blood. (see 1 Samuel 18.10,11; 19.1; 19.9,10)
David fled into the wilderness, leaving his home, his work, and his wife. In his haste to leave, he did not stop to get food, provisions, or even a weapon.
Consider for a moment what the future heir to Israel's throne must have been thinking at this point. He believes he will one day lead Israel, if only he can survive the wait. He has no food, no way to use his training -- be it shepherd, musician, or military general. He would endanger any friend or family he would turn to. What would you do? Where would you turn?
For David, it probably seemed obvious. He sought godly counsel. 1 Samuel 21 describes David's meeting with Ahimelech the priest. Ahimalech provides two things which have significance, but for different reasons.
The bread, giving nourishment, is not ordinary bread, it is the consecrated bread which only the priests ought to eat. Bread, it is shown in the New Testament, is closely identified with the Word of God. That is, Word of God in both senses: the Scripture on one hand, and the Incarnate Son of God on the other.
The lesson here, if we were to examine it, would be to find our strength in His Word.
But there were two gifts given to David: The other one was Goliath's sword.
When David slew Goliath, he was still a boy. He was too young to wear armour or swing a sword. But now David was bigger, stronger, and more mature. He was now battle-hardened. He no longer sniped from the periphery, but now personally lead others into battle.
God made sure that David had a weapon, and now David was ready to wield it. Did his enemies tremble when they heard that he carried the now-famous sword into combat? Did it inspire awe in his followers? That doesn't matter.
What matters is this: When David was in his darkest days, at the time when God's plan simply did NOT make sense, when circumstance was screaming all around him that everything he had believed and hoped was a naive dream, David held something real. He had cold, hard metal in his hand to remind him of a day God was faithful. Whatever was going wrong around him, he held in his hand - in every battle - evidence of God's earlier faithfulness against overwhelming odds.
Neither you nor I are fleeing the wrath of an angry king, or armed with a giant's sword. (probably) But even we have our occasional times of trial. The providence of God sometimes seems difficult to see, and the chaos of life crowds in on us all. Through it, we can still see God. There are earlier times in our life where God has shown His faithfulness, and we have only to look back, take hold and move forward.
Sometimes, we have to borrow the trials, lives and triumphs of others. David had a sword. Abraham had the night sky. Joseph was given a dream. That's why Scripture is not a mere 'manual'. It shows the good and the bad of the lives therein. We can find ourselves in the lives of others, and through them, find the faithfulness of the God who is called Faithful and True.
We have the faithfulness of Christ who said "I am with you always, even to the end of the age."
[...]
2 comments:
Excellent post on the significance and symbolism of those two gifts.
Thanks Theophilus.
BTW the anti-trinity asylum has changed posts, but inevitably been sucked back into Trinity vs Oneness/Modalism debating. If it is not the topic of the main post I try to ignore the jibes and bait from paul g and PB. It is not my doggedness but PB is a personal friend of mine and my Brother in Law. (I married His sister) It saddens me that He hates the Church and many Orthodox doctorines so much and I cannot stand by without trying to reason with him, no matter how futile it may be. At least by blog correspondance the debates dont turn personal and our face to face interactions now are not caught up in theological debates/arguements. My wife and I can now enjoy his company and conversation.
MDM
MDM -
I have loved ones who I'm too thick to give up on, too.
Now it makes sense. Good to see you found a way to stay true to what's true, without dividing family in the process. Families are under enough attack as it is.
btw
p.g and afl sound like Pb's personal acquaintances, too. Do you know them as well?
Post a Comment