Waiting in Face of Threat

Samuel's Reproach to Saul, Francis Cleyn circa 1582-1658 Saul, the first king of Israel, was becoming more anxious and unhappy by the minute. As the new leader of the motley tribes of Israel, he still had things to prove to his people, some of whom were not supportive of him. His mentor, the prophet Samuel, kept reminding his subjects that it was not the plan of the Lord that Saul be their leader. There was a vote of confidence!

And now his son Jonathan had walked into a hornet's nest by attacking and defeating a Philistine outpost garrison. The powerful and war-savvy Philistines were now amassing to retaliate against him and his "nation," if it could be called that in its infancy, to wipe them out. There were thirty thousand Philistine chariots gathered against Israel near Gilgal (just north of Jericho), so the intelligence reports said, and six thousand horsemen. And, the spies reported, the troops were "like the sand of the seashore in multitude."

Saul's people had gone into hiding, and many had simply fled. If there was to be any confidence at all in those who had stayed with Saul to fight, it would need to come from a sense that God was with them. At this time they didn't need a king; they needed the assurance of their prophet.

Samuel was called for, and his message back to Saul was, "Wait for seven days, and I'll be there."

Had I been Saul, I would have been supremely frustrated. Seven days? You could walk from the very south to the very north of Israel in seven days. What was the old guy up to? The Philistines weren't twiddling their thumbs over there in their camp, simply wanting to pose a far-off menace. They might attack at any time. And with every day that passed, there were more Israelites slinking off into hiding or crossing the border and running.

I can just see Saul pacing back and forth, keeping an eye on the path coming into Gilgal, watching for that familiar prophetic form. Seven long days passed, and still Samuel didn't show up. Saul had to make some kind of decision. With his anxiety reaching fever pitch, he considered the facts:

• Innumerable enemy troops were about to attack
• Israelite numbers for defending themselves were dwindling
• He'd been anointed king; he had to do something
• The prophet wasn't showing up
• If they were to succeed in battle, they must have God on their side
  

He made his decision; they had to quit waiting for the prophet to show up and get on with it. "Bring the burnt offering here to me, and the offerings of well-being," Saul said. And he offered them himself. What could he do? He didn't want to meet the Philistines without acknowledging God. It was a pragmatic, time-sensitive decision, the best he could do under the circumstances.

It was the wrong decision.

As I've mulled over this story, the disturbing thought is that I would likely have decided as Saul did. I know that familiar anxiety, that inner "push" that seeks some kind of forward movement so that we "do something" and "get it over with" in the face of threat. Waiting, especially waiting for quite some period of time, without taking action of some sort or resolving the tension, can be excruciatingly difficult for a leader.

In hindsight, Saul would have been smartest had he settled down, worked on developing a "non-anxious presence" (to quote the psychologist Edwin H. Friedman), and refused to let the looming threat push him into any precipitate action. He should have waited for the guidance and blessing of God to come in its own time.

That's very easy to say if you're looking back on history. It's not at all easy in the moment. How do you know the guidance will show up if you wait two hours longer? How do you know the guidance is coming at all? Is Saul's story an example, or is it just one incident? Is it always smarter to wait for guidance or peace before moving to deal with threat?