The student will submit a 5-page report pertaining to the major leadership themes stemming from the Forrest/Roden textbook reading assignments. Each paper must contain a title page, 1-page introduction, 3-pagesummary analyses of major leadership themes, and a 1-pageconclusion and bibliography/reference page.  The report must be in the style format pertaining to the student’s degree program

After reading through the 19 chapters dedicated to the O. T. (Old Testament) provide a concise summary of 3 major themes per testament.  Summarize each theme but more importantly provide an analysis identifying the reasons why each theme is especially important to you or to our generation in regards to practicing Godly leadership no matter the context of one’s vocation or location.

I have attached the necessary material from the course textbook along with 3 chosen themes to use. 

THEME: Leaving a Legacy

Chapter 6

Leaving a Legacy: Leadership in Judges

Michael J. Smith

The transition from the time of Joshua into the period of the judges indicates a significant leadership change in Israel. God had appointed Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt (Exod. 3). Later, when Moses sinned, God instructed Moses to appoint Joshua as his successor (Num. 27:12–23). When Joshua came to the end of his life, God did not appoint a successor. Instead there was an intended transfer of leadership from Joshua to the “elders and their heads and their judges and their officers” (Josh. 23:2; 24:1), all of whom held positions as “representatives of the people on important ritual and covenant-making occasions.”[1] As Joshua came to the end of his life, he gave two exhortations to this group, with an application to each individual family unit.[2] After giving God’s review of all that he had done for the nation (Josh. 24:2–13), Joshua challenged the people as individual households to choose whom they would now follow: “Choose for yourselves today whom you will serve … but as for me and my house, we will serve [ʿāḇaḏ] the Lord” (Josh. 24:15). Thus, the purpose of this chapter is to examine Israel in the period of the judges, looking at individuals and families, as represented in the judges themselves, as they responded to the leadership of God. The book demonstrates that Israel increasingly failed to follow God’s leadership by failing to pass on the faith within their families. The end result was that, because they did not see an earthly king in Israel, “everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judg. 21:25).

Framing the Book of Judges: Introductions and Epilogues

The book of Judges is unique in its construction. It is a book that is symmetrically arranged, and gives evidence that it was written by one author who carefully placed each of the stories in a specific order to communicate his prophetic message to Israel.[3]There are two separate introductions to the book, each using the death of Joshua as their starting point (Judg. 1:1 and 2:6–8). The first introduction (1:1–2:5) is a focus on the military compromises of the nation, as they failed to drive out the remaining Canaanites. The second introduction (2:6–3:6) is a focus on the religious and moral compromises leading to cycles of idolatry, servitude to a conquering nation and the gracious response from God to raise up judges to free them. Judges 3:3–6 indicates that the conquering nations were for a test for Israel “to find out if they would obey the commandments of the Lord, which he had commanded their fathers through Moses” (Judg. 3:4). But in rejecting their God, Israel lived among the nations left in the land; they intermarried with them, exchanging sons and daughters, with the result that Israel served the gods of those nations. Instead of reflecting the God who had delivered them from Egypt and led them into the Promised Land, they became like the Canaanites God had warned them about. A failure to live and respond to the leadership of God in the family structure opened the door to the “Canaanization” of Israel. Leadership comes out of the common culture, where man becomes like the one he worships.[4]

Just as the book begins with two introductions, it also concludes with two contrasting epilogues. In the two epilogue stories there are no stories of judges and no external enemies. Israel instead becomes its own enemy in the spiraling decline of the nation. In each case, a problem began in an individual Israelite home and then escalated to become a source of moral failure in the nation.

Between the two introductions and the two conclusions the narrator has placed the stories of the six major judges and the supplemental stories of the six minor or secondary judges. In each of the major judge stories, there was an active forsaking of God and a choice to follow other gods of the Canaanites (Judg. 2:11–13). As a result, God “gave them into the hands of plunderers who plundered them; and he sold them into the hands of their enemies around them, so that they could no longer stand before their enemies” (Judg. 2:14). When they were severely distressed “then the Lord raised up judges who delivered them from the hands of those who plundered them” (Judg. 2:16). In spite of the fact that they did not listen to the judges, “the Lord was with the judge and delivered them from the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge; for the Lord was moved to pity by their groaning because of those who oppressed and afflicted them” (Judg. 2:18). However, “when the judge died . . . they would turn back and act more corruptly than their fathers, in following other gods to serve them and bow down to them; they did not abandon their practices or their stubborn ways” (Judg. 2:19), resulting in a continual downhill spiral throughout the whole book.

The role of the judges is defined by the narrator in Judges 2:16: “Then the Lord raised up judges who delivered them from the hands of those who plundered them.”[5] Block makes three points regarding the role of the judges:

(1) The source of the judges’ authority and power was Yahweh. (2) The purpose of their appointment was not judicial but soteriological. . . . Indeed the designation môšîaʿ, “deliverer, liberator,” is specifically applied to several judges. . . . (3) These individuals were instruments of deliverance from external enemies; their purpose was not the settlement of internal disputes.[6]

That God was to be considered the one real and true leader (and king of the nation; see 1 Sam. 8:7), however, is seen in that the actual title “the Judge” is only applied to one Person in the book: to God. The verb “to judge” (šāpat) is used to describe the activity of the human judges in the book, but the noun-title “the Lord, the Judge” is only used by Jephthah in Judges 11:27, as he describes God’s role over the nations. Israel at this time is a nation of individual families, clans, and tribes headed by fathers, and clan and tribal leaders, under the ultimate rule of God who has given all levels of sub-leadership the goal of subduing the land and removing the Canaanite influence. Life was to be carried out in obedience to the Law of God as taught by the Levites and administered by the priests (Lev. 10:8–11; Deut. 31:9–13).

The descending cycle of sin in the nation of Israel is seen in the descending character of the judges. Younger points out that “the ‘cycles’ themselves in 3.6–16.13 . . . are arranged in such a way as to point to the decline in the character of the judges as illustrative of the chaos of the time. . . . Each judge may be seen as a microcosm of the nation.”[7]God reached into the nation at successive points to provide a deliverer, but the deliverer/judge was also an example of how far Israel had descended in the cycle.[8] The stories move from the first judge, Othniel, as a good example in creating a family by taking a wife who is linked to the faith of the past in her father Caleb, to the last judge, Samson, who completely failed to create a godly marriage, much less a godly legacy, ending his life in suicide. “The failure of the family to pass on the faith from generation to generation, in obedience to Pentateuchal commands, is a partial explanation for the downward cyclical trend of the nation of Israel in the Book of Judges. This theme is part of the larger purpose of alerting Israel to the Canaanization that has taken place in the nation because of disobedience to God.”[9]

The First “Introduction” to Judges: Militaristic Compromise

The theme of the first introduction (1:1–2:5) centers on Israel’s military compromises in taking the land. In answer to an inquiry before God, Judah was given leadership in the fight against the remaining Canaanites (1:1–2). However, Judah failed: “Now the Lord was with Judah, and they took possession of the hill country; but they could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley because they had iron chariots” (1:19). This was a test God gave Israel “to find out if they would obey the commandments of the Lord” (3:4). From that point on, the phrases “[tribal name] did not drive out” or “[tribal name] did not take possession” is applied to seven other tribes (1:21–35). In response, God rebuked the nation (2:1–5). God had demonstrated an unbending commitment to the covenant he had made with the patriarchs, but Israel had demonstrated the opposite in compromising with the idolatry of the Canaanites. As God demonstrates his own character in leadership, he asks his people to imitate that same character in their own levels of leadership. If God is the Judge, then all leadership is to be a reflection of him.

Within the first introduction there are three short stories. The first story is a negative story. Israel began the Canaanization of their nation by imitating a Canaanite ruler rather than imitating the character of God (Judg. 1:5–7). Having caught a Canaanite ruler, they cut off his thumbs and big toes as he had done to his enemies. In a connecting story in the second epilogue, a Levite mutilated his wife (Judg. 19). No one can follow both the culture and God at the same time. Leadership involves looking past the culture we must deal with, looking instead to the character of the One we must follow. Failure to do that can corrupt even spiritual leadership, with shocking results.

The second story is a positive one. Caleb, the spy from Numbers 13, who had already demonstrated faith in God and a willingness to follow him in obedience, advertised for a son-in-law who would share his own desire to obey God by taking the very land promised to them (1:11–15). Othniel responded, demonstrating that same commitment to take the land; and he received Achsah, Caleb’s daughter, as his wife. Achsah, like-minded with her father in wanting to enjoy the land and its goodness, asked for more land than her father initially gave them. This is the same Othniel who becomes the first judge, but this is before the judge stories begin. Leadership in a home—the basic unit of a nation—begins with a good marriage between a man and a woman who are both committed to trusting God, obeying his commands, and committing themselves to God’s program.

The third story is again a negative one. This story mimics the story about Rahab in Joshua, but it ended with a frustrating failure (1:23–26). Spies made an agreement to spare a man in a city, only to have that man go off and start another Canaanite city. The narrator is hinting on the compromise to follow with “Israel’s increasing coresidency with the natives.”[10] Once compromise begins—and this story is situated within the list of compromising tribes—the blessing of God cannot be presumed upon to automatically follow.

