King Saul & King David: A Cursory Look

King Saul & King David: A Cursory Look 

The leadership styles of the first and second kings of Israel have always intrigued me. When I look around the world today, I often see striking similarities between their worlds and our own. Questions arise, such as: Was David favored over Saul? Was Saul truly evil? Was David really the epitome of kingship?

In those days, the children of Israel relied on prophets for guidance, and Samuel was the one who communicated with God on their behalf. However, as they became more exposed to the nations around them, they began to desire a royal system of government, with a king at the helm. The timing of their request clashed with God's plan, and although it wasn’t the right time, their request was granted. (If God had intended for a monarchy, David would likely have been His chosen king, though he might not have been born at that time.) As a result, Saul became the candidate. Saul, by the standards of the day, was a model of goodness—someone who stood out in terms of stature, intelligence, and leadership. In fact, he was regarded as the finest man in Israel at the time. However, despite his outward qualities, Saul had human frailties—emotional weaknesses, such as timidity and fear.

Saul was eventually anointed king, and this divine anointing transformed him into a leader whom Israel would willingly follow, one who could lead them into battle. The anointing was seen as God's mark on Saul, and anyone who revered God would revere the one He had anointed. However, from a natural perspective, Saul's anointing did little to address many of his physical and emotional weaknesses. He relied heavily on Samuel for guidance, and when Samuel died, Saul felt as if he had lost his spiritual compass. He sought desperately to communicate with Samuel even after his death. His flaws were evident when he spared the best of the Amalekites' possessions, defying God's command to destroy everything. This act revealed his tendency to follow his own desires, driven by fear and worldly wisdom, even though both Saul and David were equally anointed men.

Does anointing not help overcome weakness? In the Old Testament, anointing was primarily for God's purposes, making those anointed instruments for achieving His will. Anointing did not automatically eradicate a person's natural weaknesses. Only the strength that came through Jesus' death and resurrection could bring regeneration, allowing human weaknesses to be exchanged for divine strength.

Prophets, priests, and kings of the Old Testament operated in their natural powers, and the anointing increased the effectiveness of their abilities. Their natural strengths and weaknesses were largely unaffected by the anointing. However, God also gave laws and commandments to ensure that their human weaknesses did not lead to their destruction. These laws were delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai. Saul, fearful of losing his throne to David's family, was consumed by these fears. Whether it was the murder of over 85 priests or his complete alienation of David, Saul lived a tormented life. Yet, his torment did not prevent him from remaining king until his death by suicide.

To a natural king with natural desires, Saul's choices may not seem out of the ordinary. However, despite his external goodness, Saul was the only option Israel had for a king. This highlights the short-sightedness of human judgment, which often relies on what the eyes can see, rather than what the spirit of God reveals. Saul's dependence on God shifted to a reliance on his own wisdom and methods. When God no longer spoke to him through prophets or dreams, Saul sought spiritual advice from other sources, but he never regained the divine backing he had once experienced. His consultation with the medium at Endor sealed his fate, and he ultimately took his own life.

When David was chosen to be anointed, his father Jesse presented his older sons, who were physically impressive men. However, God, through Samuel, understood the limitations of human goodness in matters of royalty, which required not only physical strength but spiritual wisdom. Kings don't just rule over their people; they have a significant role in the spiritual realm.

David, by nature, was a different kind of leader than Saul. While Saul was timid, David was brave and courageous. While Saul was self-centered, David was concerned with God and His people. While Saul depended on Samuel, David relied on God within him. These were the reasons David was described as a man after God's own heart.

David's courage and strength were demonstrated even at a young age. When he tended sheep, he didn’t hesitate to protect them from lions and bears. Unlike others who might have avoided confrontation, David realized that if he allowed the lion to take one sheep, it would return for more. This understanding motivated him to face the lion and the bear and protect his flock. Similarly, when David faced Goliath, he recognized that the giant was a threat to Israel's very survival and the worship of their God. David’s alignment with God gave him the courage to defeat Goliath. These feats of courage were in stark contrast to Saul’s constant fear. Saul, plagued by evil spirits, would lash out in anger, while David, through playing his lyre, would calm those same spirits.

David was a true leader, both inside and out. Even when he had the opportunity to kill Saul, he refrained, feeling guilty for even cutting Saul’s garment. David's reliance on God was evident, and his ascension to the throne seemed like a mere formality. Before Saul's death, David had already demonstrated the wisdom and understanding required to rule. His ability to make wise decisions was evident, such as when, after his wives and children were captured, he encouraged himself in the Lord and found a way to recover them, unlike Saul, who relied on natural methods to address his problems.

David's personal relationship with God was evident in his ability to hear from God and make decisions based on that guidance. Saul, on the other hand, showed no such connection, often relying on his own understanding. The lessons of these two kings highlight that leading God's chosen people is not an easy task. Saul fought and won battles, but victory was always elusive. David, however, experienced true victory, not only in battle but in his personal relationship with God. His reign was marked by wisdom and understanding, and his son Solomon succeeded him, continuing his legacy.

Saul's leadership was grounded in his natural understanding, devoid of divine insight. When things went wrong, he turned to earthly sources for guidance. God, who sees the end from the beginning, knew that Israel’s choice of Saul was not in alignment with His timing. Despite this, the Israelites were content with Saul as their king.

David, on the other hand, exemplified the kind of king God desired. Though greater than Saul in many ways, David’s reign still showed that human weaknesses could hinder the fulfillment of God's purpose. If David's greatness and his son Solomon's wisdom were sufficient for the perfection of humanity, there would have been no need for Jesus. Jesus came to overcome all human imperfection, even the weaknesses of David and all mankind.