One would have imagined that
Saul would be delighted with a victory over his enemies and proud of the role
taken in the battle by his son Jonathan. But he was not, and in his response he
shows that he was a foolish man, and he shows his folly in at least five ways.
First, he engages in a bizarre
checking to see who is missing instead of heading against the enemy. This
points to a sense of jealousy that someone else is capable of defeating the
enemy.
Second, he is impatient with
finding the Lord’s will (vv. 18-19). Third, Saul self-centredness comes out
strongly in this incident. He wanted the glory for himself and he showed no
concern for his troops.
A fourth feature, which was
totally inappropriate for a leader of God’s people, was that he asked more of
them than God did when he wanted to punish his son Jonathan, which they did not
want to do.
A fifth detail was the rashness
of his oath. It had several consequences. It showed to Jonathan that his father
was not fit to rule, and his stupid oath had weakened the people and prevented
them from obtaining a greater victory. Then it caused the people to sin when
they ate blood when they were hungry. The Lord was displeased, which is shown
by his refusing to answer. It led to great injustice in that Jonathan was
condemned for doing nothing wrong. And it led to Saul’s authority being
challenged by the people for they refused to allow Saul kill Jonathan.
These features are further
evidence of the fact that Saul was not a good leader of God’s people. Jealousy,
impatience, self-centredness, demanding and rashness marked him. Unfortunately,
he was not the last leader in the church to combine some of those traits.
No comments:
Post a Comment