The Second “Introduction” to Judges: Religious Compromise

The theme of the second introduction (2:6–3:6) centers on Israel’s religious compromise. When Joshua and the leadership of his day all died, Israel began the downward spiral. We see Israel’s tendency, which is not too uncommon throughout history, to compromise on the spiritual commitment of those who came before them. However, part of this result may lie in a former generation’s inability to faithfully pass the faith on to their children. “All that generation also were gathered to their fathers; and there arose another generation after them who did not know the Lord nor yet the work which he had done for Israel” (Judg. 2:10). Block comments here:

This text is a witness to the apparent failure of the community to keep alive its memory of Yahweh’s gracious saving acts. The priests had failed in their instructional duties (Lev. 10:11); and the elaborate system of festivals, memorials, and other customs, designed to pass on the rich spiritual tradition (Deut. 6:20) had either lapsed or been reduced to formality. If the Shemaʿ(Deut. 6:4) was being recited at all, the following injunctions to the community (6:5–6) to instruct the children in the fundamentals of covenant faith were obviously regarded more in the breach than in the observance. When people lose sight of God’s grace, they lose sight of God and the sense of any obligation to him. All that follows in the book is a consequence of Israel’s loss of memory.[11]

One of the roles of leadership is to intentionally model and pass on the faith to the next generation. If the leadership fails to do this, it can be expected that the next generation will fill the void with an allegiance of their own finding.

The downward spiral of sin cycles in the nation began at this point, with Israel playing the part of a prostitute with the gods of the Canaanites. Each successive round of sin and deliverance under a judge brought the nation lower. The failure of the nation was at the very level of the family: They lived among the Canaanites, interchanged sons and daughters in marriage, and served their gods (Judg. 3:4–6). When families abandon their role of following God, there is no other safety net for the children. The children are thus being groomed by example to be godless leaders.

Leadership in the Quadrant 1 Judges: Othniel, Ehud, and Shamgar

Williams presents the twelve judge stories in the form of a circle divided into four quadrants, with three judges in each quadrant.[12] The first quadrant covers Othniel (3:7–11), Ehud (3:12–30), and Shamgar (3:31). These are the most positive stories, each presenting a brave warrior who led Israel against an enemy and so was used by God to deliver the nation. There is a noted absence of women in this quadrant, which accentuates the masculine role seen in the first three judges, but it also prepares the reader for the sudden occurrence of a woman in the judge position in the second quadrant.

The account of Othniel (3:7–11) is a short, paradigmatic presentation of the judge cycle, described in generalities in the second introduction (2:11–19). Israel forgot Yahweh their God and served a set of male and female gods. “Asherah is now known to have been a prominent goddess in Canaanite mythology, the wife of the high god El (ʾil) and mother of seventy gods” who is now a consort “of Baal in this fertility religion.”[13] Othniel, by his marriage into a family of faith, has already demonstrated his leadership in the nation by choosing a good wife and not indulging in the adultery portrayed by the Canaanite gods which attracted Israel into their worship. Othniel, as the first judge, is a stark contrast to Samson, the final judge, who failed to provide any family leadership in Israel and instead demonstrated the very promiscuous behavior of the Canaanite gods. In place of Othniel’s positive leadership, Samson’s failed leadership further promoted Israel’s descent into spiritual chaos.

The story of Ehud is much longer (3:12–30). Ehud is a Benjamite who also stands as a contrast—first to those in Judges 1:21 who did not drive out the Jebusites, and also to the Benjamites of the second epilogue who defended the evil men of Gibeah (20:11–17). Israel again did evil before God, and God strengthened the king of Moab over them (3:12). In response to Israel’s cry for help, God raised up Ehud who demonstrated his courageous leadership by personally killing the king of Moab in his own quarters, and then leading Israel in the ensuing battle against Moab. He knew God’s plan, and he led Israel in acting on it (3:28). In his confident leadership, Ehud is a strong contrast to Gideon, who will continuously questioned God’s plan. He is also a contrast to Samson, in that it is Ehud who deceived the enemy instead of fraternizing with the enemy and becoming deceived himself. Ehud’s leadership is also seen in his responses to idols. The references to Ehud and idols in 3:19 and 3:26, provide us with an important ideological frame to Ehud’s deliverance of Israel. The deliverance itself is not just a matter of the defeat of Moab and the subsequent eighty years of peace for Israel. For Ehud’s decisive action begins when he “turns away from the idols at Gilgal” and his escape is successful when he “passed” the idols and fled to Seirah. It is he whose decisive actions for Israel began with a characteristic “turning away from the idols (šûb min happesîlîm),” as one “turns away from the evil way (šûb midderek harācāh)” (1 Kings 13:33; 2 Kings 17:13) and “returns to Yahweh” (Deut. 30:10).

Proverbs 1:7 and 9:10 say that the fear of Yahweh is the beginning of knowledge and wisdom. Since the first commandment in the Decalogue says, “You shall have no other gods before Me” (Exod. 20:3), godly wise leadership must begin with a proper understanding of God. When leaders know the character of God and what God is about in the world, it gives them a perspective out of which to make their own decisions. Tozer wrote, “What comes to our mind when we think about God is the most important thing about us. . . . The idolatrous heart assumes that God is other than he is—in itself a monstrous sin—and substitutes for the true God one made after its own likeness.”[14] Ehud had a right view of God, and God blessed his efforts to deliver Israel.

The account of Shamgar the son of Anath is very brief, being contained in one verse: He “struck down six hundred Philistines with an oxgoad; and he also saved Israel” (3:31). The story is in line with the masculine behavior of the first judges, but it introduces the short accounts of the secondary judges. The narrative pattern the narrator uses in the sin cycles is disrupted, and this change “alerts the reader to the possibility of further disruptions of the pattern by the writer.”[15]Further, the name Shamgar has “four strong consonants: š-m-g-r” rather than the three consonants of Hebrew words,[16] and the additional “ben Anath” might be an indication that his family was originally connected with a Canaanite goddess.[17] In spite of that possibility, Shamgar is presented in a positive way in the text. He came after Ehud and “he also” saved Israel. His victory over the Philistines is preparatory for the coming of Samson, but in contrast to Samson, Shamgar “saved Israel.” Shamgar is evidence that God is not limited to conventional means and methods for saving his people. God will impartially use leaders who demonstrate that they have a commitment to God’s program, regardless of their ethnic background. This is in keeping with 2 Chronicles 16:9, and is a hint of things to come.[18]

Quadrant 1 presents courageous men who are effective military leaders, used of God to accomplish the desired end of saving Israel from those who dominated them. When men act within their leadership roles as assigned by God, God gives success. Their life stories, however, show that their success arose out of their obedience to God.

Leadership in the Quadrant 2 Judges: Barak, Deborah, and Gideon

Quadrant 2, in Williams’ structure, contains the stories of Barak and Deborah, Gideon, and the secondary judge Tola. The movement from Quadrant 1 to Quadrant 2 brings some major changes. Several strong women are presented in contrast to a very hesitant military leader in the Barak-Deborah story, and then a similarly hesitant judge appears who finally succeeds and then fails in a most profound way, first with his family and then as a carryover into the state of the nation in the Gideon story.

Barak and Deborah: Weak Leadership and New Leaders

As Quadrant 2 opens, the narrator appears to resume the sin cycles but then abruptly deviates from the norm.

Instead of following his formulaic pattern for introducing the deliverer, the narrator abruptly breaks into the narrative (4:4) with a circumstantial clause and Deborah’s name is placed in the emphatic position. He clearly wants to capture the reader’s attention to direct it to something unusual. The reader is struck by bewilderment. Instead of being introduced to the man he anticipates will be Yahweh’s next deliverer for Israel, he is introduced to a woman who is already performing as prophetess and judge. It is quite apparent that something out of the ordinary is happening and he feels compelled to ask, “What is going on here?”[19]

Deborah does not function in the story as one of the judges, but rather as an introducer of the judge,[20] and as a representative of a new subtheme in the book.[21] The story presents her as “a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, [and she] was judging Israel at the time” (4:4). She was situated in a place that was not the spiritual center of Israel, but was “under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim,” and the sons of Israel were coming to her for “the judgement” (4:5). In the poetic version of the story, she calls herself “a mother in Israel” (5:7).

The story begins in the normal way telling of Israel’s sin, God selling them into the hands of a Canaanite king, and Israel crying out to God for deliverance (4:1–3). “It appears that when ‘the sons of Israel’ come to Deborah for ‘the judgment’ they are not asking her to solve their legal disputes, but to give them the divine answer to their cries. She functions as a representative of Yahweh.”[22] Israel is asking Deborah to identify for them the next judge who will bring about the deliverance, and in the next verses she does that. Deborah summoned Barak, the next judge, and gave to him the command from Yahweh that he was to go against Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite army. God would draw out the commander and his army, and God would give them into Barak’s hand (Judg. 4:6–7). Barak, however, was hesitant and would not go unless Deborah would go with him. Deborah agreed, but told Barak that because of his hesitancy, he would lose the honor of the battle and that Yahweh would give it to a woman instead (Judg. 4:8–9). When the two armies were assembled, “Deborah said to Barak, ‘Arise! For this is the day in which the Lord has given Sisera into your hands; behold, the Lord has gone out before you.’ So Barak went down from Mount Tabor with ten thousand men following him” (Judg. 4:14).

When God brought the victory as promised, and Sisera’s army was defeated, Sisera escaped and hid in the tent of Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite. Jael appeared to offer hospitality to Sisera in keeping with her husband’s defection from Israel into a peaceful relationship with the Canaanites (4:11, 17). When Sisera fell asleep, however, Jael killed him in her tent (4:18–21). Barak arrived shortly thereafter to find God’s pronouncement true: He had lost the honor of the battle to a woman (4:22).

