TotD: Grace

Grace, as in the Grace of God, not the Church, not Grace Campbell and not Grace Cronin... All very confusing!

So I have been thinking about Grace today as the online Bible College course I do is focused on grace today.

I want to talk about defining grace because of lot of people do and everyone comes up with something a little different than anyone else.

CEF, specifically Mags Adamson defines Grace as

God's
Riches
At
Christ's
Expense

that is a definition I love because in one sentence, which is an acronym, you get the cross and the promise if you trust in the work done at the cross. It is used for talking to children about growth as Christians and sometimes even evangelistically. For those purposes it is a really good definition. However, and I mean this with no offence, it is a limited definition. What I mean is grace is so much more than what God blesses those who believe with, scripture also talks about general grace given to all people. For example rain falling and the Sun shining are examples of general grace given to everyone, whether saved or unsaved so then there is grace that falls out of this definition.

Louie Giglio, of the Passion Movement who has all those DVDs such as 'Indescribable', 'How Great is Our God', etc. He defines grace as 'God at work'.
When I first heard this definition I wondered about it and thought 'why just this?' It seemed too simple. I was confused by it but in one of his DVDs, I think it's either 'Symphony' or 'Fruitcake and Ice-cream', where he says that he defines grace as God at work because it means it's not me at work.
That makes it a little more genius because grace is God at work. It is Him working when we realise there is nothing we can do for our salvation or even for His work. We are weak and He is strong. It is not by our works but by His work that anything happens in our lives. Louie Giglio's definition is great in that sense but it still feels limited.

The Bible College Course I am doing (www.onlinebiblecollege.com, found by Andy) defines grace twice. It says no one definition is enough for us to begin to grasp what grace is. The first definition is God doing what we did not deserve and the second is God doing what we cannot do ourselves.

The course goes on to give a few opposites of grace. The first is debt. If it was not for the grace of God at the cross we would still have the "wages of sin" upon us and be indebted to God (which we are for His grace but in a different way). The second is self-effort. We need to realise, as Philip Yancey said once, "there is nothing you can do to make God love you more; there is nothing you can do to make God love you more." God's love for us is not dependent on us at all! Self-effort is the spiritual ewquivalent of giving God the finger. The third, and final definition for the opposite of grace is law. I'll talk about that one in a different blog I think as it would take up a lot of room in this one.

Both of those definitions, from the Online Bible College, capture the definitions of Louie Giglio and Mags Adamson. God's Riches At Christ's Expense is there and so is God at work. The first definition is one that really stands out in a way that the others do not.

God did things for us that we do not deserve, God is still doing things for us that we do not deserve. Every breath I take I do not deserve (general grace) but by the grace of God, He allows people to continue to breathe. Every good moment in my life I do not deserve, I deserve only punishment for my sins. Yet, God, in His mercy and grace has given me a life full of happiness, friendships, joy and love.
I do not deserve to be loved, but again God in His grace loves me and because He first loved I love Him and other people and other people love me.
I am a sinner, of the worst kind, I do not deserve the life He has given and the promise I have of eternal life in Heaven after this good life is over. I do not deserve that, I deserve the pit of Hell but God, in His grace, says: "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." (Romans 8:1 ESV). That's insane.

I pray that as I look to serve my Lord and my God, the author of my faith and the procurer of my salvation that I will realise this verse as a reality in my life and not just a piece of knowledge in my head:
"But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me."
(2 Corinthians 12:9 ESV)

TotD: Saul the Judge

At the time of Samuel in Israel God did not have kings but prophets and judges. The latter of these were appointed to judge the Israelites and make decisions for them, they also fought and won battles for their God and His people. In some instances judges were also priests, such is the case with Eli, and in others they were also prophets, like Samuel.

God successively chose judges from different lines, tribes and families throughout the early history of the nation of Israel.

Then Samuel appointed his sons as judges. 1 Samuel 8 talks about the corruption of Samuel's sons (Joel and Abijah) and how the people came to Samuel and complained about them. This forced Samuel to remove them from their positions. The people no longer wanted a judge and demanded a king instead (like the other nations had).

