We have seen that because Amalek’s hand
was laid upon the throne of the Lord war was declared from generation to
generation. Let us pursue this vital
subject further. It will be remembered
that after Saul had been king for some time, we read:--
“So Saul took possession of the kingdom
over Israel, and made war round about against all his enemies, against Moab,
and against the sons of Ammon, and against Edom . . . . . and smote the
Amalekites” (I Sam. xiv. 47, 48).
Following this general deliverance of
Israel from their hereditary foes comes the more explicit command to:--
“Smite Amalek, and utterly
destroy all that they have, and spare them not” (I Samuel xv. 3).
The story is well-known to us. Saul smote the Amalekites, but he took Agag
the king of the Amalekites alive. Saul
and the people also refused to destroy the best of the sheep and the oxen, and
“all that was good”.
The flesh, the old man, typified by
Amalek, is too often spared to-day. In
the sight of God there is “no good thing” in the flesh, but it is rare to find
that believer who is so taught of God that he has reached the height of Philippians iii. and, making no comparison between the flesh
cultured and the flesh manifestly depraved, repudiates it entirely and rejoices
to stand beneath the Banner of the cross.
Many who condemn Saul would be found sharing this “good” thing of the
flesh. Too often we add to our sin by
hypocrisy. Saul said:--
“The people took of the spoil, sheep and
oxen, the chief of the things which should have been utterly destroyed, TO
SACRIFICE UNTO THE LORD thy God in Gilgal” (I.Sam.xv.21).
“In Gilgal”! The place where the reproach of Egypt was
rolled away (Josh.v.9), where the rite of circumcision which sets forth the
repudiation of the flesh (Col. ii. 11) was solemnly carried out by all Israel
before they set foot in the land of promise, there above all places would Saul
offer the sacrifice of the flesh and dishonour the Lord. This was to go in the way of Cain. The very next thing that Samuel is instructed
to do after this is to anoint David king (I Samuel xvi.). That the throne of the kings of Israel could
be spoken of as “the throne of the Lord”
I.Chron.xxix.23 makes clear:--
“Then Solomon sat on the
throne of the Lord as king instead of David his father.”
The purpose of God foreshadowed in the
earthly kingdom of Israel will be brought to a glorious conclusion by the Lord
Jesus Christ. When He takes to Himself
His great power and reigns, He will not rest until all enemies are
abolished. There will be no sparing of
Amalek then. Those readers who have
grasped the significance of the two seeds (see volume XIII, page 52 and the
pamphlet “The Reconciliation of All Things”) will perceive it in operation here,
for Amalek though descended from Abraham was not counted as the seed, for that
line came through Isaac and Jacob, whereas Amalek descended from Esau.
Mordecai
and Haman.
One other occasion is given in Scripture
to show the character of Amalek and to foreshadow the end. The book of Esther records that Haman was
advanced by the king above all the princes that were with him, and that all the
king’s servants bowed down before him.
It further says that “Mordecai bowed not, nor did him reverence” (Esther
iii. 2). Why was this?
“Haman was the son of Hammedatha the
AGAGITE” (Esther.iii.1).
Haman was the descendant of one of the
Amalekite kings, and Josephus (ant. xi. 6, 5) calls him an Amalekite. What was this man’s attitude towards Israel?
“Haman sought to destroy all the Jews that
were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus” (Esther iii. 6).
As a result of Esther’s noble
intervention, Haman the Agagite is first compelled to do honour to Mordecai,
and then to suffer the fate upon his own gallows that he had planned for the
Jew. We cannot say that Haman was a
descendant of that Agag who was spared by Saul, but typically we can see that
in the sparing of one Amalekite in the early days of Israel’s kingdom, Saul
jeopardized the whole nation under the reign of Ahasuerus. So must it be with the flesh.
“He that soweth to his flesh shall of his
flesh reap corruption” (Gal. vi. 8).
“Because the minding of the flesh is
enmity against God” (Rom.viii.7).
It certainly is extremely suggestive to
read the genealogy of Mordecai in Esther
ii. 5:--
“Now in Shushan the palace there was a
certain Jew, whose name was Mordecai, the son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the
son of Kish, a Benjaminite.”
Saul, who so signally failed concerning
Agag, is of the same line as Mordecai who so signally succeeded. Both were of the line of Kish, a
Banjaminite. Saul loses his kingdom, and
David is sought out and anointed immediately after the failure of Saul
concerning Agag. Mordecai, however,
dispossess the Amalekite, and succeeds to his office:--
“For Mordecai the Jew was next unto king
Ahasuerus, and great among the Jews, and accepted of the multitude of his
brethren, seeking the wealth of his people, and speaking peace to all his seed”
(Esther x. 3).
This foreshadows the purpose of the Lord
and the happy results that will follow the casting down of all opposition and
the introduction of that perfect day when God will be all in all. The throne of God and the purposes connected
therewith have been assailed. Satan is
the arch rebel, and the principalities and powers directly under him are the
Amalekties of the church of the one body.
Just as Amalek barred the way towards the land of promise, so in the
heavenly places are the opposing principalities and powers. There our conflict lies.
This conflict of the age is figured
throughout Scripture under various titles.
The Canaanites were to be utterly destroyed by the conquering
Israelites. Each one may see in these
ancient foes the sketch of his own. Each
dispensation, too, has somewhat parallel marks.
Blessed be God, Satan is to be overcome, and the words of Zech. xiv. 21
are to be understood in their fullest and highest sense:--
“In that day there shall be
no more Canaanite in the house of the Lord of hosts.”
No comments:
Post a Comment