The story of Barak, Deborah, and Jael demonstrates God’s choices in some areas of human leadership. The first area of Israel’s leadership downfall is seen in the area of weak men lacking faith in God and his promises. Rather than trusting God’s direct word to him through Deborah, Barak hesitated and put his faith in the messenger rather than in the Sender of the message.[23] Numerous items in the story show that men of the time were falling away from God as the focus of their faith and worship. The men are weak; thus, God uses the women who have a heart for his plan for Israel. Deborah is chosen as God’s messenger, in contrast to the priests at the ark. Deborah’s husband played no part in the story, and God called a “mother in Israel” (Judg.5:7) as his messenger. Heber the Kenite, the wife of Jael, had parted with the other Kenites to side with Israel’s enemies. Other men are rebuked in the psalm of Deborah for not participating in the battle (5:16–17, 23), and a comment from Sisera’s mother and her princesses give an indication of the focus of Canaanite men, which will soon be shown to be the growing focus of Israelite men (5:28–30).[24] In contrast to the masculine men of the first quadrant, the men in this story have failed to be the models, protectors, aggressive leaders, and worshippers in Israel. The story is repeated in the only poetic portion of the book, a psalm composed by Deborah in Judges 5. In this psalm, Deborah picked up the teaching function of men in Israel (Deut. 6) and praised God for the victory. When men lapse spiritually, their faith in God is replaced with desires for personal safety, personal honor, and material goods. God then turns to women, and they receive the honor men would have received. Deborah saw herself as a “mother in Israel” (5:7), and Jael is praised as a woman in her tent (5:24). Barak finally led the army but there was no honor for him in the end. He is remembered as a man who cowered.

Gideon and Abimelech: Fatherly-Leadership-Failure

The account of Gideon and his family is the longest story in the book. In this story, the theme moves beyond the account of the judge and shows the impact a parent has on his children. It is a three-generational story. Gideon’s father, Joash, was a worshipper of Baal. Gideon rose to faith in God over time as God used him to defeat the enemy, and then Gideon fell back into his idolatrous roots, impacting first his family and then the nation.

Israel sinned again and God gave them into the hands of the Midianites (Judg. 6:1). When Israel cried to God for help, God sent a prophet to rebuke them for the sin of thanklessness. God had rescued them from Egypt and had given them the land. He told them not to fear the gods of the land, but they did not obey him. A basic quality of a spiritual leader at any level must be to cultivate a historical remembrance of God’s blessings. Remembrance brings thankfulness; thankfulness encourages faith for future tests. Israel forgot God’s blessings to them and as a result, they walked away from him as though there was no obligation of thankfulness.[25]

In response to Israel’s cries for help, God went about recruiting Gideon to fill the role of deliverer-judge. Exum wrote, “No character in the book receives more divine assurance than Gideon and no one displays more doubt.”[26]As a representative of his time, Gideon was not thankful for past blessings and so lacked any faith for the present challenge. God identified the potential he saw in Gideon, but Gideon rejected it (Judges 6:12–13). God gave specific instructions, but Gideon dismissed them (6:14–15). God gave the direct promise of his presence and a promise of victory, but Gideon demanded a sign (6:16–18). God graciously provided that sign (6:19–21) and gave a further assurance that Gideon would not die when he expressed fear (6:22–23). God then gave Gideon a job to do—tear down his father’s altar to Baal and cut down the Asherah. Gideon fearfully did the task at night, and his own father protected him when the men of the city wanted to kill him for the desecration (6:25–32).[27] When God empowered Gideon with the presence of his Holy Spirit, Gideon put God to a further test with the fleece (6:34–40).[28]

Seeing a potential problem in Gideon, God reduced his army until Israel was greatly outnumbered (7:1–7). The reason given was that “Israel would become boastful, saying, ‘My own power has delivered me’” (7:2). Then, God gave Gideon one final gracious encouragement, instructing him to go down into the enemy camp where he received a direct confirmation that his army would be victorious in the battle (7:9–15). This final word brought Gideon to worship and to assure his army that “the Lord has given the camp of Midian into your hands” (7:15). Gideon doubted all the words from God, but was finally convinced by the words of an enemy soldier. Leaders always need to seek advice and counsel from advisors. God’s wisdom, however, must always take precedent over that of human advisors, as man is prone to pride and earthly influences, and only God’s wisdom is pure in its motivation (James 3:13–18).

The outcome of Gideon’s story is first hinted at in Gideon’s instruction to his men. Twice he gave the battle cry as, “for the Lord and for Gideon” (7:18, 20). Leaders are prone to see themselves as more important in the process than is warranted before God. Pride is the leader’s constant enemy, and an ever-present temptation.[29] When the war was won, Gideon at first avoided confrontation with Ephraim by emphasizing first the importance of their accomplishments, and then by telling them that God had given the leaders of Midian into their hands (8:1–3). However, when Gideon met men with doubt like his own, he became ruthless in his treatment of them (8:4–17), even to the point of killing fellow Israelites for being hesitant to fully enter the war.[30] Leaders must always remember their own humble journey, and God’s grace in their lives, and then be an instrument of that grace to others in their journey. Gideon sorely failed in this matter, being fed by his own swelling pride over the Midianite defeat.

From this point on, Gideon’s pride rose to the front and controlled his actions. He embarrassed his own fearful and hesitant son over the killing of the two Midianite kings (8:18–21). He claimed for himself the kings’ “crescent ornaments which were on their camel’s necks” (8:21). When the people came to Gideon and asked him to rule over them, forming a dynasty along with his sons, Gideon piously declined, stating “the Lord shall rule over you” (Judg. 8:23). Instead, Gideon asked each of them to give him an earring from the spoil of the war. They willingly did this, providing Gideon with more than forty-three pounds of gold, “besides the crescent ornaments and the pendants and the purple robes which were on the kings of Midian, and besides the neck bands that were on their camels’ necks” (Judg. 8:26). The narrator says, “Gideon made [the gold] into an ephod, and placed it in his city, Ophrah, and all Israel played the harlot with it there, so that it became a snare to Gideon and his household” (Judg. 8:27).

Gideon then married many wives, and had seventy sons, one of them being Abimelech, the son of his Canaanite concubine. Here a judge failed to obey specific commands from God not to intermarry with the Canaanites (Deut. 7:3; Josh. 23:12). A leader’s prideful elevation of himself will even take him to a place where he feels above the laws of God. Gideon’s sin in making an idolatrous ephod impacted his own home, as seen in the following story of Abimelech, and then in the nation. When Gideon died, “the sons of Israel again played the harlot with the Baals” (Judg. 8:33). Gideon piously refused the title of king which the people wished to give him, but he certainly lived “like an oriental king, a status memorialized in the name of his son, Abimelech (‘my father is king’).”[31] Gideon’s story began in the idolatrous household of his father. Through many gracious events God brought Gideon to a place of faith. His victory, however, was tainted with pride, and Gideon’s life ended back in idolatry.

The story of Abimelech demonstrates the impact Gideon had on his own family.[32] The narrator writes that Gideon surely defeated the Midianites and “they did not lift up their heads anymore” (Judg. 8:28), but the story of Abimelech illustrates that Gideon destroyed his own family in the process. Leaders tend to see the big-picture challenges before them as the primary focus of their calling, while at the same time they may fail to see the need to look beyond their own lives and leave a godly legacy when they are gone. The leader’s family often gets little attention, resulting in sons and daughters who are ill-prepared to carry on the victories of the parents.

Abimelech is such a case. Abimelech illustrates a son who picked up on all the bad traits of his father. He illustrates the proverbial saying, “like father, like son,” but with a step downhill. Abimelech purposefully sides with the idolatrous side of his background, with no thought of obeying Yahweh. The narrator then shows numerous parallels between Gideon and his son.

Gideon is said to have looked like the son of a king (8:18); Abimelech’s name meant he was the son of a king. Gideon ends his life in idolatry (8:27); Abimelech financed his evil reign from the house of Baal-berith (9:4). Gideon tore down the altar of Baal and sacrificed a bull to Yahweh in preparation for his judgeship (6:25–28); Abimelech sacrificed his own brothers “on one stone” in preparation for his kingship. Gideon’s brothers were killed by the enemy (8:18); Abimelech killed his own brothers as his enemies (9:5). Gideon told his men to watch what he did and do likewise, as they went into battle against Midian (7:18); Abimelech told his men to do the same as they went to war against his own family in Shechem (9:48). Gideon overreacted and killed all the men in the tower at Penuel (8:17); Abimelech overreacted and did the same at Thebez, killing all the men, and some women (9:49; there was no mention of this city previously as a warrant for Abimelech to attack).[33]

There is a definite cause-effect relationship between Gideon and Abimelech. While Gideon damaged his family spiritually, Abimelech damaged his family both spiritually and physically, demonstrating the downward cycle in the book from Judges 2:19. Abimelech turned on both his father’s and his mother’s families, freely murdering both. When leaders neglect or purposefully abuse their families, they take sides against God who is seeking to preserve the family as a basic building block of society (Judg. 9:23–24).

Leadership in the Quadrant 3 Judges: Jephthah among the Secondary Judges

The story of Jephthah (Judg. 10:6–12:7) continues themes from both Gideon and Abimelech. It is once again a story about a parent with personal goals that are in conflict with God-given family goals. Like Abimelech, Jephthah was the offspring of a woman outside the main family circle (Judg. 11:1). As such, their fathers were poor examples for them. Both were ostracized by the main family group and formed a group of their own of “worthless men” (Judg. 11:2–3). Both had aspirations of creating a dynasty which led to their downfall.

The story of Jephthah must be viewed against the backdrop of the stories surrounding it. Viewed as the centerpiece in a chiasm [34] from Gideon to Abdon, the story of Jephthah can be understood from the theme of the growth of the family and the roles the offspring assumed. The chiasm is formed based on the numbers within these stories themselves.

A. Gideon’s main family had 70 sons; the story involves a 3-generational family

B. Tola’s story gives only basic facts of his life, career, death and burial (10:1–2)

C. Jair’s story had 30 sons, 30 donkeys, 30 thirty cities (10:4)

D. Jephthah had one child, a daughter (11:34)

C’. Ibzan’s story had 30 sons, 30 daughters, 30 sons-in-law (12:8–10)

B’. Elon’s story gives only basic facts of life, career, death and burial (12:11–12)

A’. Abdon had 40 sons, 30 grandsons, a 3-generational family, riding 70 donkeys (12:13–15)

Tola and Elon seem to be placeholders in the pattern, but the growth and development of the family in the other secondary judges demonstrates the important theme. Gideon certainly had his eye on a dynasty, with himself as the king.[35] That idea is then developed through the chiasm, based on the offspring of the judge.

