Misdirected Ambition

1 Samuel 15 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

1 Samuel 15

1 Samuel said to Saul, "I am the one the LORD sent
to anoint you king over his people Israel; so
listen now to the message from the LORD.

2 This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will
punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel
when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt

3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally
destroy [a] everything that belongs to them. Do
not spare them; put to death men and women,
children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels
and donkeys.' "

4 So Saul summoned the men and mustered them at
Telaim—two hundred thousand foot soldiers and
ten thousand men from Judah.

5 Saul went to the city of Amalek and set an
ambush in the ravine.

6 Then he said to the Kenites, "Go away, leave the
Amalekites so that I do not destroy you along
with them; for you showed kindness to all the
Israelites when they came up out of Egypt." So
the Kenites moved away from the Amalekites.

7 Then Saul attacked the Amalekites all the way
from Havilah to Shur, to the east of Egypt.

8 He took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and
all his people he totally destroyed with the
sword.

9 But Saul and the army spared Agag and the best
of the sheep and cattle, the fat calves [b] and
lambs—everything that was good. These they were
unwilling to destroy completely, but everything
that was despised and weak they totally destroyed.

10 Then the word of the LORD came to Samuel:

11 "I am grieved that I have made Saul king,
because he has turned away from me and has not
carried out my instructions." Samuel was troubled,
and he cried out to the LORD all that night.

12 Early in the morning Samuel got up and went to
meet Saul, but he was told, "Saul has gone to
Carmel. There he has set up a monument in his own
honor and has turned and gone on down to Gilgal."

13 When Samuel reached him, Saul said, "The LORD
bless you! I have carried out the LORD's
instructions."

14 But Samuel said, "What then is this bleating of
sheep in my ears? What is this lowing of cattle
that I hear?"

www.biblegateway.com

There is a metaphor in this passage for those who
choose to harbor the mistaken belief that there
is something from the world's value system that
will be acceptable to G-d. Saul was given explicit
directions to destroy everything in the attack
against the Amalekites. There was no ambiguity.
But he had other ambitions, to make himself look
good and to attempt to gain the favor of the
people under him by giving in to their desire for
a split of the spoils of war. At least that's the
way it appears, given that he had a monument raised
in his honor. Saul gave in to selfish ambition.
Samuel wasn't fooled at all.

If you take time to read the rest of the passage,
you will find that this mistake cost Saul the royal
lineage, and it was given to David and his
descendents. There is an illustration here that
selfish ambition will take you places that you
don't want to go. There is no shortage of examples
in the present time, if you bother to look around.

Compromise, compromise, compromise. We do it all
the time. Most of us are fortunate enough to not
be in the position that Saul found himself in, with
an explicit instruction from G-d to take a specific
action and then fail to do so. We don't have to
face the devastating consequences that followed
for Saul and his family. If you are an average
person though, you probably have experienced the
consequence of compromise. Some of us just don't
have the will to directly confront the compromise
in our own lives. Like Saul, we prefer to kid
ourselves about the vanitys we entertain. It's
so obvious, yet we're so helpless against it.
Sometimes we get help from others. A popular TV
show these days is 'Intervention'. I guess it's
supposed to portray this drama of helping those
who can't help themselves.

The way I see it, this is what happened to Christian
theology around the time of Darwin. There was a
desire on the part of the christian leadership to
gain acceptability from the 'scientific' world.
Where has that gotten us? You would think that
perhaps someone would have recognized that Newton
didn't seem to have a problem with harmonizing
theology and science. There are others.

Where's the conviction? You would think that
christianity has nothing to offer. And that's the
way it's presented these days. What else can we
give away in terms of compromise? When the doctrine
of creation was surrendered, they gave it all away.
We are in Saul's position. This is what I've seen
in my own time, that compromise leads to surrender
until the point that there is nothing left to
give away. It's a perilous predicament. The sad
point is that there isn't even any recognition of
the situation, by many. There is no need to argue
about it, just hear the words of Samuel, What then
is this... that I hear?