1 Samuel 9-10:8 introduces that king; Saul. Saul was of the tribe of Benjamin. He was about a head and shoulders taller than all the other Israelites and no other Jew matched him in physical attractiveness. His family was wealthy (we know because they owned donkeys) and it seems people were aware of their business, they may have been influential in their community. This is despite the fact that Saul claims he is from an unimportant tribe, clan and family and that he himself is the least of that family. (I imagine anyone would in the face of an anointing from God.)

What was Saul anointed as though? The ESV translates the Hebrew word 'nagid' as prince. In this sense the KJV is better as it uses captain. The word is actually the word used for judge in the book of Judges. This means that Samuel appoints Saul not as King over Israel but as a judge.

It is very possible that Saul was intended to be the next judge after Samuel, who was beginning to retire from public ministry and leave it to his sons. God had chosen Saul to be the next judge of Israel.

However, God takes the desires and wants of His people seriously. He wants to work with them and not against them. Thusly He appoints the next judge he had chosen as King over Israel. So the judge (nagid) becomes the king (melek) not necessarily because Saul deserved to be King but because the people demanded that he would be.

In the passage mentioned above we see that Saul had leadership aspirations when Samuel meets him and tells him the donkeys have been found and are safe but then goes on to say that in the morning they would speak of what was in Saul's heart. Saul's reaction also hints at his aspirations for leadership when he mentions about his humble background. His reaction to Samuel's comment is insane and seems really presumptuous. Even if Samuel mentioned him and his family as the desire of all Israel...

Finally some people say that Samuel made a mistake in appointing Saul as King over Israel. This is not the case. The LORD says to Samuel that someone will come during the offering feast the next day and that he is to be appointed nagid. When Samuel meets Saul the LORD confirms that this is the man he meant when he said the one will arrive tomorrow who is to be appointed nagid. The Lord gives three signs (people saying the donkeys have been found, three men heading to Bethel that will give him some bread, and prophets filled with the Spirit prophesying) all of these come to pass and so Saul knows it is God behind the appointment. Saul is even filled with the Spirit and prophesies himself.
David also, whenever he has the possibility to kill Saul says he will never harm God's anointed. David recognises Saul as someone anointed by God, even if he has lost his way.
So Saul is chosen by God to be nagid over Israel. It is Samuel that appoints him king. Nowhere does God specifically say that he wants Saul appointed as Melek, which is what Samuel calls him to the assembled Israelites at Mizpah. This is the first time the word is used for Saul...

On the other hand David is appointed King by God. 1 Samuel 16:1 ends, "for I have provided me a king among his (Jesse's) sons." The word used in this sentence is melek. Does leave it open to the idea that Saul should never have been King specifically though was appointed by God to be their leader.

However, the passage does go on to talk about men of valour who were moved in their hearts to follow Saul and become a sort of army for him. Evans, in her commentary, says that despite the fact God never intended there to be a King other than Himself that He begins to move and work in the new system of government that the people have called for. He appoints Saul King and then moves people in their hearts so that they decide to serve the new King.

I'm not sure about God appointing Saul King as he uses nagid but he did accept him to be King after Samuel appointed him king. This can be seen in the men of valour and when, in 1 Samuel 15:11,35* God admits he regrets making Saul king (melek is used here) perhaps as opposed to his original plan for Saul to be just a judge like Samson, Gideon, Eli, Samuel and others.

*Thanks to Andy for adding these verses to my thoughts when I told him I would be posting this today.

TotD: God versus Dagon.

So, if you haven't guessed by now my present reading of Scripture is 1 Samuel. I have bought a book that is basically an exegetical commentary of the books of Samuel, which I am now using in my time with God (which is considerably longer reading than it has been before.) One of the things I love to do is discuss with Him the things going on as I read them and the commentary is one of the ways He tells me about the passage. Another is the fact that these daily thoughts generally are not on passages I have looked at TODAY but usually YESTERDAY but I can't get them out of my head.

Some of you won't know who Dagon is. There was a nation north west of the nation of Israel during the time of the Judges, Samuel, Saul and David called Philistia. It is from here that Goliath and the Philistines come. One of their gods was an invention known as Dagon. In iconography Dagon was portrayed as a creature similar to a merman. He had a fish like body with a human torso and head. (You can Google Image him if you like).