The narrator begins the theme of the extension of the family with Jair. He had thirty sons who rode on thirty donkeys. The donkeys are signs of wealth as they are the vehicle for kings.[36] Jair seems to have appointed his sons to continue his own rule by putting them over thirty cities in Gilead (Judges 10:4). Ibzan also had thirty sons, along with thirty daughters. He gave the daughters in marriage and he brought in thirty other daughters-in-law to marry his sons (Judg. 12:8–10). With Ibzan the family is expanding beyond just having offspring. The children are getting married. Abdon had forty sons and thirty grandsons and he gave them all donkeys. With Abdon the family again moves to the next step. The children get married and have grandchildren, but the presence of the donkeys indicates that the role of Abdon as judge is now passed to both his sons and to his grandsons. The building of a dynasty is in place. This is something that almost happened with Gideon and Abimelech, and it is the very thing that Jephthah wanted most.

Jephthah had been disinherited from the brothers of his father’s wife since he was the son of a harlot (Judg. 11:1–2). Jephthah left home and gathered a band of “worthless fellows” (Judg. 11:3). When the sons of Ammon fought against his homeland, the elders of Gilead sought Jephthah out and asked him to return and become their chief to fight against the Ammonites (Judg. 11:4–6). Jephthah negotiated an arrangement with the elders of Gilead that if he won the war they would make him “head and chief over them” (Judg. 11:7–11).[37] Jephthah would be able to establish his own dynasty, even over the brothers who disinherited him. Jephthah, however, had only one child, a daughter.

In his desire to win the war, “Jephthah made a vow to the Lord and said, ‘If You will indeed give the sons of Ammon into my hand, then it shall be that whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the sons of Ammon, it shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up as a burnt offering’” (Judg. 11:30–31).[38] Block argues that Jephthah “had everything to lose if God should fail him; all that he had gained politically would slip from his fingers. If God should abandon him, so would the people.”[39] Human sacrifice was an abomination in Israel (Lev. 18:21; Deut. 12:31), but it was practiced by the Ammonites.[40] “In this instance Jephthah was neither rash nor pious (in the orthodox Yahwistic sense)—he was outrightly pagan. Rather than a sign of spiritual immaturity and folly, like Gideon’s ephod, his vow arose from a syncretistic religious environment.”[41] Jephthah was covering his bases by making a promise to the God of Israel, but by offering a human sacrifice he was also making an appeal to the gods of the Ammonites who accepted human sacrifice.[42]

Jephthah won the war,[43] and when he returned home, his daughter came out of the house to greet him (Judg. 11:32–34). As a result, the narrator simply said that Jephthah “did to her according to the vow which he had made” (Judg. 11:39). Then, following the war, in a confrontation with the men of Ephraim, in contrast to Gideon’s treatment of Ephraim (Judg. 8:1–3), Jephthah turned against them and killed “42,000 of Ephraim” for not supporting him in the battle (Judg. 12:1–6).

The lessons of the Jephthah story indicate that Israel had spiraled further downhill. In staking everything on his personal goal, Jephthah foolishly destroyed his own goal by destroying his own family. His daughter was his only offspring, and in sacrificing her, he sacrificed the only hope for a dynasty. Leaders need to see that success in building their families is intricately tied to the success of their career. If leaders model a destructive approach to the family, they are contributing to the destruction of the nation and their local body of believers. When a leader places such an emphasis on personal career over family, he/she is in danger of losing both.

The Gideon story describes what happened to the sons as a result of the fathers not living and passing on the faith. The Jephthah story tells what happens to the daughters when the fathers are concerned for themselves rather than preparing a godly heritage. When the men failed, God raised up women to take over their responsibilities (e.g., Deborah, Jael, the unnamed woman in Judges 9). But if the women are removed from the picture, as Jephthah’s daughter was, the very existence of the nation is at stake. . . . Problems in the home ultimately impacted the nation.[44]

Leadership in the Quadrant 4 Judges: Samson

The story of Samson (Judg. 13:1–16:31) is the last of the judge stories, and as such, it brings Israel to the bottom of the downhill spiral. Samson took the drive for personal satisfaction that is seen in Gideon and Jephthah to a new low. His first words in the story focused on wanting what he saw (Judg. 14:2), and in the end he lost his sight (Judg. 16:21). He never finished his marriage ceremony and he died without a family. Samson embodied the promiscuous behavior of the Canaanite gods.

The story begins with yet another spiritually weak man, Manoah. He is blessed by God with the promise of an extraordinary son, which puts Samson in line with other great leaders born to barren women.[45] The angel of the Lord came to Manoah’s wife multiple times with the message because Manoah seems spiritually dull in understanding God’s plan, even to the point of fearing death which would annul the plan (Judg. 13:1–22). Manoah’s wife understands the ramifications of the angelic visit and needs to brace up her husband (Judg. 13:23). When Samson was born and expressed his desire for a Philistine woman, Manoah was unable to persuade him otherwise and so acquiesced to his demands. If leaders are spiritually dull they may begin to follow those they are supposed to lead.

The story of Samson begins with Israel’s sin and God giving them into the hands of the Philistines. This story does not have the stage where the nation cries out to God for help. Judah, who was the designated leader-tribe in the book (Judg. 1:1–2; 20:18), tried to stop Samson from harassing the Philistines (Judg. 15:9–13). It is for this reason that God gifted Samson with supernatural strength: A one-man army was needed to fight as a representative of all Israel. Judah was willing to sacrifice their own Spirit-filled judge by giving him to the enemy rather than fight for their own freedom (Judg. 15:11). When leaders have lost their spiritual contact with God, they resign themselves to the whim of fate and the forces they cannot control. Even leaders can lose their God-given vision for the task at hand as they needlessly surrender to the enemy.

Like Gideon and Jephthah, Samson’s personal passions drove his actions. His lust for women, and his hatred for the Philistines, controlled him in all the episodes the narrator included of his life. Samson’s greatest strength was his unstoppable God-given power over the Philistines. His greatest weakness was his inability to overpower his personal lusts. In the end his weakness for women led him to a most unglorious death. Samson was blinded by his lust and was unaware of the tactics of Delilah. He treated the secret of his strength as Esau had treated his own birthright, each selling it to indulge their temporary appetites.

Concluding the Book of Judges: The Canaanization of Israel

The conclusion of the book has two extended epilogue stories that correspond to the two introductions. These final stories (17:1–18:31 and 19:1–21:25) are clearly distinct from the stories of the judges. Instead of being built around the cycle of sin and deliverance, they are built around the repeated phrases, “In those days there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25) and the resultant fact that “everyone did what was right in their own eyes” (17:6; 21:25). In these last two stories, “the narrator will offer the reader a series of glimpses at how ordinary Israelites fared in the dark days of the ‘judges’ (governors). The effect will be to confirm the picture of a pervasively and increasingly Canaanized society.”[46] Each story began in a dysfunctional Israelite home, creating a situation that would lead to first a moral and then a military disaster in the whole nation.

In the story of Micah and his mother (Judg. 17:1–18:31)[47] Micah stole money from his mother and then confessed in fear of a curse upon the thief. His mother gave the money back to Micah, commissioning the making of idols for the home. Micah created a shrine with the idols and commissioned his son as the priest. Soon a traveling Levite arrived and replaced Micah’s son as the family priest, only to be enticed away by some Danites who were moving their tribe to a better location in the far north. The Levite took Micah’s idols and went with the Danites to become their priest. They set up an alternate worship center in the city of Dan that was later used by Jeroboam as a cultic center, and it lasted until the Assyrian captivity of Israel in 722 bc. The Levite is identified at the end of the story as Jonathan, the grandson of Moses.[48] A private shrine in the syncretistic home of Micah and his mother escalated into a place of pagan worship for Israel for hundreds of years. This was the corresponding end result of the moral compromises seen in the second introduction of the book (Judg. 2:6–3:6).

The story of the Levite and his concubine (Judg. 19:1–21:25), a shocking account of moral depravity, occurred early in the period of the judges.[49] A concubine “played the harlot” and left her Levite husband to return home. When the Levite went to retrieve his wife, he experienced great hospitality in contrast to the treatment they experienced on the way home. Avoiding a Canaanite city, they went to an Israelite city where “the men of the city, worthless fellows, surrounded the house” in order to “know him” (Judg. 19:22, esv). Their Ephraimite host offered the men his virgin daughter and when they refused, the Levite thrust his concubine out the door. Finding her raped and lying at the doorway in the morning, he took her home, cut up her body and sent parts to all the territories of Israel. When the nation gathered to discipline the guilty men, the tribe of Benjamin rallied to protect them and a civil war arose. When all the tribe of Benjamin was reduced to only six hundred men remaining, the war was called off. Now they needed to find wives for these six hundred men so that the tribe was not lost to Israel. Since those who fought had sworn not to give any of their daughters to Benjamin, they came up with two plans. They wiped out all but the virgin girls in one city that had not helped in the war, securing four hundred virgins. Then the remaining Benjamites kidnapped another two hundred virgins from a group holding “a feast of the Lord” (Judg. 21:19–23). The Levite had mutilated his concubine wife—an even more depraved counterpart to the story of Adoni-bezek in the first introduction who had mutilated his enemies (Judg. 1:5–7). The Benjamites murdered and kidnapped virgin girls because they needed “wombs” to re-start their tribe again—a counterpart to Sisera’s mother’s comment about the Canaanite view of women as spoils of war (Judg. 5:28–30). All of this happened because “in those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judg. 21:25).

