Making Kings
Today’s scripture passage finds us at a pivotal point in the history of our spiritual ancestors. It’s been many years since the people of Israel escaped captivity in Egypt. They have settled in a new land, and have spent years being governed by judges, among them Deborah and Gideon and Samson, whose stories can be found in the book of Judges. These judges were military leaders, but not monarchs.
The land in which the people of Israel resided was not under threat by a single great power, and a lot of tribal-level fighting was taking place. This had recently resulted in the Philistines taking possession of the Ark of the Covenant, in which the tablets bearing God’s commandments resided.
Thankfully, the Ark was returned when the Philistines were struck ill, but the Israelites still had problems. Their recent string of judges — which included Eli, Eli’s sons, and Samuel’s sons — had not inspired confidence due to their tendencies toward corruption.
Samuel was an exception to this. He was the judge after Eli, and also a priest and a prophet. (Collins, 234) But he wasn’t a military leader like the other judges. These combined issues might be why the elders of Israel approached Samuel asking for a king to be appointed. Samuel was a righteous man, but not a military leader. But their judges who were military leaders — including Samuel’s own sons! — hadn’t served Israel well.
The elders want a king like the “other nations” have. This is one of those lines that reminds me that though our spiritual ancestors lived in a very different context than ours, some things haven’t changed. Next thing you know, they’re going to want gold rims on their chariot wheels like the Philistines have!
Samuel wasn’t pleased with their request for a king, but the scripture doesn’t say why. I think at least in part it stung because it was a knock on his sons, whom Samuel himself appointed over Israel. He might also have been concerned with the influence the surrounding tribes seemed to have on the elders.
If we look at history from the bottom, meaning from the perspective of those who held less influence in that society, one wonders if their desires were being represented by the elders. What would a king mean for those living on the margins? In his role as a prophet, was Samuel considering their circumstances?
Biblical scholar Bruce Birch points out another consideration when he writes that “To serve a king is to return to bondage, to reverse what God had done in the exodus deliverance. . . . For the security of a king, the people would surrender their freedom.” (Birch, 371) Israel’s prior experience under a monarch had not been a positive one.
Regardless of the source of his displeasure, God reassures Samuel that the people are rejecting God and not him. God asks that he not deny their request, but to first warn them of what is to come once a king is named. He speaks of the children of the elders being conscripted into the military and put to work in other ways, of their land and harvest and livestock being taken, and that ultimately they would be enslaved. As Birch writes, “Samuel’s speech is a catalog of the royal abuse of power. Many have observed that it seems to reflect Israel’s later experience with its own kings, especially Solomon.” (Birch, 370)
Samuel speaks of what it’s like to live in a monarchy, both in years prior and in years to come. For Israel in particular, the monarchy that begins following the request of the elders ultimately “ends in the defeat and destruction of [that] kingdom.” (Pyper, loc. 12111)
It might be easy to sit back smugly and take pleasure in the fact that we don’t live in a monarchy. We aren’t subject to kings and queens, and I sometimes shake my head at the attention and ceremony afforded the royals in the UK and other countries.
For me and perhaps for you, the idea of living in a monarchy doesn’t resonate. I think that might be part of the reason some of us struggle with the king-related language used in scripture, hymns, and church readings. Many kingdoms in human history were unpleasant places, especially for the vast majority of folks who existed below the ruling class. You could argue that Christianity’s alliances with various empires throughout history, beginning with the one in Rome, are the source of much of its regrettable past. The residue of Christendom can still be found in churches in our country, and some people exhibit more allegiance to those traditions than to the message of Jesus at the core of Christianity.
I think referring to God as “king” or “lord” or even “queen” is actually limiting when speaking of the creator of the universe. We don’t live in a context where a king is the highest power, so such language might not be enough. Wilda Gafney has an admirable array of alternative designations that includes the following:
AGELESS GOD
AGELESS ONE
ALL-KNOWING GOD
ALL-KNOWING ONE
ALL-SEEING GOD
ALMIGHTY
ANCIENT OF DAYS
ANCIENT ONE
ARK OF SAFETY
AUTHOR OF LIFE (Gafney, 329)
And those are just the a’s!