The Philistines were the main enemies of the Israelites and were often at war with them (pretty much at any given opportunity actually). In one of these wars the people of Israel were not doing so well so they sent people to the Tabernacle in Shiloh (were Samuel and Eli were probably still living at this time) and they took the Ark of the Covenant out of 'Samuel's bedroom', the Holy of Holies. They brought the Ark, as if it were a good luck charm, to the battle and believed that they would now win the battle because Yahweh was in the camp (remember they believed He dwelt on the mercy seat between the two cherubim decorating the lid of the ark).

The Philistines were terrified when they saw the Ark of the Covenant enter into the camp of their enemies for they knew there was now a god there and this particular God, they knew, had done wonders in Egypt and the wilderness (though they were confused as to the exact details). They had never fought a war against a god before and this gave the Philistines a new sense of determination; they would fight with everything they had.

The Israelites on the other hand seem to have grown complacent. Now that the Ark of the LORD was in their midst they did not need to worry about the battle anymore. The way Scripture records their defeat is interesting because it sounds as if they just sat there while the Philistines killed them. "So the Philistines fought, and Israel was defeated, and they fled, every man to his home. And there was a very great slaughter, for thirty thousand foot soldiers of Israel fell." (1 Samuel 4:10 ESV)
See how that's worded? The Philistines fought but the Israelites were just defeated.

The Ark of the Covenant is taken by the Philistines as part of the spoils of war. They had taken, not just money, weapons, animals, women etc etc; but an actual god. They brought the Ark to Ashdod in Philistia, one of the five major cities.

In the meantime news of the Ark's capture gets back to Eli in the Tabernacle. His sons, who had carried the Ark, were dead, the army was defeated and the Ark gone. On hearing the third of these Eli faints and because he is so fat his own weight causes his neck to be broken and he dies.

In Ashdod the people are getting tumours and boils. According to extra-biblical writings these boils and tumours appeared on the people's groins (which would be more irritating and more painful than anywhere else) also there was a plague of rats. Ultimately it was for this reason that the Philistines sent the Ark back to Israel but not before both of the gods could do battle.

The Ark was stored in the temple of Dagon in Ashdod. Each morning it was there the Philistine priests would come in to find the statue of Dagon bowing, face first, to the Ark; or broken.

I wonder what the Philistines thought as they saw this the second time. Seeing as Dagon was their god I imagine he had some form of power, and as he was half fish I assume it was power over water. God brought down fire on Sodom and Gomorrah so I think the Philistines, had they seen Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix would imagine a battle between the two deities as similar to the battle between Dumbledore and Voldemort in that movie.

In the film Voldemort the bad guy, shoots a fire snake creature at Dumbledore who defeats it and temporarily traps Voldemort in a massive floating ball of water. The reason my mind went here is the water-fire thing and also the fact that to the followers of Dagon, Yahweh would be Voldemort in this situation. They would see Him as this evil foreign God that cannot accept that He and His people have been defeated and has come to do battle with their beloved Dumbledore.

Of course in this instance Dumbledore loses, and rightly so because the Lord is not the bad guy. He is the all-powerful and only true God. The actuality of the 'battle' between Yahweh and Dagon went more like this.

The Ark of the Covenant is placed beside the statue to Dagon. God's presence in with the Ark. The Lord watches until nightfall. The whole time Dagon stares at Him, unmoving, unwavering and even unaware of His existence at all. There is nothing behind those carved and sculpted eyes. There is no Dagon. The Lord watches in despair as the last ritual is performed in front of this inanimate object. He is a jealous God, but loving, God. He does not want that the Philistines would perish but that they would repent and sacrifice with the Israelites after they repented too. Yahweh looks the statue in the eye for a nano second and the statue falls, face to the floor, in front of the one true God.

The experience of the defeat of their god is both not lost and lost on the Philistines. They realise the boils and tumours and rats are from the fact that the Ark is in their cities (they move it around a bit and the disasters follow) but they still do not recognise Him as the one true God. They offer Him and offering (of gold rats and tumour models) and send the Ark in a new cart with two cows who have recently become mothers.