These epilogue stories both contain a Levite as part of the story, with one coming from the very family of Moses. The temptation to be drawn into personal gain, or to be impacted by the prevailing culture around us, is not something that affects only a few. These are temptations that impact everyone, even those who are directly attached to the ministry. Leadership in spiritual ministry is no guarantee that one will be exempt from the allure of the sins of the culture. Thus, one must remain vigilant to the task given by Yahweh instead of pursuing what is right in one’s own eyes.

Leadership Significance

The setting of the book of Judges arises out of Joshua laying down a challenge for individual families to purposefully choose to serve the God who brought them out of Egypt into the Promised Land (Josh. 24:14–15). Their job, entering this next period of time, was to rid the land of the remaining pockets of Canaanites and remain faithful to God who would help them. Israel failed by allowing the Canaanites to remain, and by compromising on God’s moral instruction. They formed family-marriage alliances with the Canaanites and failed to pass to their children a faithful adherence to the covenant in Deuteronomy. The judge stories show the downward spiral, as they moved from order to chaos. Othniel began the story by marrying into the faith of the past, building a marriage around God’s promises for the land. Samson closed the story, fully indulging the lusts of his eyes and becoming physically blind as Israel was spiritually blind. The end product was a failure to fulfill the responsibility of family leadership given by Joshua, with the result that everyone just did what was right in their own eyes.

Godly leadership must be chosen willfully as it is only one of many options for those in leadership. Godly leadership is not naturally found in a onetime decision, but instead it is something that has to be chosen over and over as leaders are constantly barraged by choices and opportunities to sacrifice their service of God in exchange for serving one’s own passions and appetites. The leader’s service must be built around a thankfulness for God’s demonstrated grace, with a maintained commitment to God’s goals, recognizing God’s principles for carrying out those goals. When leaders abdicate their responsibility to do that, they enter a downhill spiral where allegiance to God is gradually replaced by allegiance to self. Pride and self-serving goals are the temptation of every leader. If followed, the end product is a blindness to all heavenly wisdom in favor of what is right in their own eyes.

Many of the lessons found in the Book of Judges are negative lessons, but there is a sliver of hope that needs to be highlighted. It is generally accepted that the book of Ruth, is joined thematically to the book of Judges and takes place “in the days when the judges governed” (Ruth 1:1).[50] Even though the book of Judges ends on a pessimistic note, God, the Judge, is behind the scenes preparing a leader who is a man after His own heart. That man is David (Ruth 4:18–22), a descendent of Ruth, who will turn the nation back toward a proper worship and service of God. And, it is through the lineage of David that God brought to the world a Savior who brought grace and truth (John 1:17) to all who fail. Leaders must never lose sight of the grace of God which is behind all that we are and all that we do (1 Cor. 15:10). With that perspective, there is always hope, even in the darkest of days.

Reference information

[Benjamin K Forrest (2018). (p. 112). Biblical Theology for the Church: Biblical Leadership: Theology for the Everyday Leader. Retrieved from https://app.wordsearchbible.com]

THEME: Faith in the Face of Fear

Chapter 9

Faith in the Face of Fear: Leadership during the Divided Kingdom

William R. Osborne

Like many character traits, leadership is often forged in the flames of fear. It is not that leaders are fearless; they are simply committed to a cause that transcends their personal welfare. The divided kingdom—itself a tragic consequence of faithlessness and leadership failure—was a time plagued with threats, sieges, and fear. Israel and Judah had separated into two nations with two separate governing monarchies, and the way these monarchies responded to YHWH would shape the history of that nation. In the stories of these two nations, we find that some kings respond in faith to the promises of YHWH, while others retreat to and depend on the political, monetary, or strategic tactics of the age to achieve stability and protection. Throughout the running narrative in 1 and 2 Kings, we see that leadership ultimately depends upon whom the kings of Israel and Judah would serve—themselves or YHWH as the sovereign, divine King. In this study we will turn our attention specifically to the lives of Rehoboam, Jeroboam, Hezekiah, and Josiah, and we will see both the dismal failures and soaring successes of how each of these kings approached faith in the face of fear.

Unfortunately, the responses of Judah’s and Israel’s kings to national threats were not always faithful and honoring to God, and sadly we see the same motivating vices driving too many leaders today. A quick read through 1 and 2 Kings will reveal that the same lack of faith, jealousy, pride, greed, and idolatry that plague our experiences as leaders have been corrupting past leaders for millennia. And with a piercing divine power these stories expose us for who we really are. However, these books also present powerful pictures of inspiring leaders shaped by faith, honor, and courage that continue to point us toward the goal of faithful leadership—and ultimately, the faithful Leader.

First Kings opens with a buzzing excitement of divine encounters, building projects, expanding borders, and international amazement, all focused upon the splendor of Solomon’s empire. Indeed, the period of the United Monarchy incited great hopes for Israel’s kings (2 Sam. 7). However, Lissa M. Wray Beal accurately captures the positive potential of Israel’s kings alongside the lamentable reality that came to characterize the divided kingdom:

The monarchy is given in the hope of wise and godly leadership and the kings are intended as pointers to the one they represent as co-regent. . . . The tragedy is that the life of promise too quickly degenerated to servitudes: syncretized and aberrant worship, corvée labour for monumental building projects, and the ongoing encroachment of foreign armies with the ultimate loss of national life and servitude in Babylon—a new Egypt.[1]

As part of a larger, unified portrait of Israel’s history, the books of 1 and 2 Kings present us with two contrasting “lineages,” in which we are to understand royal leadership in ancient Israel: the promise of David’s dynasty (Judah) and Jeroboam I’s sin (Israel). Both David and Jeroboam serve as royal progenitors who also come to resemble the high-water mark of leadership for subsequent generations, albeit in their own respective ways.[2] These two distinct lineages, and their ensuing commendations and indictments, also present us with an interpretive grid from the perspective of the biblical writer. Many times in OT narrative, it is not exactly clear where the characters stand morally. There are complex characters like Abraham, Samson, and even David. Some of their actions are praiseworthy and worthy of emulation, while others are quite dastardly. The book of Kings affords an opportunity for assessment, based upon how a king lines up with reference to the royal lineages of David and Jeroboam—the former affording a positive assessment and the latter a negative one.

It is difficult for Americans to appreciate the significance of a king. As people raised on a government “for the people, and by the people,” the notions of sovereignty, divine-right, and corporate solidarity do not mean very much. However, in the ancient Near East and the Old Testament the king played an enormous social and religious role. The Old Testament books of Kings and Chronicles both present something of a rationale for the exilic and postexilic situation experienced by God’s people. But when you read through the books you primarily encounter kings and a few prophets bringing indictments against them. Where are the citizens? What did they do to deserve exile from the land? As important as these question may seem to us, they were not a driving question for the authors of the biblical text. They operated in a worldview that saw the king as a representative for the people, both before God and other nations—thus, so goes the king, so goes the nation (see 1 Kings 12:16)! This idea is often referred to as corporate solidarity. The identity and outcome of the group is bound up in its leader.

The king not only maintained a unique place with regard to the populace, he also maintained a unique religious function. He was to be the faithful worshipper par excellence. He was supposed to be the model of humanity and demonstrate fidelity and trust before YHWH. John Walton states: “As in the ancient Near East, the Israelite king is the agent of the divine plan, concerned with the will of deity, and representative of divine authority. . . . The king was responsible for justice and accountable to the Deity for protecting the vulnerable.”[3] The king was an earthly sovereign, but any authority he maintained was granted from the Lord. This trust and faith, or lack thereof, necessarily affected the leaders’ relationships with foreign nations.

The kingdoms of Israel and Judah were not isolated nations in the ancient world. The two nations rested upon a highly valued travel route between Egypt in the south and Assyria in the north. Throughout the period of the divided kingdom, both Egypt and Assyria applied enormous pressure on Israel and Judah, and eventually the Babylonian and the Persian empires would become central players in the Levant. The kings in Israel and Judah determined their nation’s foreign policy, again, which necessarily took into account the religions of other nations. International diplomacy and warfare were religious endeavors. The period of the divided monarchy presents the downward spiral and collapse of both Israel and Judah. However, these stories should not be wasted on us; there are powerful truths to be learned from the mistakes and triumphs of these ancient leaders (cf. 1 Cor. 10:6). Turning our attention to the book of 1 and 2 Kings, we will see both negative and positive examples of faithful leadership that we can apply to our lives today.

Leadership in the Divided Kingdom

Rehoboam’s Foolish Threat (1 Kings 12:1–24)

King Solomon’s death at the end of 1 Kings 11 brought about the end of his forty-year reign over Israel and signaled the beginning of a new era under his son Rehoboam. However, the dark clouds of division were already rolling in (1 Kings 11:31–35). The prophet Ahijah had already told Jeroboam that he would reign over ten of the tribes of Israel, because Solomon had turned to worship other gods (1 Kings 11:31). The only question was when and where this great monarchial rift would burst open, rendering the irreparable divide.

Chapter 12 opens with Rehoboam traveling to the hill country of Ephraim to the ancient site of Shechem (where Abimelech was anointed king in Judges 9) so that “all Israel” might make him king. The united response of Jeroboam and the people to lighten their load likely indicates that dissension had already begun to grow and fester under the reign of Solomon, due to heavy labor burdens and high taxation.[4] The people then said, “Your father made our yoke heavy. Now therefore lighten the hard service of your father and his heavy yoke on us, and we will serve you”(v. 4). Rehoboam tells them to return in three days for his answer.

During those days the would-be king sought advice from the older men who witnessed the reign of his father. They responded by telling Rehoboam that if he will serve the people and speak good words to them, they will serve him forever. However, Rehoboam rejected this advice and desired counsel from the young men he had known from his youth. The impetuous young upstarts tell Rehoboam that these people do not need apologetic regrets but royal threats! The friends of the crown prince advise him to respond with one of the best one-liners in the Bible: “My little finger is thicker than my father’s thighs” (v. 11). In essence, “You thought my father gave you heavy burdens, I will show you heavy. . . !”

