True obedience isn't necessarily "the obvious" thing to do...

In my previous post, I wrote about how Saul allowed pressure - from his people/soldiers and his circumstances - to make him deviate from what he knew to be the revealed will of God. That sad pattern continues throughout the following chapters of the book of 1st Samuel. Saul's weak character, his failure to obey God in the details, is shown in multiple ways as he pursues young David with the intention of killing him. But then we get to chapter 26, and now it is David who is faced with the temptation to resolve a difficult situation by side-stepping what he knows to be the revealed will of God.

The context is that David and a rag tag company of soldiers have been on the run for years, while King Saul is hunting David down and hoping to kill him. There has already been one occasion (in chapter 24) where David had the opportunity to kill his wicked enemy in a cave, but he refused to do that. Instead, he cut off a piece of Saul's robe... as a testimony that he meant the king no harm.

Now, in chapter 26, a second opportunity to rid himself of his foe has presented itself. Saul and his men are so fast asleep that David and a man called Abishai are able to walk right into the enemy camp. It would be logical to assume, as Abishai did in verse 8, that God was delivering their enemy into their hands. "God has handed your enemy into your hands," says Abishai. "Let me pin him to the ground with one thrust of my spear."

But David refuses to kill the person that God has previously anointed as king - even though the circumstances seem to be pointing that way, and it even says in vs 12 that it was the Lord who had put Saul and his warriors into such a deep sleep.

The powerful lesson from this episode (as I wrote in my journal, pictured above) is that circumstances are not always an accurate indicator of the right thing to do.... not when they violate a principle or a directive that God has previously spoken.

In my own situation, the circumstances seem to be saying clearly that it's not possible for me to live in Alhaurín. Some might even think these circumstances mean that I should no longer be in Spain or that I should no longer be a missionary. 

So, how should I respond to long-lasting circumstances that seem to suggest I'm no longer in the right place?  The axe-head principle (from a story in 2 Kings 6: 1 - 7) says that I need to go back to the last thing that God clearly said or did. And what a long list of things I have to confirm that God clearly brought me here to Spain after I left South Africa and returned to Europe:

1. He brought me here to Spain in 2007 - 2008 and led me through circumstances and relationships to be based in Alhaurín.
2. He later confirmed the rightness of that by reminding me that He'd spoken to me two years previously through a Bible verse about a place of springs and palm trees. (You can read that story here.)
3. Despite my not having enough money to rent a home in Europe, He made a way for me by proving a house mate to share the cost. Then, years later, He amazingly provided half-price housing when I first began living alone.
4. He provided a home church and many non-Christian friends here in town.
5. When we closed the leadership retreat centre after ten years of fruitful ministry, my intercessors and financial supporters were unanimous in believing that it was right for me to continue living in Spain.
6. God hasn't shown me anything else - despite my asking Him multiple times whether I should move back to Scotland or relocate to another country where I've received ministry invitations.

In dog training, we have a maxim that says we should focus on what we want the dog to do,  rather than on what we want him not to do. So, when someone says, "I don't want my dog to jump up on people who come to the door," the more important question is, "What do you want him to do instead ?" Sit politely to greet people, or go to his bed, for example.

In my own situation, there seem to be so many societal and circumstantial obstacles to my finding a new home here in Spain, but the bottom line is that God has not shown me any "instead." There's no alternative for me to pursue that wouldn't just be using my own human reasoning - doing the logical or seemingly obvious thing (like Abishai wanted to do) and therefore going against the last thing that God showed me. The only "wiggle room" is that perhaps I could enlarge my search to other towns, even if they're not as close to Alhaurín and church and friends as would be ideal. If God no longer wanted me to live here in Spain at all, He would have been faithful to show me where He wanted me to move to instead. But He hasn't done that, even though I have asked Him repeatedly over the past year and declared my willingness to obey Him no matter what the cost.

In David's case in this chapter, God's purposes seemed to be:

• to test David's obedience and integrity.
• to underline that David's kingship would be brought about in God's way and God's timing.
• to convict Saul, an "onlooker," of his own sin and selfishness.

David recognises that God will bless and reward him for being loyal and doing good  (vs 23) and even his enemy has to concede that God will bless him and give him success. (vs 24 - 25)

It's not easy to keep obeying God when a different course of action might seem more "obvious." We can only hold on to the fact that God will always honour those who seek to follow Him and do things His way, no matter how hard that might be.