So one way of reading today’s scripture passage “has led to a suspicion of kingship that has not always helped relationships between the church and the state. [Hugh Pyper writes that] in response to the Geneva Bible’s questioning of royal legitimacy in the footnotes to passages such as this, based on its endorsement of the Calvinist position that the people have the right to depose a tyrannous ruler, King James decreed that the new version of the Bible produced under his sponsorship should have no footnotes.” (Pyper, loc. 12221) It sounds like King James was not a fan of critical thinking.
The Geneva Bible was one of the first English translations of the Bible, and dates back to 1560. The King James Version was published 51 years later, and for some it is still the king of Bibles, even with its antiquated language and lack of footnotes. Archaeologists have discovered and dated many Hebrew and Greek biblical manuscripts since 1611, and biblical scholars have pieced them together and improved translations as a result, but some people still swear allegiance to the King James Version. You might say they make a king of the KJV. For them, doing so is less complicated than accommodating advances in biblical scholarship and the new translations that have emerged as a result.
Such a yearning for simplicity might help explain the motivations of those who attempt to marginalize our LGBTQ siblings from a religious standpoint. They crown a few lines of scripture that reflect practices belonging to ancient places and times, ignoring the core biblical messages of love and justice that transcend time and culture. Sadly, you’re likely to find some street preachers at Harrisburg’s PrideFest later this month, spewing hatred at the adults and children trying to peacefully attend a festival devoted to safety, equality, and harmony. The street preachers have made a king of a cultural issue, an issue that didn’t even warrant mention by the founder of the faith they claim.
I guess kings do exist within our borders. They might take the form of symbols, such as the King James Bible or the US flag. They might take the form of issues, such as LGBTQ rights or gun control. We might even metaphorically crown people as queens and kings from time to time, including politicians and celebrities.
Returning to Samuel, I mentioned that one reading of today’s scripture passage paints the choosing of a king in a negative light. Certainly Samuel points out several consequences of being subjects, but Hugh Pyper questions whether those are worse than the conditions that led them to request a king:
“Read in context . . . is it quite the condemnation that Samuel seems to think? After all, what he warns the people is that the king they are seeking will organize the army, give their sons a proper military training, and even find occupations in his palace for their daughters. After the years of uncertainty and chaos that are depicted in the book of Judges, when Israel had no clear leader or any mechanism for appointing one until they had suffered defeat, this is surely just what the people are asking for.” (Pyper, loc. 12207)
So this passage can be viewed in different ways, and if you look at other writings in the Hebrew bible, you’ll find mixed reviews of the monarchy. Some writers point to the united kingdom under David and Solomon as the high point in the history of Israel, and others point out their shortcomings. Pyper acknowledges that, writing that “what may trouble some readers as inconsistency, both stylistically and ideologically, can also be seen as an acknowledgment of the complexity and messiness of human nature and human history, due to the residuum of the unknowable and unpredictable in any human transaction.” (Pyper, loc. 12073)
Saul becomes the first of the Kings who would rule over Israel and Judah for centuries, but that doesn’t mean the voices of prophets like Samuel were relegated to the sidelines. Quite the contrary — they were only getting started speaking truth to power. As Birch writes, “Perhaps only God’s prophet, like Samuel, can be trusted to guard justice in Israel. When Israel does have kings, it is the prophets Samuel and Nathan who will have the authority to confront Saul and David with violations of justice and covenant disobedience.” (Birch, 369)
Where does such authority reside today?