There is reverence there but not to the right degree. God has proven Himself more powerful than Dagon, more than once, and the Philistines recognise His power; but they just send Him back across the border and wait for the day they can attack the Israelites again. They learned nothing.

This is evidenced in chapter 7 when Samuel gathers the people together, all of Israel, at Mizpah. The exact amount of time between both events (the Ark coming home and this all-Israel meeting) is not mentioned but what is is that while the meeting goes on the lords of the Philistines decide it is a good time to go to battle with the Israelites again. " Now when the Philistines heard that the people of Israel had gathered at Mizpah, the lords of the Philistines went up against Israel. And when the people of Israel heard of it, they were afraid of the Philistines." (1 Samuel 7:7 ESV). It seems no one learned anything from the time the Ark was in Philistia.

We can, however, we can see that God is the most powerful. We can see that nothing should come above Him and we can praise and serve the God that other gods bow before!

Genesis Fight Club

I mentioned this in my most recent blog. This is a talk given to the UCC Christian Union on the 16th of October 2012. The reason I share it here is because it is linked to the previous blog post.

We’ve been looking at Jacob and this guy is a guy of strife. He divided his parents, he divided his family, he stole his father’s blessing, he stripped his older brother of his birth right, he came into conflict with Laban and then Leah. He caused jealousy in his household when he was having kids with Leah but not Rachel. This man was a man of struggles. He pretty much struggles with everyone he has ever known and met.

                At this point in time Jacob is on his way back to meet Esau, his brother, the brother who’s birth right he stole. Jacob is fearful for his life. He is so afraid that he gets his wives and kids (in his struggling family as most of his sexual partners are not fond of any of the others) and he sends them off to meet his brother with a large gift (think mansion ‘cos that’s the closest modern day equivalent).

                So we see he is terrified. He is trying to win his brother over and just in case that fails he isn’t even going to be there when the gift is given and his people meet Esau’s.

                Jacob himself stays on the other side of the river Jabbock (Hebrew ‘yabbock’ which sounds like the Hebrew word for wrestle ‘Ye’abeck’ which also sounds like Jacob ‘ya’acob’). The river means wrestle/struggle his name means supplant and struggle. The Bible is awesome!!

What do you think he is thinking as he’s there? This is my last night? Is he praying? If so what is he praying? Something like ‘help me God, shine your favour on me? Bless me? Protect me?’

Then, while he is praying the most random thing in the world that could ever happen happens. Imagine being scared of your life and crying out to God to help when this random ‘stranger’ shows up and decides it would be a good idea for you two to wrestle. Firstly I don’t think I’d particularly enjoy that particular method of communication from God.

I imagine I would be a bit like ‘ah, d’u mind? I’m in the middle of praying to God here to help me in my dire and life or death situation. Bugger off.’

Now I’m not saying that God hasn’t had to wrestle with me. He has, more than you know. Getting me out of bed on a day that ends in y is a struggle with God somedays (you know the ones that end in y) and God has to be like ‘Waves, come on I want to do things.’ And that’s the absolute best example of times God has to wrestle with me, if I told you any of the other ones I would likely be excommunicated. One thing to note though, He always wins.

That’s one of the things that make this piece of scripture so interesting. God isn’t winning He cannot prevail. When day begins to break Jesus touches Jacob’s hip and blamo it’s sore. It’s like the opposite of what God on earth will do next time He’s here (or well the time He’s around longest).

There is a lot of debate on this topic. Is this dude an angel? Then why does Jacob say he has seen God face to face? How can God be walking around the earth post ‘Garden of Eden’ times? Was Hosea doting then? Who’s the ‘Angel of the Lord?’ We could do a whole other CU time on this but general Christian theology (called Christology) believes He is a pre-incarnate Christ.

In Exodus it talks about how God’s name dwells in Him (Ex. 23) His name can literally mean the ‘Word of God’ and most people who meet Him equate seeing Him with seeing the face of God. (like Jacob does and Moses does also) as well as that the Angel of the Lord could forgive sins (Ex. 23:21) and in Mark we see “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Mark 2:7). Anyway that’s why I think the Angel of the LORD is a pre-incarnation Jesus (which is cool).