When the people returned, as requested by Rehoboam, he responded as his young advisors had suggested. He threatened the people, telling them that instead of lightening their burdens he would increase their workload and intensify the punishment for noncompliance. As a result, the people rejected Rehoboam, stoned his taskmaster Adoram (v. 18), and made Jeroboam king over the northern ten tribes of Israel (v. 20). Rehoboam returned to Jerusalem, and reigned only over the tribes Judah and Benjamin.

Jeroboam’s Golden Calves (1 Kings 12:25–33)

It is difficult to overstate the significance of the events that play out early on in Jeroboam I’s reign. Like many newly installed leaders, Jeroboam first moves to secure his place of dwelling by fortifying the cities of Shechem and Penuel.[5] After establishing these locations, he then turns his attention to the religious situation that must be addressed in the new nation. Being a bright and “very able young man” (cf. 1 Kings 11:28), Jeroboam recognized that the religious center of Israel’s faith was located outside the borders of his new nation. He feared that if the people were to continue to return to Jerusalem to worship, “they will kill me and return to Rehoboam king of Judah” (1 Kings 12:26).

Therefore, after receiving some bad advice, Jeroboam established two new centers for worship in the northern nation of Israel. He built two golden calves, placing one in the north at Dan and one in Bethel in the south, and proclaimed to the people of Israel, “Behold your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt” (1 Kings 12:28; cf. Exod. 32:4; Neh. 9:18). Whether or not the bovine structures were indeed idols of the deities or sacred mounts upon which the divine presence would have stood is debated, but most agree that the idea was in violation of the first and second commandments in the Decalogue.[6]However, there are numerous transgressions listed in the passage that indicate the seriousness of Jeroboam’s bad decision:[7]

Identifying multiple gods as the source of Israel’s deliverance from Egypt (v. 28)

Establishing places of worship on “high places” (v. 31)

Appointing priests to serve his new worship complexes who were not Levites (v. 31)

Declared changes to the calendar of religious festivals (v. 32)

Officiating personally at the altar in Bethel (v. 33)

Any one of these actions would have been a religious train wreck, and yet Jeroboam carried them all out at once. No wonder the author describes the situation in verse 30 stating, “Then this thing became a sin.”

Jeroboam’s iniquity becomes even more severe when compared to his potential, as witnessed in the initial divine offer mediated by Ahijah in chapter 11: “And if you will listen to all that I command you, and will walk in my ways, and do what is right in my eyes by keeping my statutes and my commandments, as David my servant did, I will be with you and will build you a sure house, as I built for David, and I will give Israel to you” (1 Kings 11:38). Jeroboam could not have demonstrated a greater propensity for ignoring the word of the Lord. Driven by fear and selfishness, he turned from the ways of the Lord and ultimately made himself lord and god over the northern kingdom. Jeroboam’s divine judgement came (1 Kings 14:9–11), but the wicked seed had been sown. Every subsequent king of Israel (the only exception being Shallum, who reigned for one month; 2 Kings 15:13–16) is described as walking in the sins of Jeroboam: Nadab (1 Kings 15:30), Baasha (1 Kings 15:34), Elah (1 Kings 16:13, “the sins of Baasha”), Omri (1 Kings 16:26), Ahab (1 Kings 16:30–31), Ahaziah (1 Kings 22:52), Jehu (2 Kings 10:29), Jehoahaz (2 Kings 13:2), Jehoash (2 Kings 13:11), Jeroboam II (2 Kings 14:24), Zechariah (2 Kings 15:9), Menahem (2 Kings 15:18), Pekahiah (2 Kings 15:24), and Pekah (2 Kings 15:28). According to the biblical historian, the northern nation of Israel fell for two reasons: (1) the people walked in the ways of the Canaanite nations (2 Kings 17:7–9), and (2) “The people of Israel walked in all the sins that Jeroboam did. They did not depart from them” (2 Kings 17:22).[8] Jeroboam’s legacy was Israel’s tragedy.

Hezekiah’s Courageous Stand (2 Kings 18:13–19:37)

The book of Kings makes a concerted effort to demonstrate that the northern nation of Israel exceeded the southern nation in their commitment sto disobeying the word of the Lord. Without a doubt Judah experienced epic leadership failures after the initial reign of Rehoboam, for example: Abijam (1 Kings 15:3), Jehoram (2 Kings 8:18), Ahaziah (2 Kings 8:27), and Ahaz (2 Kings 16:2–3). However, just as Jeroboam’s sin was perpetuated down through the generations of Israel’s kings, the legacy of King David in Judah also had lasting effects. King Asa, the grandson of Rehoboam, is so described: “Asa did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, as David his father had done” (1 Kings 15:11). Unlike Israel, Judah experienced periodic relief from the wickedness of their leaders. Consequently, the southern nation did not experience the impending destruction and exile as quickly as the northern kingdom.[9]

One of those periods of relief was under the reign of King Hezekiah (715–686 bc). Like his predecessor Asa, Hezekiah is described as doing what was right in the eyes of the Lord and trusting “in the Lord, the God of Israel, so that there was none like him among all the kings of Judah after him, nor among those who were before him. For he held fast to the Lord” (2 Kings 18:5–6a).

Hezekiah’s resolve and faithfulness found its ultimate test in 701 bc, when the Assyrian king Sennacherib surrounded the city of Jerusalem, threatening to ravage the city (also recorded in 2 Chronicles 32:1–20 and Isaiah 36:1–22). After having stripped the temple and his own house of silver to pay off Sennacherib, who was encamped in the nearby city of Lachish, Hezekiah received word from his officials that the chief spokesman of the Assyrian army was threatening the people of Jerusalem: “Do not let Hezekiah deceive you, for he will not be able to deliver you out of my hand” (2 Kings 18:29). However, the people did not respond because Hezekiah had commanded them not to answer the Assyrian threats.

Once the spokesman returned to Sennacherib, the king sent another message to Hezekiah by way of letter, and when Hezekiah received it he took it to the temple and spread it out before the Lord. Verses 15–19 record for us Hezekiah’s powerful prayer of faith offered up in the middle of this immense crisis. The prayer identifies God as the sole ruler over all of the kingdoms of the earth, cries out for his divine ear and intervention, and concludes by saying, “So now, O Lord our God, save us, please from his hand, that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that you, O Lord, are God alone” (2 Kings 19:19). Immediately following the king’s prayer, we are told that the prophet Isaiah sent word to Hezekiah confirming that God had indeed heard his prayer, and that the Lord would lead King Sennacherib away from Jerusalem without taking the city. Verses 35–36 report that these words came true and that the city did not fall to Sennacherib.[10]

Josiah’s Faithful Reforms (2 Kings 23:1–27)

About forty-five years after the reign of Hezekiah, and two horrible kings later (Manasseh and Amon), an eight-year-old boy by the name of Josiah assumed the throne of Judah. Though young, Josiah was a good king who was also described as walking in the ways of his father David, and it was because of his devotion and concern for the house of the Lord that the word of God would again resonate through the land of Judah. Josiah desired to allocate money so that the temple could be repaired and as the repairs were going on one of the priests, a certain Hilkiah, discovered the Book of the Law (which many perceive to be some form of Deuteronomy [11] ).

Hearing the word of the Lord, Josiah tore his clothes and immediately commanded the priests and servants to inquire a word from the Lord as to whether or not his wrath would come against them because of their fathers’ disobedience and neglect. God spoke to Josiah through the prophetess Huldah and told the king that his wrath would not be diverted from Jerusalem because of the idolatry of the nation. However, God told Josiah, “because your heart was penitent, and you humbled yourself before the Lord, when you heard how I spoke against this place and against its inhabitants . . . and you have torn your clothes and wept before me, I also have heard you . . . and your eyes shall not see all the disaster that I will bring upon this place” (2 Kings 22:19–20).

In the following chapter, we read that Josiah gathered all the people of Judah at the house to the Lord and read this newly rediscovered book to the nation. He then made a covenant with the Lord before all the people that he would walk in accordance to God’s laws, and the people covenanted along with him. The young king commanded the priests to rid the temple of the vestiges of Baal worship and the Asherah; he removed the high places from throughout the land, and destroyed the temple at Bethel constructed by Jeroboam I. Josiah carried out numerous religious changes in Judah, and the thoroughness of the reforms powerfully reveals the depths to which the nation had fallen and the significance of his faithful cleansing.

Theology of Leadership in the Divided Kingdom

A theology of leadership from the divided kingdom must begin by addressing the fundamental theological question: what do these texts reveal to us about God? While this seems utterly elementary when stated, our Western, individualistic, kneejerk reaction to Old Testament narratives is often to treat these stories as a biblical version of “Aesop’s Fables,” thus asking, “What is the moral lesson to be learned?” and “Do I follow this example, or not follow this example?” It is not that these questions are wholly inappropriate, for Paul tells us that many of Israel’s stories were given to us as a warning against moral and religious failure (see 1 Cor. 10:6–11). And in fact, these questions of moral character will be discussed further below. However, the Bible is a theological and historical revelation that is—at its core—a revelation of God’s redemptive plan for his people. Thus, a theology of any topic or book must begin with God. Perry W. H. Shaw helpfully ties this theological reality into the leadership discussion: “Overwhelmingly through the Scriptures the ideal model is not that of democracy or autocracy but theocracy; leaders see themselves as, first and foremost, servants and followers under the authority and leadership of God, and from that position lead others”[12]

The Word of the King

In the midst of the downward spiral that characterizes the divided monarchy, the word of the true King of Israel remains constant and sure. Burke Long writes of the divine word in Kings, “[T]he divine word not only comes true, it seems to push and motivate the actors in the drama, announce the turns, and shape of the tale (e.g., 17:1–6; 18:1–2). Prophecy is a history-creating force.” [13] The word of the Lord is described as being fulfilled, established, or confirmed five times in the Solomon narrative (1 Kings 2:4, 27; 6:12; 8:26, 56). Even the events surrounding the division of the kingdom under Rehoboam are attributed to the sovereign hand of YHWH: “So the king did not listen to the people, for it was a turn of affairs brought about by the Lord that he might fulfill his word, which the Lord spoke by Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat” (1 Kings 12:15).

