The seven wonders of the ancient world pale into insignificance beside the wonder enacted between Deuteronomy and I Samuel – our readings for May-June; a wonder which astounded the ancient world, and left an indelible mark on man’s concept of civilization which can still be seen faintly in the best of human society.
This wonder was the experiment which God conducted with Israel in establishing His prototype Kingdom. We know too little of the revolutionary principles on which it was founded; we think of it only in terms of the later reactionary period of the monarchy, when Israel had rejected God in order to imitate the corrupt Gentile systems round them.
The Kingdom under David and Solomon, whilst relatively better than the Gentile kingdoms around them, was nothing to what the Kingdom could have been if Israel had co-operated with God, and kept him as their King. They sold their blessing of freedom under the Law of God for the price of being like their neighbours. There is no greater indictment of the crass foolishness of men than Samuel’s inspired condemnation of the monarchical system in 1 Sam.8:10-18; and history, even in the period of David and Solomon, adds a loud ‘Amen’.
The organisation of the Kingdom of God was unique. Every other nation in history has been built round a man, in the pattern set by Nimrod who founded the typical human city-state of Babel. Men of great cunning, having persuaded their simple-minded weaker fellows that they have divine right to rule, have exploited and manipulated their people, only making concessions when pressed to breaking point by their oppressed subjects.
The best kings have only been those who exploited least, and even the glory of Solomon’s kingdom was tarnished by slave labour camps and excessive taxation to maintain the show of an eastern monarch competing with his contemporaries in other courts. But from the beginning it was not so. In the beginning of the Kingdom of God there was no king except God; no man stood above his brother-man; there was no national central government living like a parasite on the labours of others; no prison system in which men were incarcerated to rot,because their fellows did not know how to rehabilitate them so as to live in the likeness of God in which they had been created; no standing army of licentious soldiers raping and pillaging because they had no constructive work to do; no possibility of a minority grasping great areas of land to become landlords sucking the blood of their impoverished tenants and living lives of idleness themselves. All these, and more evils, came only into God’s Kingdom as Israel debased themselves in imitation of their Gentile neighbours.
Let us start a new, fascinating study of the social structure of Israel under the Law, which was designed to prepare men for the coming of Messiah. We have had many studies investigating the symbology of the Law. If the Sabbath is mentioned, immediately we think of it as a type of the seventh thousand year rest; if dietetic laws are being considered, we think of our need to ruminate on the Word like cud-chewing animals, and to be sure-footed like the divided-hoof clean beasts. It is always the spiritual parallels we are seeking – and this is perfectly legitimate and good. But we may have missed one of the most faith-stimulating studies – that of the reality, the actuality, of what happened in Canaan from Joshua to Samuel.
Two million (600,000 men beside women and children) lately freed slaves,an uncivilised rabble, miraculously fed, watered and clothed – and their flocks and herds too. How much water? How much pasture? Every day for more than 40 years! In a howling wilderness! Today’s camping sites are subject to strict planning, or they become eyesores on the landscape. How many tents for 2 million? And they weren’t an eyesore – “How fair are your tents, O Jacob, your encampments, O Israel, like valleys that stretch afar, like gardens beside a river..,,” Look up Num.24:5,6 and share Balaam’s astonishment at the unusual spectacle of ORDER, PLAN and DESIGN in Israel’s encampment. It has taken another 30 centuries for Gentiles to establish their Town and Country Planning to prevent the haphazard development our 20th century is paying to demolish.
In what other nation was the working man the centre of concern? What capitalist country of any age gave one day off in seven, eight days after the first harvest, and another eight after the second, a whole year off every seven (always, in each case, of course, apart from the necessary attention to flocks and herds)? In what other nation did every man own a hereditary piece of land with inalienable rights of restoration to the family at the end of 49 years if it had been lost to them? Where in the Law of God’s people were the Prison Laws? You will look in vain.
Punishment for non-capital crimes was deprivation of liberty for a maximum of seven years spent in service. In what society, before or since, did the woman find such protection from lust and exploitation, or find herself exalted to such a position of responsibility as the partner in the education of her children? Where else were Cities of Refuge established to protect both innocent and guilty from frightful family feuds until they could be fairly tried? What other people of that age (or any since, except again the 20th century) had the benefit of teachers – the Levites – resident in every city to teach and advise?
