I. Kingdom Concept In The Old Testament – Part 3 – The Theocratic Kingdom Under The Judges And Kings .
A. Under The Judges.
1. When Israel accepted the lordship of Yahweh, God (Yahweh) moved to a new administration of the theocratic kingdom, an administration through the judges (Judg. 2:16, 18; Acts 13:20). The statement of Gideon is clear: “Then the men of Israel said unto Gideon, Rule over us, both you, and your son, and your sons’ son also: for you have delivered us from the hand of Midian, and Gideon said unto them, I will not rule over you, neither shall my son rule over you: the Lord shall rule over you [Judg. 8:22-23].”
2. Gideon refused the place of absolute authority, for such was to belong to God. The experience of Samuel with the Lord (1 Sam. 3:1-18) reveals that God was actively administering the affairs in Israel through this human agency. The acceptance of Samuel by Israel (1 Sam. 3:19-4:1) is the recognition by the people that Samuel is the divinely appointed representative of the theocracy. Such administration continued until the close of Samuel’s life, when: “all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, and said unto him, behold, you are old, and your sons do not walk in your ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations” [1 Sam. 8:4-5].”
3. The spiritual declension of Israel is noted in the closing history of the period of the judges. “Every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judg. 21:25). This spiritual condition brought about the rejection of the form of the theocracy under which God had operated and brought about the request for the king like all the nations. God revealed to Samuel that such an action constituted a rejection of the theocracy, for “they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me, that I should reign over them” (1 Sam. 8:7). God, therefore, passed to a new administration of the theocratic kingdom, “the administration through the kings who ruled over Israel.”
B. Under The Kings.
1. The monarchial form of government was God’s ideal for the theocratic kingdom. Such a king had been promised to Abraham (Gen. 17:5-7) and to Jacob (Gen. 35:11). The authority of the kingdom was to reside in a king eventually (Gen. 49; Num. 24:17). At the induction of Saul into the kingly office the appointment was seen to be a divine appointment, for Samuel announced, “behold, the Lord has set a king over you” (1 Sam. 12:13). And yet Samuel reminds Israel that they had sinned in repudiating the former form of the theocracy, saying, “you have this day rejected your God” (1 Sam. 10:19), and adding, “your wickedness is great, which you have done in the sight of the Lord, in asking you a king” (1 Sam. 12:17). “No deeper insult could scarcely be offered to God than such a request indicated. This is seen by considering the Being who condescended to be their Ruler, the blessing that He promised, and the design He had in view in becoming, in a direct manner, King over the nation. The only extenuation for such “wickedness,” as Samuel intimates, is found in their distressed circumstances, also brought upon them by unbelief.”
2. The institution of this kingdom form of theocratic administration carries the theocratic kingdom a step further toward its ultimate completion. Concerning the king himself, his very kingship was of an entirely religious character and implied a unity of the heavenly and earthly rule over Israel through him, who as God’s substitute, sat “upon the throne of the kingdom of God over Israel” (I Ch. 17:14; 28:5; 29:23), who was “God’s anointed” (I Sam. 24:10).
3. It is a mistake to visualize this theocracy over Israel as merely typical of the future theocracy. The Theocratic ordering, or government, which for the time adopted these rites and observances, is never represented as a type. This is utterly opposed by covenant, and prophecy, and fact. The Theocracy did not foreshadow something else, but was itself the Kingdom of God in its initiatory form, a commencement of that rule of God’s as earthly King, which, if the Jews had rendered the obedience required, would have extended and widened itself until all nations had been brought under its influence and subjection.
4. That this was a continuing part of the theocratic kingdom program is observed from the fact that perfect obedience on the part of the kings was demanded by God. According to Samuel’s statement, God pardons the nation on the conditions that it still, with the king included, acknowledges him as the continuous Supreme Monarch, and that the king chosen shall enforce the laws given by his Superior in authority. In this entire transaction God’s theocratic rule is preserved intact. The earthly king was under certain imposed restrictions, and was threatened, in case of disobedience, with the displeasure of, and punishment from, the still recognized Civil Head of the nation. This was felt and freely confessed by Saul (I Sam. 13:12, and 28:15), David (1 Sam. 6:20, and 7:23-26, etc.), Solomon (I Kings 3:8-9, and 6:12-14, also chap. 8, etc.), and others.
5. Early in Saul’s reign it was announced that God had rejected him (1 Sam. 13:11-14). The authority was transferred to David (1 Sam. 16:1-13) and his reign was particularly associated with the development of the theocratic kingdom. This is noted in two areas.
a. (1) God identified His kingdom with the Davidic kingdom. The Theocracy and Davidic kingdom, in virtue of a special and peculiar covenant relationship between the two, were regarded as one, and in the future so identical in destiny that they are inseparably linked together; this is evidenced by three things: (1) The Davidic throne and Kingdom is called the Lord’s. So, e.g. in I Chron. 28:5, it is “the throne of the Kingdom of the Lord over Israel”; in 2 Chron. 13:8, “the Kingdom of the Lord”; and in 2 Chron. 9:8, the King is placed by God “on His throne to be King for the Lord thy God.” (2) The King was expressly designated “the Lord’s Anointed” (1 Sam. 24:6, 2 Sam. 19:21, etc.). (3) The Prophets, after the establishment of the Davidic throne and kingdom, invariably identify the glorious Kingdom of God, the blessed Theocratic rule, as manifested through the same, e.g. Jeremiah chap. 33 and 36, Amos 9, etc. The reason for this lies in the firm and perpetual union.
b. (2) God entered into an eternal, unconditional covenant with David (2 Sam. 7:16) in which God guaranteed that the Davidic kingdom should be the kingdom in which the theocratic kingdom should come to full realization as one from David’s line reigned forever. Suffice it to say that God has now developed the theocratic kingdom to the point where it has assumed the form of a monarchy over which a God appointed king reigned and Messiah will come to bring the program to completion in that form. The Davidic Kingdom is that which will follow Jacob’s trouble (Jeremiah 30:7, the coming days of Tribulation that will come upon all Israel (Jacob), and will be an earthly kingdom that has not yet come upon the earth).
Eternity 