The Times They Are a-Changin' (I Samuel 7-8)

1st Samuel 7-8, thoughts and summaries:

-Ch. 7: The ark comes to rest at Kiriath-jearim, where twenty years pass "and all the house of Israel lamented after the Lord" (1 Samuel 7:2). Is this a twenty-year lacunae, in which God continues his holy temper tantrums, killing non-celebrators here and inflicting tumors there? After all, the Israelites have yet again strayed into worshipping other deities and idols. Much of the history of early Judaism seems to involve God and his prophets dragging the "house of Israel" kicking and screaming into exclusive monotheism. According to the Harper Collins Study Bible, the meaning of the original Hebrew word in place for "lamented" is uncertain. Of course, I could easily be over-analyzing, and the Israelites are simply lamenting to be delivered "out of the hand of the Philistines" (7:3).

To be saved from the Philistines, Samuel tells the Israelites, "Direct your heart to the Lord, and serve him only" (7:3). Out of need, yet again, the Israelites obey and put away their "Baals" and "Astartes" (7:4). At Samuel's behest, all of Israel gathers at Mizpah, where he judges and purifies the people in a ritual that "anticipates the later observance of the Day of Atonement" or "Yom Kippur" (footnotes p. 399). The Philistines hear of this convenient gathering at Mizpah and launch an attack. On Israel's behalf, Samuel offers a whole burnt offering and cries out to the Lord. Accepting the offer, God "thundered with a mighty voice against the Philistines and threw them into confusion, and they were routed before Israel" (7:10). Israel regains the previously tumor-ridden towns of Ekron and Gath, amongst others taken by the Philistines, and maintains peace with the Amorites. Samuel carries on his new role as judge, traveling along a circuit through Israel. He builds an altar in Ramah, his home.

-Ch. 8: Samuel's sons turn out to be corrupt like Eli's, proving themselves unfit to succeed in his place. Yet again, the Book of Samuel presents a critique of hereditary succession. Israelite elders congregate at Ramah and point out to Samuel that he is old and his sons do not follow in his ways, so they ask of him, "appoint for us, then, a king to govern us, like other nations" (8:5). I find it interesting that the Israelites want to be like other people; I can imagine the jeers of outsiders, "You country bumpkins don't even have a king yet! Get with the times!" This irks Samuel, who prays to the Lord for guidance. God answers:

"Listen to the voice of the people in all that they say to you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them. Just as they have done to me, from the day I brought them up out of Egypt to this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so also they are doing to you. Now then, listen to their voice; only - you shall solemnly warn them, and show them the ways of the king who shall reign over them." (8:7-9)

Telling Samuel not to take the people's request personally, God's monologue establishes earthly monarchy as being a rejection of his role as the true and only king. By extension, such a monarchy would replace God's divine appointment of judges with a hereditary dynasty of kings, the same type of inherited power warned against in the portrayal of Eli and Samuel's sons (footnotes p. 400). Plotz remarks, "The Bible is refreshingly meritocratic: again and again it measures the worth of men by their deeds, not their bloodlines," except for the patriarchs (126). Makes me wonder how later adherents of the "divine right of kings" reconciled dynastic, royal absolutism with the anti-monarchial views of First Samuel.

Samuel delivers his convincing warning to the Israelites of what monarchy will entail. The king will appoint their sons to be soldiers, commanders, fieldworkers, and makers of war implements, while their daughters will become his perfumers, cooks, and bakers. The best of their fields, vineyards, and olive orchards will be given to courtiers, as well as one-tenth of their grain and vineyards being given to courtiers and officers. He will also take their slaves, the best of their livestock, and one-tenth of their flock. Samuel concludes, "And you shall be his slaves. And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom who have chose for yourselves; but the Lord will not answer you in that day" (8:18).

Nevertheless, the Israelites stubbornly refuse to listen, demanding to be like other nations and have a king who "may govern us and go out before us and fight our battles" (8:20). Samuel relays the message to God. Granting the request, God tells the judge and prophet to "Listen to their voice and set a king over them" (8:22). Plotz asks if you can blame the Israelites for wanting a king, giving insight into their refusal to compromise with Samuel.

Really, can you criticize them for wanting a monarch? We just finished a book, Judges, which is all about what happens when there is no leader - mass murder, gang rape, anarchy, and so forth. The Israelites have lived through a nightmare. Samuel's theoretical warnings against kingship fail against the lived misery of Judges. Kings may be corrupt and brutal, but the Israelites aren't stupid for choosing monarchy over anarchy. I would have done the same. (Plotz 127)

Until reading First Samuel, I never envisioned myself siding with monarchists, but I also may have done the same. Samuel's later interactions with Saul, the first king, make me only more sympathetic to the cause of Jewish monarchy.

To be continued...