The stories of the Bible reveal a pattern of "ups and downs" for the nation of Israel. A
period of prosperity, faithfulness and fearing God would almost always be followed by a
period of destitution, lawlessness and idolatry. This recurring cycle can be linked to
political authority, and the level of separation of political authority from other
influences. The successful struggle for liberation under the leadership of Moses and the
glorious conquest of Canaan under Joshua instilled a fresh breeze of hope and a renewed
faith in God in the nation of Israel. Guided by God, the nation of Israel met with
unprecedented success as they journeyed to the promised land. During this time,
political authority among the Israelites rested in the hands of patriarchs, or prominent
members within the tribes. These men were righteous figures of authority, chosen by God,
to lead His people and to teach His ways. The success that swept over the Israelites was
short-lived, however, and for the next two hundred years the people of Israel struggled
against neighboring tribes. The new generation of Israelites "knew neither the Lord nor
what he did for Israel"(Judges 2:10). They began to "do evil in the eyes of the Lord" by
worshipping other gods and engaging in various sexual activities. To save His people
from their enemies and from their "evil ways," God "raised up" judges to rescue them
(Judges 2:16). These so-called judges had the political authority vested in them to lead
the people of Israel and to save them from their sins. They mobilized the people of
Israel against invasions of the tribes all around them. At this time, the nation of
Israel was nothing more than a loose confederation of twelve tribes. Israel had no
central authority, which meant no unity, no organization and no power. During the period
of the judges, there was no need for a central government, because the people of Israel
were able to defend their tribal territories effectively against adjoining peoples.
Whenever there was a threat from a neighboring tribe, God sent a judge to lead the
Israelites against their enemies. As this era came to an end, however, the Israelites
were faced with a much larger problem - the Philistines' military threat. As the
Israelites were eliminating all the small powers around them, the Philistines, with their
iron implements and organization, were becoming an emergent threat. In order to protect
themselves from the looming danger of the Philistine army, the Israelites asked for a
king to furnish unification, organization and power for the nation of Israel. God
granted their request, and Samuel reluctantly appointed Saul in God's name. The king's
function was to provide leadership and to unify the people against their enemies.
However, the responsibilities, powers and privileges that came with kingship
overwhelmingly went beyond the scope of politics. The personal relationships between the
king and his people became increasingly involved with government. With the rise of the
monarchy came a definite change in political authority. As Israel changed from the
period of judges to the period of the monarchy, politics and political authority became
increasingly associated with personal relationships. In the period of the monarchs, the
separation between politics and personal matters was no longer delineated as it was
before, and politics and personal relations became interrelated.
"Whenever the Lord raised up a judge for them, he was with the judge and saved them out
of the hands of their enemies as long as the judge lived" (Judges 2:18). God sent judges
to lead the Israelites in the process of consolidating tribal areas and defense against
organized enemies. The judges led the Israelites into battle and also served as
reminders to the people to obey the word of God. It is needless to say then, that the
judges were leaders of the Israelites during desperate times. The main reason why a
clear distinction between personal relations and political authority during the period of
the judges was possible , was that there was no succession of judges. God chose judges
to lead Israel against its enemies only when they were in need of leadership and
guidance, and in doing so, there was no power struggle or "fight for the crown." There
was no specific person "next in line" to lead the Israelites, because the only thing
important to them at that time was defending themselves against neighboring powers. It
was of no concern to the Israelites who the leader was, as long as the leader was
competent and effective. Another characteristic of the judges' rule that compensated for
the separation of politics and personal matters was the brevity of their leadership.
Whereas a monarch would remain ruler of the land after conquest, the judges served only
as a sort of "temporary relief" for the nation of Israel. After fulfilling their
assignment as leaders of the Israelites against their adversaries during times of
emergency, they would humble themselves before God and before the Israelites. It is
clear that the judges possessed political authority over the Israelites, but rarely did
they allow personal matters and relationships to interfere with government. Only in the
case of Samson did his personal relationships and desires come in the way of political
authority. There were twelve judges in all, but the Bible pays most of its attention to
three of the twelve: Deborah, Gideon, and Samson.