So one might go on harvesting the social revolutionary ideas of the Kingdom of God – a unique state. On the main trade route trodden by all travellers, east to west, or west to east, on the site of the most obscure culture known to the historian or archaeologist, God produced a miraculous and radical revolution which attracted the attention of all. “Ye are my witnesses” was the reason behind the statement that it was that the Gentiles might learn how life with God could change their lives even in this mortal state. Look in Deuteronomy for the expression of this ambition.
But oh, the tragedy of Israel’s foolishness! “Make us a king that we may be like the other nations, a king to lead us into battle”. So they sold themselves to the worship of men instead of God, and put their trust in princes. It was not the first time that they had asked for a king – they’d done it before in the time of the earlier judges look for it. It would be interesting to trace what happened between Joshua and Samuel. The twelve tribes went victoriously into the Land, and the conditions of Exodus 23:20-33 had been fulfilled up to Joshua 11:15-23. Yet by Judges 1:1 we must conclude that much had been lost, and that the indigenous native tribes had re-occupied the Land. We may well ask “why?” and the answer is clear. Israel failed to rise to the standard of her calling. Each individual was called to “holiness”.
This wasn’t sanctimoniousness, nor simply physical separateness; it wasn’t “touch not, taste not…”; it wasn’t a negative approach to life, but a very positive one. Each individual was required to accept a new attitude of mind and a new standard of living, a positive one which would advertise to the Gentiles what could happen if men and women absorbed God’s Law of Living. This was not applied by might and fear of human kings and governments, but by the individual willingly accepting what he was taught by the Levites – the teachers – throughout the Land. Occasionally judges (saviours) were raised up locally to rescue a tribe or a group of tribes who had been overcome by the enemy, but apart from the family of Levi there was no other authority.
Now this presented the following challenge of alternatives to the people. Either they individually rose to the occasion and accepted the challenge of freedom to learn and serve God and gain fulfilment, happiness, contentment and security – and remember, the Law was their custodian to guide them to Christ, so they would learn of the hope of the Gospel and of salvation once they had learned the lessons of the Law, and these four blessings would be amplified into the salvation in Christ – or they would fall into the ways of the Gentiles, they would lack directive and hope, having turned from God, and they would have to seek human leadership and thus become snared by any enterprising exploiter of men.
This is exactly what happened. In the Judges period they swung between serving God and the local baals; they alternated between freedom under God and slavery under the local gods, until in desperation, recognising they needed leadership (having rejected God), they made two attempts to unite themselves under a human being, and succeeded at the second.
Now, how may this affect us? As far as I know, we are the only community without a human leadership. Like Israel, we were rescued from the slavery of the worship of men in their various organisations, religious and political, and gathered in a loose association of ecclesias like the twelve tribes in the Land. In times of stress, or with common ‘objectives, we work together. The State demands that we have a name, so we take one; we need to appeal for exemption from military service; we need to preach the Gospel, to advertise and publish reading and study material, to look after our sick, aged and isolated; and so we co-operate together as individual groups. But as long as every individual accepts the responsibility of learning for himself, we need no ‘king’ except the Lord Jesus.
What an advertisment our community could be for the power of God’s Word in our hearts if we ALL as individuals really accepted this challenge!
The Law failed to bring Israel to Christ. Doubtless it succeeded in faithful individuals, families and groups, but the majority voted to return to the slavery of human government in place of the freedom of serving God.
The period from the Exodus to the beginning of the Monarchy is about 490 years. A sufficiently long time to test both the effectiveness of God’s way, and the willingness of the people to accept it. It ended in the start of a new period of decline in which there were occasional infrequent bright periods when the conduct of a godly king brought divine blessings. In general we have studied the period of the monarchs more than the previous period when God was their King. We have lost many important reflections of our own times and conditions by this neglect, and therefore are perhaps not as aware of our on privileges, needs and dangers as we should be.
Reflections on the Potter and the Clay