Biblically rooted leadership recognizes and submits to the authority of the Sovereign Leader of the universe. God is at work in the world revealing himself and his plan of redemption through his chosen people Israel, and those leaders who recognize the divine word and work of the true Leader of Israel are portrayed as good and faithful leaders of God’s people. King Hezekiah prays, “O Lord, the God of Israel, enthroned above the cherubim, you are the God, you alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth; you have made heaven and earth. . . . So now, O Lord our God, save us, please, from his hand, that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that you, O Lord, are God alone” (2 Kings 19:15, 19). Yet even provided this portrait of Hezekiah’s piety, this does not appear to be the primary justification for delivering the city from the forces of Assyria. The Lord proclaims through the prophet Isaiah, “For I will defend this city to save it, for my own sake and for the sake of my servant David” (2 Kings 19:34). YHWH works through the faithfulness of Hezekiah to deliver Jerusalem for the sake of his glory and because of the covenant he made with David.

Longing for a Perfect King

God would indeed keep his promise concerning his covenant with David. Despite the numerous negative examples of faithlessness, unrighteousness, and folly revealed in the divided monarchy, each failed attempt to reign would eventually serve as a foreboding foil for the coming King in God’s great narrative of salvation. Each failed reign points more directly to the high stakes of human rebellion and the desperate need for a king to come and represent the people in righteousness and justice. Theologically reflecting on the leaders found in the books of 1 and 2 Kings drives us in anticipation toward the great Leader of God’s people—Jesus the Christ. Consequently, in a post-incarnation and postresurrection world, the decided mark of true leadership is not measured by material productivity or institutional effectiveness but fidelity to the King—the Son of David—who reigns on high and will one day rule all the nations with a rod of iron.

Significance of Leadership in the Divided Kingdom

While the period of the divided kingdom certainly involves more examples of positive and negative leadership than the previously discussed episodes, these central figures serve to illustrate many of the foundational leadership principles found when surveying Kings. These individuals and events point to both the tragic consequences of poor leadership among the people of God and the preserving power of faithfulness and courage of great leaders.

Faithful Loyalty to YHWH

As mentioned in the earlier part of this chapter, the king was to function as the example of a faithful worshipper par excellence. In fact, in Israel and Judah, this was the primary means by which the biblical historian assessed the quality of a king’s reign. Positive portrayals of leadership are centered upon loyalty to YHWH as the one true God. This is illustrated negatively through the idolatrous worship of the northern kings following in the patterns of Jeroboam. Jeroboam and the northern kings did not walk in the ways of the Lord, and consequently lead the people into sinful idolatry. While the account of Josiah reminds us that the king and the people were not inseparable in God’s perspective (see 2 Kings 22:15–20), the overall pattern of leadership depicts the universal truism: People go where their leaders take them.

While Jeroboam and the kings of north demonstrate the consequences of disloyalty to YHWH, Hezekiah and Josiah reveal the fibers of faithfulness woven throughout the Davidic line. Not only does Hezekiah demonstrate his religious fervor by removing the high places, cutting down the Asherah, and breaking the bronze serpent (2 Kings 18:4), he recognizes that faithful cultic worship is linked to faithful foreign policy. Unlike his wicked father Ahaz—who sought deliverance from the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III, even after he received a word from the Lord (cf. Isa. 7:1–25)—Hezekiah refuses to serve the foreign Assyrian king.

For the king, loyalty to YHWH includes walking in his ways with regard to worship and rule. The two are not to be separated. In Kings, the political maneuverings of the king should to lead the people toward a holistic understanding of YHWH’s sovereignty over the nations of the earth—certainly, including his chosen people. Josiah leads the people in covenanting with the Lord and points them toward divinely sanctioned worship. Consequently, he receives the commendation: “Before him there was no king like him, who turned to the Lord with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his might, according to the Law of Moses” (2 Kings 23:25). There is no such thing as “secular leadership” for the people of God. There is no realm of life to which God’s reign does not extend, therefore leadership must always be first and foremost loyal to the reign of God.

Humility & Wisdom

Wisdom and humility frequently coincide among the great leaders of the Bible. These characteristics are woven together in Proverbs 3:7, “Be not wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord, turn away from evil” and resonate with King Josiah’s divine commendation because he humbled himself before the Lord after being told about the Book of the Law (2 Kings 22:19). However, humility must also extend to the realm of earthly relationships as well. Exercising humility and wisdom often looks like responding properly to others. This is where Rehoboam fails as a leader. He is instructed by the old counselors, “If you will be a servant to this people today and serve them, and speak good words to them when you answer them, then they will be your servants forever” (1 Kings 12:7). Like many leaders presented in the Bible, Rehoboam rejects the notion that leadership involves service; he demands that he be served instead. His proud heavy-handed power grab reveals his insensitivity, insecurity, and incompetence as responsible leader.

Rehoboam’s leadership strategy is captured nicely in a work written over a thousand years later—Nicholi Machiavelli’s The Prince. He writes: “And here comes in the question whether it is better to be loved or feared, or feared rather than loved. It might perhaps be answered that we should wish to be both; but since love and fear can hardly exist together, if we must choose between them, it is far safer to be feared than loved.”[14] Rehoboam’s pride prompts his refusal to listen to the requests of the people he is serving. As theologian Kevin Vanhoozer writes, “Pride does not listen; it knows.”[15] While Rehoboam did seek counsel from others, in the end he listens to the foolish advice of the young yes-men he surrounded himself with, instead of heeding the words of the people he was leading.

Unlike Rehoboam, who refused to humble himself before the people and the wise counsel of the elders, Hezekiah humbles himself before the word of the Lord delivered through the prophet Isaiah. However, even before responding to the word of Isaiah, he sought out the word of Isaiah. When Hezekiah received the threats of Sennacherib, he tore his clothes, went to the temple, and sent for the prophet of the Lord. His leadership reflex was to turn to YHWH when crisis hit. When he received confirmation from Isaiah, he responded in faith, going a second time to the temple to pray for God to protect him and the city from this mighty enemy.

Hezekiah’s wisdom is also highlighted in the way he leads his people to deal with the Assyrian officials. The strategy of the official was to create such a sense of fear and panic that the people of Jerusalem would do the fighting for him. If he could create a panic with his rather serious threats (which had been confirmed in previous attacks not to be mere threats), the people would turn on Hezekiah and give him up to the Assyrians as a way of saving their own lives. However, it appears in 2 Kings 18:36 that Hezekiah was not caught off guard: “But the people were silent and answered him not a word, for the king’s command was ‘Do not answer him.’ ” Wisdom and silence are steady companions in the Old Testament (e.g., Prov. 11:12; 17:28; Eccl. 9:17; Isa. 7:4), and wise leadership looks like foreseeing scenarios that could produce panic and interjecting calm. In fact, Isaiah tells Hezekiah’s father Ahaz to do just this: “be calm, be quiet, do not fear, and do not let your heart be faint” (Isa. 7:4). Hezekiah obeys the words given to his father better than he did, and the city and its people were blessed through his leadership.

Courage in the Midst of Difficulties

The famous French revolutionary leader Napoleon Bonaparte held such contempt for human nature that his biographers recorded him saying, “There are two levers for moving men—interest and fear.”[16] Truly, there is not a more accurate or succinct assessment of the leadership motivations that appear to lie behind the actions of Rehoboam and Jeroboam. They simply feared the people they were leading, instead of the God they were serving. Once the kingdom divided and Jeroboam saw that people would have to return to Jerusalem to worship, he knew their allegiance would falter and they would turn back to Rehoboam the king of Judah. His fear drove him to spiritually compromise in ways that had enormous consequences for the northern nation of Israel. Interestingly, what Jeroboam’s motivations reveal is that he had been practicing idolatry long before the golden calves were ever constructed. His fear revealed his real love. It is no consequence or mistake that YHWH continually commands his people to fear him and love him only (see Deut. 10:12). Our worst fears often reveal our deepest affections. In his fear of losing his life, his kingdom, and his position, Jeroboam reveals that his kingdom and position are the objects of worship in his life, not the Sovereign Lord of Israel.

Having received the word of the Lord, Jeroboam had no reason to fear. He had the testimony of God’s faithfulness to Israel from the Patriarchs, to the Exodus, to the Promised Land. However, we have an even greater testimony of God’s love and faithfulness. God’s love has been demonstrated to us in that “while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). Paul tells Christians that they have nothing to fear, for nothing can separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus (Rom. 8:31–39), and that coming to a right understanding of God’s perfect love for us in Christ drives out fear (1 John 4:18). There are times when we will need to embrace the promises of God, and walk into the face of bad odds, low profit margins, and political ruin in order to faithfully lead in a biblical manner. This takes courage, and any leadership decision rooted in a fear of losing status, prestige, position, and power is not embracing the “Spirit of adoption as sons” that we have in Christ Jesus.

Conclusion

The divided kingdom was a dark period in the history of God’s people. However, like many periods of human history, the bleakness of the time allowed the character of certain leaders to shine forth. The faithlessness and fear of Jeroboam truly make the trust and courage of Hezekiah and Josiah stand out all the more. Ultimately, a good leader during the divided kingdom was a leader who responded faithfully to the promises of God. The faith of men like Josiah and Hezekiah, in the face of challenging circumstances, separates them from the foolishness and idolatry of leaders like Rehoboam and Jeroboam.

