its somewhat questionable history is reflected. On the one hand, kingship could be seen as a rejection of God’s own kingship. On the other hand, it was a gift from God, a model and a channel through which God’s relationship with Israel could be illustrated and strengthened.”23
Consequently, God counseled Samuel: “Now listen to them, but warm them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do.” In greater detail, “He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and others of fifties, and others plow the ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war.”
But the elders insisted, “We want a king over us. Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.” Without regard for their unique calling as the chosen people, and in this capacity, to serve as a light to the Gentiles.
Samuel subsequently summoned the people of Israel before the Lord at Mizpah, to anoint a ruler over them. “We cannot be sure how the lottery took place. But the indication of God’s choice through the drawing of lots is fairly common throughout Scripture and various, sometimes now obscure, methods being used. The king is appointed from among the people and, whatever powers he might be assigned, he remains one of them.”24
In any case, Saul appears as a likely candidate. He was from the relatively small tribe of Benjamin, and so should not fuel controversy among the major clans. He was also “an impressive young man without equal among the Israelites—a head taller than any of the others” (1 Sam. 9:2), and appealingly humble (9:21, 10:22). As a matter of record, the rulers of the united monarchy had an auspicious beginning, while falling away with the passing of time. David’s record would remain the least tarnished, due in large measure to his deep sense of contrition.
The monarchy consisted of an intricate system of checks and balances. There was the king. Qualifications aside, if he observed the covenant stipulations, the people would prosper. If not, they would suffer along with him. In brief, like ruler, like people.
There were the prophets. Whose monumental task was to fine-tune the people to their covenant commitment. “What manner of man is the prophet?” Abraham Heschel rhetorically inquires. “To us a single act of injustice—cheating in business, exploitation of the poor—is slight; to the prophets, a disaster. To us injustice is injurious to the welfare of the people; to the prophets it is a deathblow to existence; to us, an episode, to the, a catastrophe, a threat to the world.”25
There were the priests. Such provided meaningful ritual for worship purposes. While accenting God’s holiness and righteous resolve. As a reminder of the human proclivity to sin, and as a summons to repentance and faith.
There were the sages. Who were more perceptive than the general populace. As a result, more skilled in engaging life. Some of whom acted in an official capacity to lend guidance to royalty. Others qualified as an elder. In ideal terms, as extended to parents in their privileged role in guiding their offspring.
Finally, there were the people. Without their consent, the efforts of those in authority would be fruitless. Without their participation, the task would be impossible, recalling the sage advice, “One for all, and all for one.”
David was subsequently informed “Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever (2 Sam. 7:16). Forever would evolve into the anticipation of a Messiah, from the lineage of David.
“How great you are, O Sovereign Lord!” David exclaims. There is no one like you, and there is no God but you. And who is like your people Israel—the one nation on earth that God went out to redeem as a people for himself. You have established your people forever, and you, o lord, have become their God.”
The Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream, and invited him: “Ask whatever you want me to give you” (1 Kings 3:5).
“Now, O Lord my God, you have made your servant king in place of my father David,” Solomon allowed. “But I am only a little child and do not know how to carry out my duties. So give your servant a discerning heart to govern your people and to distinguish between right and wrong.?
This greatly pleased the Lord, so that he replied: “I will give you a wise and discerning heart, so that there will never have been anyone like you, nor will there ever be. Moreover, I will give you what you have not asked for—both riches and honor.” And so it came to pass, only to have Solomon violate his covenant obligations. Along with the ominous warning that this would eventuate with the division of the kingdom.
With the exile. So it was that Jeroboam rebelled against Solomon, and fled to Egypt until the latter’s demise. He then, along with the whole assembly of Israel, approached Rehoboam with the observation: “Your father put a heavy yoke on us, but now lighten the harsh labor and heavy yoke he put on us, and we will serve your” (1 Kings 12:4).
Rehoboam rejected the advice of the elders who had served his father, in favor of young men of his age. “My father made your yoke heavy; I will make it heavier,” he stridently replied. “My father scourged you with whips; I will scourge you with scorpions.”
When all Israel saw that the king refused to heed their request, they inquired: “What share do we have in David, what part is Jesse’s son? To your tents, O Israel! Look after your own house, O David!” And so the kingdom was rent in two.
With little exception, Israel would remain impervious to the pleas of the prophets. It plunged headlong into destruction, which eventuated in the fall of Samaria to the Assyrians. As if caught in a tight spiral, from which there was not recovery.
The Southern Kingdom fared better, benefitting from periodic spiritual renewals. For instance, Josiah “went up to the temple of the Lord with the men of Judah, the people of Jerusalem, the priests and the prophets—all of the people from the Covenant, which had been found in the temple of the Lord” (2 Kings 23:2). For the purpose of renewing the covenant. “then all the people pledged themselves to the covenant.”
His efforts notwithstanding, Judah’s days were numbered. Jehoahaz did evil in the eyes of the Lord (cf. 23:32), as did Jehoiakim (cf. 24:9), and Zedekiah (cf. 24:19). As an evil legacy passed on from one reign to the next. So it came to pass that the Babylonians lay siege to Jerusalem. Then the city wall was broken through. Every important building was burned to the ground. Including the temple and palace. And so the people were taken a way into captivity, leaving behind some of the poorest people to work the vineyards and fields.
Resulting in an imaginative reconstruction: “The caravan had made its way up the slopes of the Trans-Jordan Plateau. From there it would travel along the King’s Highway toward Damascus and eventually Babylon. The column paused long enough to look back toward Jerusalem. The torched city was bellowing smoke into the air.”26 The captives wondered what the future held with the City of the Great King devastated, and the temple complex destroyed.
As for apt commentary, “Almost all the old symbol systems had been rendered useless. Almost all the old institutions no longer functioned. What kind of future was possible for a people who had so alienated their God that categorical rejection was his necessary response?”27
“By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept when we remembered Zion,” the experience of exile is painfully recalled (Psa. 137:1). “Our
