Apparently, the passage in Second Samuel offers a vignette of how God functions relative to mankind in common grace. There are secondary lessons in the passage about King David’s day-to-day relationship with God for the administration of Israel; the ugliness about warfare and revenge, especially in God’s eyes; and, the lesson about human dignity in the story of Rizpah, a woman who went well out of her way to protect the bodies of murdered men from vulture ravaging. All factors had an influence on the restoration of prayer effectiveness, after three years of drought in Israel. The story provides a prophet’s understanding and explanation of why mankind is visited with sorrows, and how we can emerge from them. The sorrows may be generated from any number of sources including nature.
From the passage one can assume that God’s judgments, in common grace, are related to nature. This assumption is strengthened in numerous biblical and other historical events. The point is especially arresting on the earthquake and the three hours of darkness attending the crucifixion of Christ. That factor from Golgotha seems to have caused the centurion and some of his men to say: Surely this man was the Son of God. The storm attending the crucifixion has something to say to us. It likely gave pause in later conversations about the event. The lesson appears to be that God uses nature to communicate some of his pleasure and displeasure with the conduct of mankind within the bounds of human nature and mortality.
There is an additional point growing out of the Samuel passage – that God shows part of his displeasure by disregarding prayer. For three years he disregarded the prayers of the people for relief from drought. King David finally got the message, and set out to find solution through a humbling mission with the enemy. In the negotiations the enemy wanted correction from Saul’s family for the horrors of the wars of Saul, now deceased. David did the best he could, keeping his pledge to Jonathan who also died with his father in the war. Descendants of Saul were executed by the enemy. Rizpah, a lay person, became witness against the leaders in the protection of the remains of these sacrificed to war and revenge. David took the clue from her and gave them decent burial, an act of dignity honoring the creation of God, and implying human folly. Only then did restoration begin, the rains came and prayer value returned.
Given the humanistic (secular) context of the world, one can’t expect leaders of the world to experiment with the concepts of peace, of love for others, of order and righteous conduct. To launch an experiment that included effective prayer from the people would be labeled too religious. A commentator in a leading publication noted that it is difficult to evaluate what the administration of Jimmy Carter might have been in the United States: because he was too religious. Politics and religion clashed. The events and the nations were not with him in his context of Christian concern. He served the world more effectively as a compassionate leader and activist after his administration in Washington. His life was biblically oriented.
From Habakkuk 3:15, the reader learns that God’s people will note the excesses of nature causing trouble or distress. According to the prophet, this should not occupy the life of the child of God who will rely on God, his source of deliverance. That reliance begins with prayer. It joins the woman, Rizpah, who stays with her part in the life scenario until the event is closed for society and God – and God’s forgiveness permits life to go on in normalcy. Normal life is supposed to be decency. What is likely the scenario for humanistic persons at prayer, perhaps praying for no other reason than to release personal tension? That God hears them we can be rather sure, as we can be sure he hears any language, even swearing, which is a form of human prayer. Hearing is not answering. To gain answers, prayers must be sent in a context acceptable to the addressed person. It must be addressed to God, in the signature of Jesus Christ by a person of faith so that by that signature the prayer will be considered, even if the response is not to the liking of the sender. The sender does not determine the answer, but can be sure of genuine consideration to proper ends. Happily for us accepted prayer may be amended by God’s good will. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020