In my opinion this piece of scripture is about struggling. Jacob was a man of struggles and we are people of struggles too. There is a saying that you can only be sure of two things in life taxes and death; but I think there is one thing you can be sure of in life and that’s struggles. People struggle with money, with friendships, with relationships, with workloads, with themselves and with God. This struggling (as in with ourselves and God) is a normal experience for Christians and as such is dealt with quite a bit in scriptures.

Jacob physically struggled with God which is something the majority of us, if not the entire population of the CU in UCC through all time, will not have the opportunity to do. I don’t think I would particularly enjoy Israel’s experience by the River Jabbock. Imagine God appearing on earth and, from what we can gather from the passage, not saying anything just attacking you (as it may have appeared to Israel as he sat there worrying and perhaps even praying).

I want to look very quickly at three scripture passages about struggle. Then a little on the last question.

1.       The first is found in Romans 5 and will be on the screen.

“Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.” (Romans 5:1-6 ESV)

I attempted to learn this passage when I was about 16 because I read it and I first went yeah, struggles are a good thing are they? But it is insane to think about it like this. There is a saying ‘what doesn’t kill you will only make you stronger,’ which is a simplified atheistic version of this passage. Think about all of the people who make big impacts as Christians. In general they are either well known or have a story full of struggle that God has turned around to make them into an amazing witness of the power of God to bless and change lives.

I often look back on my own life and I think “Lord. I would love to change that time of suffering and choose a different option at that point.” If God allowed that, the one I specifically think about, I wouldn’t know His power as much as I do, I wouldn’t know His presence as much as I do and I wouldn’t be able to speak about a God that loves so much He could die for someone as wretched as me with such honesty. My struggles and my mistakes have brought me closer to a God who cares so much. Now I’m not saying go and make dopey mistakes in the hopes that it will bring you closer to God but I am saying that your struggles have a purpose and in your life you can choose the effect they have on you. You can allow them to produce in you the version of you God designed you to be. I’m going to say that sentence again because it was a little confusing. You can allow your struggles to produce in you God’s design for who He wants you to be; or you can become a victim and wallow in your misery, blaming God and blaming people. Either way suffering produces character.

2.       Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. Put on the whole armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. (Ephesians 6:10-12 ESV)

I’m not going to say anything about this one because it speaks for itself.

3.       For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. (Romans 8:18 ESV)

When we find ourselves in the midst of struggles we need to give them over to God in order for endurance and character and hope to be formed. We need to involve Him in our problems and allow Him to comfort us, strengthen us and renew our hope. This verse is one to hold onto in those times. The suffering, no matter how bad, is not even worth comparing with the glory that is to come. When you are in a struggle that feels like hell it is hard to see the good, even into the future we often only see this struggle, like with the dark side of the force ‘clouded the future becomes.’ (that’s from Star Wars if you didn’t recognise it.)

Lastly on Jacob becoming Israel, he had his name changed by God. One of my sins was a thing that came to define me, some of you know what that was but others don’t and that’s okay. You just need to know that it became wrapped up in who David Cowpar was. It was defining, life changing and how I identified myself for a number of years. Most of you know me as Wavey. I have adopted the name Wavey so much that my Facebook page is Wavey Tonntach (which is Wavey in the Irish language). Although I am still David Cowpar I am also Wavey and there is a difference. It’s as if, in being granted the name Wavey, the past of David Cowpar no longer has to define me. The identity that was David Cowpar is not the identity that is Wavey (even though I am the same person). I know that sounds a small bit insane but when sin becomes wrapped in who you are it makes sense that God would grant a new name. This was definitely true for Israel who went from being the supplanter to the one who strives with God. (which is not necessarily fights with God but maybe strives beside God).

We don’t have to be defined by our sins and struggles. God’s dealt with those in the death of Jesus.

It is suggested one YouTube's  "Regrets Igniter Media" after reading this as I closed with it.

Please NB the piece on the Angel of the Lord in this and in "TotD: Samuel and God".

TotD Samuel and God

This was technically yesterday's thought of the day so apologies for late upload.

