Kings and the Rule of God

Where In the Bible: Joshua to Chronicles

In this section of the story, God’s people transition from being wandering nomads to an established nation, fulfilling God’s promise to Abraham to give his descendants land. The book of Joshua deals with the conquest of the land from the Canaanites, whose immorality had reached full measure and who were experiencing the judgment of God (see Gen. 15:16). The conquest was steady and gradual, but ends with Israel in possession of the land. Over the coming generations a leadership crisis ensues, with the people repeatedly turning from God over the period of the judges. It was clear that a king was needed, but the kings they got were a mixed bag: Saul, David and Solomon all showed some initial promise, but in different ways fell short. After Solomon the kingdom divided, and both north and south had a succession of kings, the majority of who rejected God’s rule and led the people into idolatry, injustice and immorality.

The Need for a Godly King (Jud. 21:25, 1 Sam. 16:1-3): Through the first and second generations after the people had left Egypt, they were led by Moses and then Joshua, and things work quite well. Once Joshua died, there was no immediate successor to lead the people. . Left without leadership, they turned from God to idols and suffer defeats. They then cried out to God, who would send a deliverer (known as a judge) to save them. Once this judge died, the people would be back to their initial state and the cycle would repeat (see Jud. 2:10-19). This pattern repeats several times though the book of judges, as we see people like Deborah, Gideon, Samson and others raised up to lead the people. As the book goes on we see ever-increasing moral compromise, both in the judges themselves and in the nation at large. The final chapters of the book contains some of the bleakest stories in the Bible about just how depraved a society that has turned away from God can be. The verdict of the book of Judges is: “in those days Israel had not king; everyone did as they saw fit.” (Jud. 17:6, 18:1, 19:1, 21:25) . When the people did cry out for a king, it did not come from good motives but rather a desire to be like the other nations around them (1 Samuel 8:19-20). Initially they got what they ask for. Saul looked the part. He was tall and handsome (1 Sam. 9:2) and exactly what you would look for in a king according to human standards. It soon becomes clear that this is not what the people need, and Saul ruled according to his own pride and self-sufficiency rather than relying on God. What is needed is another king, one chosen by God because of his heart, and this is what we get in David (1 Sam. 16:1-13). Whilst his brothers may have looked like Saul in appearance, David had been out in the fields cultivating a heart for God. When he was anointed king, he led by faith (e.g. stepping out to fight Goliath trusting in God – 1 Sam. 17) and humility (e.g. refusing to take things into his own hands and kill Saul, but trusting in God’s plan and timing – 1 Sam. 24). This is much more like the kind of king that was needed.

Establishment In the Land (2 Sam. 7:1-2): During the time of the kingship being instituted, the people became settled in the land and transitioned from being sojourners to an established nation. This began in the battles fought by Joshua. This is not the sermon to get into too much detail about the conquest from an apologetics angle: it is enough to note that (a) the conquest is a faithful fulfilment of God’s promise to Abraham, (b) the conquest is a judgement on the immorality of the Canaanites, and (c) many of the battles are reported using hyperbolic language. By the end of Joshua the conquest is considered complete, and all God’s promises having come to pass (see Jos. 23:14). It was during the reign of David that this settling of the land took on a new permanence, with the establishment of Jerusalem as a capital city (2 Sam. 5:9-10), the relocation of the ark of the covenant (2 Sam. 6), and the building of a temple (envisioned by David in 2 Sam. 7 and built by Solomon in 1 Kings 6). This establishment marked a new season for God’s people. It was a positive thing in that it brought them peace and prosperity and the fulfilment of God’s promise. At the same time it introduced the dangers of complacency and the domestication of God. There was less impetus to live by faith and seek God, and more temptation to trust in self, knowing that the land, the people and even the presence of God were seemingly within their control.

Abuse of Power and Corrupt Kings (Lev. 9:5-7): Whilst not having a king was the cause of many of Israel’s problems in the book of Judges, the kings they ended up with brought problems of their own. Saul looked the part to the human eye, but did not rule in submission to God’s authority, and so the throne was taken from him. David started well. He was called a king after God’s own heart, was chosen by God, and as we have seen in his early days he led with faith and obedience. The monarchy reached its high point under David with God’s promise to him of an eternal dynasty in 2 Sam. 7. Nevertheless, the in the latter stages of David’s reign, he fails to live up to the promise and increasingly resembles Saul: taking for himself multiple wives (even murdering Uriah to cover up forcibly taking his wife Bathsheba for himself), ruling through violence and sword, and amassing a large fighting force and trusting in the numbers of soldiers at his disposal (2 Sam. 24). In the latter stages of his life, David falls short on every point of God’s description of what a king should be (Deut. 17:14-17). David’s son Solomon was an even more stark example of this. He also began well by asking God for wisdom (1 Kgs. 2:9), but then his rule was characterised by the accumulation of women, wealth and military might. and he turned from the Lord to foreign gods. (1 Kgs. 11:9). Following Solomon, the kingdom split and both north and south were ruled by many kings over the coming centuries. Occasionally a king would do good and bring the people back to God, but for the most part the kings were corrupt and abused their power to lead the nation into injustice, immorality and idolatry. These kings could not bring about God’s people living in harmony with each other and with God. A better king is still needed.

Potential Applications:

• The passage challenges how we see leaders – both in the church and the nation. We do need leaders and would struggle without them, but we should not put our trust in any human leaders to bring about God’s perfect promises.
• The complacency of the people in the land is challenging for any of us who are at a settled stage of life. It can be easy to forget God and no longer live by faith.
• Some of us are in positions of power and the challenge is to lead like early David, fully trusting in God, rather than the other examples of kings who led by their own strength and for their own gain.