Some have not given up yet. Whatever you might
think of ReMine's effort, I have to recognize
that at least he's taking a stab at it. There
are others. I'd rather take my stand with Gideon's
300, because if there is one thing for certain,
it's not about a popularity contest, or a popular
election. It's just as the Apostle put it 2000
years ago:

"For since the creation of the world G-d's
invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine
nature—have been clearly seen, being understood
from what has been made, so that men are without
excuse." Rom. 1:20

In other words, there is no need to compromise the
doctrine of creation.

So, let's take another look at ReMine's book and
see if we can find any evidence for creation in the
doctrine of intelligent design. Here's a quote:

" *The data is the handiwork of an intelligent
designer who fashioned it in secret, without
being seen by anyone, and who, with a purpose,
specially placed it here.*

Many feel this explanation is inherently unscientific,
yet they are mistaken. Piltdown Man involved
precisely this idea.

Piltdown Man was a hoax. The perpetrator's identity
is still uncertain, yet scientists deduced his
*existence* no less. Scientists did not have to
catch the hoaxer 'in the act' to make his existence
a fact. The details of the case made 'intelligent
design' tenable and all naturalistic explanations
untenable.

Around 1908 a group of scientists were digging
near Piltdown, England in search of man's fossil
ancestors. Several ancient-looking bones were
found in the pit. The bones -- known as Piltdown
Man -- included a cranium and mandible. The jaw
was ape-like, containing two molar teeth, worn flat
as commonly found in humans, but never in apes.
Unfortunately, the jaw was broken in just the two
places that might have determined its relationship
with the skull: the chin region and the area of
articulation with the cranium. For over forty
years, scientists discussed Piltdown Man and its
alloted position in pre-human evolutionary lineages.

In the 1950's, science eventually detected the hoax
through three lines of evidence. First, when bones
are buried underground, they readily absorb fluorine
from the soil. A chemical test showed the bones
contained only trace amounts of fluorine, proving
they could not have been in the soil for long.
Second, the tooth surfaces had unusual scratch
marks, presumably from a file used to reshape the
teeth. Third, the bones had a potassium bichromate
stain, making them look old. Scientists considered
these findings to be compelling evidence of intentional
fraud. Scientists later showed Piltdown Man had
been fabricated from a human skull and an orangutan
jaw.

Scientists also deduced information about the forger.
The forger knew many things to include to be
convincing, yet the forger's main skill was in
knowing what to leave out. The hoaxer skillfully
left out the chin and the jaw point -- just the
two structures that would have disclosed the hoax,
had they been present. The hoaxer had an acute
awareness of the scientific climate.

This example shows how science can discriminate
between an intelligent designer and naturalistic
causes. It also shows that science can go further
and deduce a designer's character traits and motives.
Science does this based on the *pattern* of the
data."pp30-1

Piltdown Man is a well known hoax. It's probably
so famous because of the attention that it got at
the time of 'discovery'(or invention). I have to
give credit to the folks who were willing to uncover
the hoax, but it did take about fifty years. It
serves as another reminder that scientific findings
are always subject to revision, and the awareness
that this is not the only hoax ever conceived.
As the saying goes, There is never only one
cockroach. I'd like to suggest that more recent
deceptions are more highly refined. If you are
willing and able to make the effort you will find
that there are many distortions and misrepresentations
circulating as 'scientific' evidence for evolution.

But I hope by now, that you grasp the basic idea
that evolution is a doctrine. ReMine's illustration
is excellent to make the point about seeing evidence
for a designer from looking at a design. But I'm
still not convinced that there isn't a leap of
faith involved, whichever direction you take on
the origins issue. Evidence brings you to a point
of recognition, that there is something unseen.
But who or what it is that's unseen, requires
faith. The Apostle in Romans 1, says that even
in this case, we are left without excuse. In
other words, there's enough evidence in what we
can see to be convinced.