In the third chapter of first Samuel God calls Samuel. The story goes that Samuel in Shiloh serving the high priest Eli in the Tabernacle. At this point in time the young Samuel does not know the Lord. The Bible tells us that Eli was getting old and was rather fat (due to the corruption of his sons, which he was technically not opposed to as he shared in the spoils). As well as this Eli's eyesight had deteriorated some bit. Samuel was used to helping and serving Eli and he did so without complaining (at least that's what we can gather from the scriptural account).

Note that in verse 3 (1 Samuel 3:3) Samuel is sleeping "where the ark of God is." This is a clear rejection of the standards God has set out in the Torah about how the ark should be approached. It appears as if the Levites in the Tabernacle have forgotten and rejected the word of God on this issue. To me I think it's lucky that Samuel hasn't been punished by God for lying in his presence in a way that should not have been done.

When Samuel hears his name he goes to Eli, and it takes three of these before Eli thinks that it could be God. At this point Samuel goes back to bed and waits for the voice to call him again. The Bible goes on to say:

"And the LORD came and stood, calling as at other times, "Samuel! Samuel!" And Samuel said, "Speak, for your servant hears."" (1 Samuel 3:10)
This verse stood out to me. 'The LORD came and stood, calling as at other times." God came and stood. God came and stood in the Tabernacle by the mercy seat on which He was thought to dwell.

This is very interesting. Why did Samuel (who likely first wrote this passage) use the word stood? It does not go on to say that Samuel saw the Lord in person at this point. The word stood (which is also in the Hebrew 'He came and stationed Himself') implies a lot more than just a voice in little Samuel's head (or even an audible voice in the room) it implies that God Himself stood, in person, in front of Samuel.

Those of you who were in my CU talk recently will know where this is going (those of you who haven't been I will add it here as well).
How can the Lord stand in front of Samuel? Why is the word stood used? This one verse has brought question after question into my head about the Angel of the Lord and such.

The Angel of the Lord is believed, by some Christians, to have been a pre-incarnate Jesus who came to earth in the Old Testament. For example; it is the Angel of the Lord that talks to Abraham about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah but He talks about Himself as if He is the Lord. It is also this person that stands in the fire with Daniel's friends while they are in exile. Hosea calls this individual an angel but He can forgice sins in the time of Moses and who can forgive sins but God alone (see Mark 2).

It makes for an interesting thought. There is, of course, not much evidence that the Angel of the Lord is in this passage of Scripture but the word 'stood' stands out as odd and an indication that, in fact, Jesus pre-Jesus may have stood in front of Samuel.

Anyway that's what I have been thinking about when reading chapter 3 of Samuel 1.

Thought of the Day (TotD): Hannah and Samuel

Some preliminary information on my 'Thought of the Day' blog.
This will not be posted daily, only if I have thoughts about things that I think are actually worth sharing. They may be daily or they may be monthly. There are some that are building up that I will post over time as well.


Hannah and Samuel:
For people who don't know the story in Israel at the time of the Judges but the end of those but before the time of Kings, there was a man named Elkanah. He was relativity well off and in love with a woman called Hannah. They got married but it turned out that Hannah couldn't have children. So, as was customary in the day, Elkanah married another woman named Peninnah who could have children.
Although this happens and there is nothing particularly said in the Bible (Old Testament) about polygamy generally the Bible records all the bad things that happen because of it: favouritism, fighting, hatred, bitterness etc.

Anyway I digress. Hannah is sad because, although her husband loves her she feels unfulfilled. So she goes and prays to God for a child as Peninnah continues to hate her and insult her, especially when she is given twice the share of food by Elkanah than Peninnah is.

So Hannah goes to the 'Temple' (which at this time was the Tabernacle tent as the first Temple was built by Solomon about 160 years after this event). She goes and prays to God there. The High Priest, Eli, is sleeping somewhere near where she is crying out to God. He sees her lips move but no words coming out and presumes her drunk. "And Eli said to her, “How long will you go on being drunk? Put your wine away from you.” (1 Samuel 1:14 ESV). This is insane isn't it? This guy is the leader of the worship of God in the country and he sees someone praying and thinks she must be drunk. I think we can learn a lot from this about being loving if we are in a position oft leadership. Eli judged a book by its cover and was found wrong. That must have been embarrassing for him. But he redeemed himself by helping, praying for her and giving her his blessing afterwards, but how much better would it have been if he had did it in the first instance.

