Saul was the first king of Israel, David was the second. Usually when people look at these two men they concentrate on the fact that when David messed up, he repented, while Saul would continually justify himself. This is true, but it occurs to me that there is more to it than that. What it really comes down to is that David had better overall character than Saul did.
For starters, lets look at the battle with the Amalekites. God told Saul to destroy Amalek, and to kill everything in Amalek. He was not to let anyone live, or even let any of the animals live. When Samuel met with Saul, after the battle, Saul had taken the king, Agag, prisoner, and had not killed the animals. Samuel confronted Saul, and Saul told him that they were going to sacrifice the animals to God. Samuel told Saul that "...to obey is better than sacrifice."
Now David once had occasion to sacrifice some animals to God, but the animals in question weren't his. Fortunately, the animals belonged to a man named Araunah that was friendly towards David. Friendly enough that he would have been happy to give the animals to David, but David refused. He would not sacrifice what wasn't his. He would not have expected God to honor such a sacrifice.
Let's look also at the battle with Goliath. I think most of us know the story: The Philistines set themselves in array against Israel, but then the Philistine champion, Goliath, offered to fight, one on one, any of the Israelites to settle the matter. The Israelites were intimidated; Goliath was six cubits tall--about nine feet. Now, common sense would dictate that the biggest Israelite would fight the giant. Instead, of course, the smallest Israelite on the battlefield ended up going against Goliath, without traditional weapons. David (who wasn't even old enough to be in the army) took a sling and five stones and only needed one. So, who was the biggest Israelite on the battlefield? Saul was.
Let's consider also the conflict that arose when Saul realized that God intended for David to be the second king of Israel, instead of one of Saul's sons. Saul tried to kill David, but God protected David. David had opportunity to kill Saul, and refused to do it. Now, when David, later on in life, found that Uriah the Hittite was standing in the way of what David wanted, he had Uriah killed. The difference, though, is that David repented quickly for having Uriah killed; Saul never really repented of trying to kill David.
You don't have to look to hard at these two men's lives to realize the difference in the strength of character and the faith in God that they had (or didn't have). And I have to admit, sometimes I feel more like Saul than like David. Particularly with regard to Araunah. If I needed something, and somebody offers me exactly what I need, and they seem happy to give it to me, I'm probably not going to argue with them, no matter what it is that I need that whatever-it-is for. I'm not sure that I have that kind of integrity.
Some would question how the Bible can say that David was a man after God's own heart, when he murdered Uriah the Hittite. God knows that none of us are perfect--He didn't create us that way. Most of the time, though, David had the strength of character, integrity, and faithfulness towards God that God has towards us.
No comments:
Post a Comment