That issue might come down to where you put your trust. For those who turn to the Bible as a source of authority, it can sometimes be challenging to sort through the inconsistencies, contradictions, specific contexts, and sometimes flat-out ugly writings to find a way forward. As Pyper writes, “These texts give us an insight into the paradox that by seeking to establish the distinctiveness of our identity, we almost always have to reformulate and even compromise it. Whose criteria do we use? Religious groups fall prey to the same paradoxes as nation states. It also reminds us that any claim, even from a recognized authority, to speak in the name of God needs to be examined.” (Pyper, loc. 12236)
I was going to try to articulate a way to navigate those challenges, but then I ran across something Shane Claiborne wrote in his new book, Rethinking Life: Embracing the Sacredness of Every Person. Shane helped start a community in Philadelphia called The Simple Way that serves those in need in the neighborhood of Kensington. He writes,
“In our community, we get a lot of food donations. I’ve learned the hard way that it’s a bad idea to just dive full on into indulging donated food, especially when it comes to things like dairy and sushi. Before I put anything in my mouth, it first has to pass the sniff test. If it smells bad, I don’t eat it.
I’ve adopted a similar principle when it comes to Christianity.
There are lots of things that try to pass as Christianity, but they don’t pass the sniff test. . . . If something doesn’t smell like Jesus, sound like Jesus, and love like Jesus, it is not Christianity. And there have been lots of versions of Christianity over the centuries and even today that don’t smell, sound, or love like Jesus. As with spoiled milk, if we consume them we’ll probably get sick.
The whole Bible is God’s Word to us, but Jesus is the sniff test through which we understand it all. Another way of saying it is that Jesus is the lens through which we interpret the Bible, and the lens through which we interpret the world and how to live in it. Again, whenever one passage of Scripture seems to conflict with another passage of Scripture, Jesus gets to be the referee.” (Claiborne, 48)
I think it’s important to point out that Claiborne is writing as a Christian, and that today’s scripture is sacred to more than one faith tradition. For those of us who follow Jesus, though, I think it provides solid guidance. We might hold some particular symbols or causes or even people in especially high regard, but they should never occupy the highest.
If you were to drive past the front of my house, on some days you’ll see a pride flag flying from the front porch. On other days, you’ll see the US flag. The former symbolizes our unity with all people, regardless of their sexual orientation or identification or the color of their skin. The latter represents our unity with others who live within the borders of this country. We don’t fly the US flag as an idol or with a yearning for an idealized past, but rather with hope — hope that the United States can progress toward our potential, rather than recessing toward the racism, nationalism, sexism, elitism, able-ism, and other exclusiv-isms too often found in our past.
Scripture suggests that the glory days of our spiritual ancestors might have been exaggerated in some instances. You’ll also find those who think the glory days of our country and the Christian church in the United States occurred sometime in the past. Whether that’s true is a matter of perspective, but ultimately no nation or church building lasts forever. Thankfully, the same is not true of God’s people. Though we will all someday die, following Jesus into death, we will also follow him into resurrection. Not only that, but we’re assured that the best days for all of humankind, collectively, are ahead of us.
That’s not a matter of perspective. In fact, it comes from the highest of authorities, the king of kings, queen of queens, Mother of Wisdom, Father of Surprise, Ancient of Days, Author of Life, Great Mystery, Faithful Friend, YHWH, Elohim, Eternal One, Alpha, Omega.
Thanks be to God.
Amen.
Works Referenced
Birch, Bruce C. “The First and Second Books of Samuel.” In New Interpreter’s Bible, Volume II. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2015.
Claiborne, Shane. Rethinking Life: Embracing the Sacredness of Every Person. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Books, 2023.
Collins, John J. Introduction to the Hebrew Bible: Third Edition. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2018. Kindle edition.
Gafney, Wilda C. A Women’s Lectionary for the Whole Church, Year W. New York City: Church Publishing, 2021.
Pyper, Hugh A. “1 and 2 Samuel.” In Fortress Commentary on the Bible: The Old Testament and Apocrypha, edited by Gale A. Yee, Hugh R. Page, Jr., Matthew J. M. Coomber. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2014. Kindle edition.
Wikipedia. “Geneva Bible.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Bible, accessed July 21, 2023.