So after some time God grants her petition and Hannah has a BABY. An actual baby, she who was barren has a son. She promised, a few years before, in the Tabernacle at Shiloh that she would dedicate a son to God if He saw fit to grant her one.
Now, this could sound like bribing God. "God if you give me this, I will give it to you, all I want to be able to do is stick out my tongue at Peninnah when she brings up my lack of children." But, perhaps it was the deepest desire of Hannah's heart to have a son that she could dedicate the Lord and His service in Shiloh.

The next time the family are going back to Shiloh Hannah and baby Samuel (which means heard by God by the way) stay in the hill country of Ephraim, where they live. Hannah will keep her vow to the Lord and give the boy over to service but she has to wean him first. This event could take until he is five years old.
We have this image of Hannah handing over a little baby to the old priest in the Temple. That is not the case at all, he was probably of Irish school going age when he was brought to Eli. Samuel probably thought of it as the equiv. of an Irish child going to boarding school (normally the first day is exciting).

So Samuel is brought to the tabernacle to serve God with Eli and his attitude, seen in the third chapter, towards his duties is evidence of the fact that he enjoyed what he was doing and he did want to do.

Random Observations on Leadership

These thoughts are inspired by Michael O'Donovan at Godzilla one Friday (26-10-12)

Some preliminary information. Mike is one of the pastors in Grace Christian Church and leader of the club for primary school aged children which is ridiculously named Godzilla.* (There is much debate on why; theory 1. Godzilla has the word God in it, theory 2. the kids will think Godzilla is cool so by extension they will think Godzilla club is cool, theory 3. Mike thought it was 'cool', theory 4. neither of the other theories are correct and it just IS Godzilla.)

*I have never cared enough about the name to actually delve into it's history and deeper, hidden, meanings (or lack thereof)

Anyway, Godzilla starts at 7:30pm and Grace CC have this fascinating mentality, that would be unlikely to hold up in court, that the children are not our responsibility before 7:30 or after 9:00pm. This means they get to do whatever they like before and after those times.

This particular Friday the kids were going insane with the various balls (of basket, soccer, football and soft varieties) when Michael made a comment to me something to this effect; "If we just left them like this some of them would be happy out."

That thought, and the sight of the assorted chaos unfolding before me got my mind to a-wandering. As I watched the kids playing I was reminded of the Christian story in general (well at least a specific aspect of the general Christian story). As the children took and played with the equipment before the leaders started anything there was freedom there: like in small churches (or in house churches). There was also a lot of chaos, as I have said before, with fighting, hoarding of equipment, unfair treatment of fellows etc.

There was even a guy smuggling a ball (he had it up his top and looked remarkably comical). This particular kid reminded me of Brother Andrew who used to smuggle Bibles into parts of the world in which it was/is illegal to believe in Jesus and read about God in His Word. As the children played, in leaderless freedom, little groups sprung up and one group with take on another in a Baptist versus Pentecostal style simile.

Eventually 7:30 came around and Michael and I took over the chaos (more so Michael than me though). Then there was organisation; then there was a little more fairness, then there was sharing. There was regulation and conformity (and that sentence may have changed the entire feel of this piece). However, with the benefits there was also some changes to the previous structure which could be viewed as negative. There was less freedom of expression.

This all got me thinking of leadership in the Church in general. There is a good and important place and role for individual freedom and conformity under a leader appointed 'above'/'below' you by the Lord. Though leaders can, and will, stifle some of your freedom; they are also appointed by God to lead, direct, guide, teach, rebuke, instruct, feed and bless the Church.

Freedom in Christ is not leaderless chaos, freedom in Christ is freedom from the power of sin and the death it brings. It is freedom to change to be more like Jesus Christ, assisted by the appointed leaders of the Church in its local expression.

"Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith." (Hebrews 13:7- ESV)