Deborah, the only woman leader of the judges, won unquestioned respect. She commanded
Barak, son of Abinoam, to battle Sisera, the commander of the army of King Jabin.
Throughout the story of her triumph, not once was Deborah's personal relations mentioned.
It can be assumed then, that Deborah kept her personal relations separate from her
political leadership, and was focused on one thing and one thing only - the defeat of
Jabin and the Canaanites.
Forty years of peace ensued after Deborah's military victory, and then the people of
Israel again began to fall into sin and were overcome once again, this time by the
Midianites. God raised up Gideon to direct the people of Israel against the Midianites.
Gideon defeated the Midianites, and in doing so, was offered an opportunity to be king.
However, Gideon declined the opportunity to rule declaring "I will not rule over you, nor
will my son rule over you. The Lord will rule over you" (Judges 8:23). The lack of
succession of judges is parallel to the separation of politics and personal relations.
There was evidently no power struggle among the Israelites, because even when offered the
power to rule, Gideon declined. There was no fight for succession of leadership because
there was no succession of leadership.
The story of Samson can be seen as the transition from the period of judges to the
period of the monarchy. Samson, although the most gifted of the judges, had a tragic
flaw; he was pitifully unable to control his lust for women. Samson's personal desire
for women affected his ability to reason, and thus hindered his ability to lead the
people of Israel. With his great physical strength and hot temper, Samson
single-handedly pushed back the Philistines - more by accident than by intention. . He
was eventually betrayed and ruined by a woman due to his boisterous wildness and careless
encounter with Delilah. God intended Samson for great things. Of all the judges, he was
the only one to be announced by an angel before he was born (Judges 13:3). He was given
supernatural abilities, and his life was specially devoted to God. However, despite all
these advantages given to him at birth, his uncontrollable desire for woman destroyed
him. His personal relations destroyed his prospects of becoming a great leader among the
Israelites. Samson's desire for women overpowered his desire to deliver the Israelites
out of the hands of the Philistines, and this led to his tragic downfall. The story of
Samson vaguely foreshadows the connection between politics and personal relations in the
period of the monarchs. It acts as a link joining a period when politics and personal
relations are clearly defined and separate, and a period when they are indistinct and
inseparable.
Nearing the end of the period of the judges, the Israelites began to notice that
virtually every other nation had a king, while Isarael was nothing more than an alliance
of scattered tribes . The rising power of the Philistines and other imminent threats to
Israelite security impelled the Israelites to ask for a king. A king offered two
advantages: first, a king would provide central government, therefore providing unity and
organization; and second, since a king would normally be succeeded by his sons, the
nation did not have a crisis of leadership every its leader became old. God despondently
granted the wish of His people and gave them a king. Samuel anointed Saul as king of
Israel, and the people were satisfied. Military success went hand in hand with bringing
the tribes together in one united country, but when the desire for succession of the
crown came into play, personal relations and government become one.
Saul was successful as king of Israel until David proved to be a threat to the crown.
After David defeated Goliath of the Philistines, the people sang aloud "Saul has slain
his thousands, and David his tens of thousands" (1 Samuel 18:7). Saul thus became
jealous of David, for he could not stand to be second best in a nation he calls his own.
From that point thereafter, Saul's political authority and leadership was no longer
concentrated on the good of the nation and the welfare of his people, but rather he
focused his efforts on "keeping a jealous eye on David" (1 Samuel 18:11), and David
"remained his enemy the rest of his days" (1 Samuel 18:29). Saul spent the rest of his
days searching for David in attempts to kill him so that he may regain the respect of his
people, and in doing so killed many innocent bystanders that got in his way. This rash
outrage of jealousy and personal hatred for David was critically associated with
politics. While Saul could have directed his efforts toward the betterment of Israel, he
was after personal benefit, and this led to his eventual collapse. David, having
unconditional respect for Saul, spared his life twice, and thus allowed Saul to further
pursue him. Saul eventually dies, however, and David is made king over the house of
Judah.
