The Road to Redemption: Kings

    Two of the most prominent characters in the entire Bible are two of the Kings of the united nation of Israel; David (1000 – 961 BCE) and Solomon (961 – 922 BCE). David is famous not only because he occupies a transitional role in the story of God's people but because he also had a great biographer. There were kings who reigned longer (Uzziah 783 – 742 BCE) or were more famous in their day (Most foreign nations referred to the people of Israel as the people of Omri (876 – 869 BCE) and not David) but never rivaled David in terms of the sheer volume of material in the scriptures. If we include the many Psalms which are attributed to David his hold over the Bible is even greater. David's son Solomon also manages to occupy a significant section of the book of I Kings. He is noted for his wisdom (supposedly having written both Proverbs and Ecclesiastes) and wealth. With so much material devoted to these two figures, as well four entire books to the other kings, we might assume that the Bible considers their appearance on the scene as a positive event. If we did we would be only minimally correct.

    While the rise of the kings plays a pivotal role in the road to redemption their appearance is not one that is whole heartedly endorsed by the tellers of our Biblical tale. There are two schools of thought (within the Bible) about the kings. The first school is anti-monarchy. This school is clear that God is the only king that the people of Israel need. Any other kings are mere pretenders who will abuse the people through taking their sons for the army, their daughters for serving girls and their money in order that the kings live a lavish life-style. The pro-monarchy school implies that it had been God's plan all along to name kings who would be the earthly representative of God. While God would still be in charge God wanted there needed to be an earthly ruler to guide and direct the people. These two conflicting views are held in tension throughout the books of Kings and Chronicles.

    Fortunately there are two places where these schools converge and provide for us a way forward on our road to redemption. The first convergence is that they are each clear that the kings do not have absolute power. All Kings rule under the authority of God and the Law of Moses. In other words there is no divine right of Kings to do whatever their please. The kings only possess limited power. This is a significant step in the life of the people of God. It is significant first because it makes clear that there is only one God. Unlike most of the nations around them Israel and Judah (the two nations which came into being after the death of Solomon) never assigned divinity to their rulers. While Egypt, Babylon and Rome among others worshipped their leaders as gods, the children of Israel would never do so. There was a clear delineation between the One True Living God and human beings. This allowed the people to continue to focus their worship on YHWH and YHWH alone.

    The second convergence where these schools provide for us a way forward on our road to redemption is that the kings were to understand themselves as servants of the people. Their role was to care for and provide for the welfare of the people. The kings were to insure that there was proper worship. The kings were to insure that the people were protected. The kings were to insure that syncretism did not overtake the people. In other words the kings were to model for the people what a savior ought to look and act like. Thus the image of David as the liberator and protector of God's people became the archetype for the coming messiah. This is one reason why the Gospel of Luke takes such great pains to locate Jesus' birth in the city of Bethlehem, David's ancestral town. This image of the servant ultimately shows up in the writings of the prophet Isaiah and in Jesus' understanding of his vocation as messiah.

    Though the road to redemption was a bumpy one with many twists and turns, it was ultimately made possible by the work of very fallible kings who none-the-less insured that it was YHWH and not themselves who were at the center of the life of God's people.