Although David's reign was better than that of Saul's, he too had problems. Ish-Bosheth
is the threat to the throne this time, while Ish-Bosheth's general Abner is a threat to
him. Abner slept with Saul's concubine, therefore openly making a claim on the crown.
In David's time, women acted as political symbols. Abner's sleeping with Saul's
concubine suggested that he had his eyes on becoming king himself. In pursuit of David,
Abner killed the brother of Joab, David's general. As a result Joab had a personal
vendetta against Abner and was after his life. When Ish-Bosheth was murdered, and it was
evident that David was going to become the next king, Joab murdered Abner. It is not
difficult to see that this "soap opera" of events is due to the fact that personal
relations and politics were interrelated. Either personal relations effected a political
change, or politics effected a change in personal relations. After David is crowned
king of Israel, he had problems of the same nature. David, seeing the alluring
Bathsheba, wanted her for his own immediately. He blatantly disregarded the fact that
she had a husband, Uriah, and took her for his wife, having Uriah killed in the process.
This corrupt use of political authority demonstrates how political authority and personal
relations are linked. David's son, Absalom, also had his eyes on the throne. He led a
conspiracy against his father by traveling all over Israel winning the favor of the
people, and he also slept with his father's concubines in public. Absalom publicly slept
with his father's concubines for political reasons; it made clear his claim to the
throne. Israelites who held back their allegiance thinking father and son would
reconcile their differences, knew now that the breach was permanent; they had to take a
side. Again sexual potency and sexual relations are acutely tied in with politics.
David was ultimately confronted with the fact that he must capture or destroy his son
Absalom. When he found out that his soldiers killed Absalom, he mourned deeply. His
love for his son collided with his effectiveness as a leader. David wept so excessively
that it demoralized the troops who had risked their lives for him and the nation of
Israel.
When David's time was over, once again there was a power struggle for succession of the
throne. This time it was between the sons of David, Adonijah and Solomon. Adonijah took
initiative and set himself up as king, but Bathsheba, David's favorite wife, and Nathan
the prophet, "pulled a few strings" to secure Solomon's claim of the crown. Due to the
efforts of Bathsheba and Nathan, Solomon was crowned king. This "pulling of strings"
demonstrates how personal relations may engender lasting impacts on politics. If
Bathseba had not been David's favorite wife, and Nathan had not been David's trusted
advisor, Adonijah may have been crowned king of Israel instead of Solomon. Solomon
also used women to his advantage; he had seven hundred wives and three hundred
concubines. Most of his wives were princesses of nearby tribes, so it can be inferred
that his marriages were politically motivated. He was married to Pharaoh's daughter,
and had an alliance with Pharaoh. The story of Solomon's succession is as complicated
and as involved with personal relations as his predecessors.
As Israel developed from a confederation of tribes into a great monarchial power, a
notable change took place. As the nation of Israel moved from the period of judges to
the period of the monarchy, politics and political authority became increasingly
associated with personal matters and personal relations. Personal relations began to
affect politics and political authority, and in turn, politics affected personal
relations. This change occurred because the characteristics of leadership changed.
During the period of the judges, there was no succession of power, and because there was
no succession of power, no one was fighting for it. The judges were sent to lead the
Israelites in times of need and emergency. Their leadership was only ephemeral, and
thus not one of them were able to gain an exorbitant amount of political power. When
the period of the monarchy was firmly in place, however, there was a system of succession
of power. Even before the king muttered his last words, there were people eagerly
waiting in line to take his place. And if that wasn't enough, people were plotting
against the king in hopes of succeeding the throne, even his own sons. This feature of
the period of the monarchy allowed for the mixing and intertwining of politics and
personal relations. The use of women as symbols of power and dominance became abundant
as kings challenged the prospective successors, and as prospective successors challenged
the kings. Events took place that can be compared to episodes of TV soap operas or
Melrose Place. Politics and personal relations became interrelated, and above all else,
the underlying reason was power. As people began to lust for power, for wealth, and for
recognition, the association of the two became imminent, and the separation of the two
became impossible.
|