Nearly three thousand years after the division of the kingdom of Israel, we are still living under the reign of a son of David—only our King is the King of kings. And like the religious leaders in the Gospels, twenty-first-century leaders must answer the question, “Who is this Jesus?” The Divine Word (the Logos) has come into world enacting a much greater salvation than Hezekiah would ever experience, and we must decide whether or not we are going to acknowledge this great redemptive work or build our own kingdoms, set up our own festivals, and worship our own images. As members of God’s kingdom, made up of royal priests (1 Peter 2:9) and vice-regents, leadership in our vocations, families, and churches must reveal our faith-filled dependence upon the one true God, the ultimate source of all authority. When our faith is rooted in the promises of God, we are free to lead—like the Hezekiah and Josiah of old—with courage and humility in the face of fear, living out the words of the prophet Jeremiah, “Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the rich man boast in his riches, but let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me” (Jer. 9:23–24).

Reference information

[Benjamin K Forrest (2018). (p. 141). Biblical Theology for the Church: Biblical Leadership: Theology for the Everyday Leader. Retrieved from https://app.wordsearchbible.com]

THEME: Leading in a Fallen World

Chapter 12

Leading in a Fallen World: Leadership in Ecclesiastes

Tremper Longman III

At first blush, Ecclesiastes would appear to offer little by way of help on the subject of leadership. This book, after all, famously repeats the phrase “everything is meaningless” throughout the book.[1] If everything is meaningless, what role do leaders have in the world?

As we will see, though, the book of Ecclesiastes has a very important message concerning leadership in a difficult and fallen world. All who aspire to lead a ministry, business, or military/political organization need to pay very close attention to the message of the book, or risk tremendous frustration in their efforts to guide others in a productive direction. However, before diving into the topic of leadership per se, we first must address the question of how to read this interesting yet enigmatic book.

The Two Voices of the Book of Ecclesiastes

To properly read the book of Ecclesiastes, we must be careful to identify there are two speakers in the book, not just one. The presence of two voices is subtle to be sure, but also clear. There is a significant consensus among recent interpreters that there are two voices in the book,[2] and it is a view that many past interpreters also held (for instance the medieval Jewish thinker Rashbam the grandson of the better known Rashi [c. ad 1080–1160]).

The major speaker in the book goes by the nickname Qohelet. In what is an introduction to his autobiography, he says “I, [the] Qohelet, was king over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Qohelet is simply the transliteration of the Hebrew nickname, and we should immediately recognize that it is not a personal name since it has the definite article before it (“the Qohelet” [haqohelet]). Traditionally, the Hebrew qohelet has been translated “Preacher” (see ESV, among modern translations), but today most translations render qohelet as “Teacher” (niv, nlt, nrsv). While the latter makes most sense (“preacher” is both anachronistic for an Old Testament book as well as inappropriate for the rather radical views of this speaker), truth be told qohelet means neither, but rather “Assembler.”[3] Further on we will explore the significance of this translational difference. In the meantime, I will simply transliterate the nickname as Qohelet.

Qohelet speaks in the first person (“I Qohelet”) through the body of the book of Ecclesiastes. We have already mentioned that his speech begins with his self-introduction in 1:12 and continues until his final reflection on death that ends at 12:7. Indeed, in previous work, I have shown how 1:12–12:7 follows a basic pattern for Near Eastern autobiography.[4]

While Qohelet’s speech occupies the largest part of the book, his is not the dominant voice. The second speaker, who speaks about Qohelet (“he, Qohelet”), frames his words, thus introducing (1:1–11) and concluding (12:8–14) the book. Interestingly, and also subtly, we note in 12:12 that this second wise man or frame narrator, as he is sometimes called,[5] is speaking to his son (“Furthermore, of these, my son, be warned!”[6] ). In the final analysis, the book of Ecclesiastes contains a wise man’s reflections on the thought of Qohelet given to his son. Thus, to understand the book of Ecclesiastes, we must ask two questions: “What is the message of Qohelet?” and “What is the message of the frame narrator who is teaching his son?” The message of the latter, not the former, is the message of the book.

The Message of Qohelet

Qohelet speaks in 1:12–12:7. As we have seen, he introduces himself in 1:12, and then embarks on a search for the meaning of life (particularly in 1:13–6:9) and finally imparts advice based on the conclusion of his search (7:1–12:7).[7]

The gist of Qohelet’s message may be summarized as “Life is meaningless.” In other words, his search for meaning ends with failure. He cannot discover the meaning of life. He looks for meaning in work (2:18–23; 4:4–6), pleasure (2:1–11), wisdom (2:12–17), and money (5:1–6:9).

There are three things that render life meaningless. The first, and perhaps the most telling, is death. Death renders life meaningless. As an example, he believes that wisdom has relative value over against folly, but in the light of death wisdom is no better than folly (“I said to myself, ‘Even I will meet the same fate as the fool, why then have I become so wise?’ So I said to myself, ‘This too is meaningless’” [Eccl. 2:15]). For Qohelet, death is the end of the story; there is no afterlife (3:16–22; 12:1–7). The second reason for the meaninglessness of life is injustice. If there is no reward in the afterlife, then one might expect to benefit from right action in the present. According to Qohelet, however, “Both I have observed in my meaningless life: There is a righteous person perishing in his righteousness, and there is a wicked person living long in his evil. Do not be too righteous and do not be overly wise. Why ruin yourself? Do not be too wicked and do not be a fool. Why die when it is not your time?” (7:15–17). Third, and finally, life is meaningless because the wise person cannot discern the right time to do the right thing or to say the right thing. To understand why this frustrates Qohelet, we must remember that in the Old Testament wise and skillful living depends on knowing the “right time.”[8] Qohelet knows well that God made the world so that “for everything there is a season, and a time for every activity under heaven” (3:1, see also vv. 2–8), but as for humanity “no one can discover what God is doing from beginning to end” (3:11).

Since there is no meaning in life, what is a person to do? Carpe diem! Seize the day! On six occasions (2:24–26; 3:12–14; 3:22; 5:18–20; 8:15; 9:7–10), Qohelet encourages his listeners to enjoy themselves, since that is the most they can expect out of life. The first carpe diem passage is typical: “There is nothing better for people than to eat and drink and enjoy their toil. This too, I see, is from the hand of God. For who will eat and who will worry apart from him? For he gives wisdom, knowledge, and pleasure to the one who pleases him, but he gives to the one who is offensive the task of gathering wealth to be given to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless and chasing the wind” (2:24–26). If one were to ask what is the advantage of living a carpe diem life in spite of its meaninglessness, Qohelet answers “they (those who carpe diem) do not remember much about the days of their lives for God keeps them so busy with the pleasure of their heart” (5:20). In other words, those who carpe diem can momentarily at least forget that life is meaningless and that death is at its end.

Qohelet thus presents us with a pretty sad perspective on life. We will return soon to the question of Qohelet’s perspective on leadership, but before we do, we need to remember that Qohelet’s view is not the perspective of the book of Ecclesiastes. What we might call the normative message (or teaching) of the book of Ecclesiastes is connected with the message of the second unnamed wise man who speaks to his son. We learn his perspective primarily from the epilogue to the book.

The Message of the Frame Narrator

At the very end of the book, the second unnamed wise man or frame narrator evaluates the message of Qohelet for his son, “‘Completely meaningless,’ Qohelet said. ‘Everything is meaningless.’ Furthermore, Qohelet was a wise man. He also taught the people knowledge. He heard, investigated, and put in good order many proverbs. Qohelet sought to find words of delight and he wrote honest words of truth. The words of the wise are like goads, and like firmly implanted nails are the masters of collections. They are given by a shepherd. Furthermore, of these, my son, be warned! There is no end to the making of many books, and much study wearies the body” (Eccl. 12:8–12).

In the first place, we can see that the second wise man understands that Qohelet’s message was an important one for his son (and later readers) to hear. He spoke “honest words of truth.” At first, that might sound surprising since his message was that “life is meaningless,” but we must remember that Qohelet was searching for meaning “under the sun,” a phrase he frequently used (that signals that he was searching for the meaning of life apart from God’s revelation).[9] In short, the second wise man is saying: “You know son, Qohelet is 100% correct. If you look for meaning apart from God’s revelation, you will conclude that life is meaningless. This lesson is hard to hear (“like goads”; “like firmly implanted nails”), but important for you to hear.”

The father, however, has no intention of keeping his son “under the sun.” While it was important to learn the lesson that life apart from God is ultimately meaningless, he does not want him to get bogged down in this type of thinking (“Furthermore, of these, my son, be warned! There is no end to the making of many books, and much study wearies the body”). Thus the father continues his instruction, “The end of the matter. All has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of humanity. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether good or evil” (Eccl. 12:13–14).

In these last two verses of the book, the second wise man turns his son away from Qohelet’s conclusion that life is meaningless and toward what we might call an “above the sun” conclusion. He urges his son to (1) fear God; (2) obey the commandments, and (3) live in the light of the coming future judgment.

While brief, these two verses pack a wallop. An “above the sun” perspective begins with the fear of God.[10] That is, the father urges his son to understand that he is a creature and that God is his Creator. In a word, the son must put God first in his life. After establishing a relationship with God characterized by fear, the son should maintain that relationship by living in conformity to God’s commandments and in expectation of a future judgment. In two brief verses, the father covers what we might, in modern theological language, call justification, sanctification, and eschatology. Not only that but in these two short verses, the father urges his son to develop an “above the sun” perspective by embracing God’s revelation in Scripture. I do not believe it is a stretch to say that in these final two verses, the father is telling the son to turn to Scripture to find the meaning in life.

It is therefore appropriate to call the book of Ecclesiastes an idol-buster.[11] The book warns that if one tries to find meaning in anything other than God, it will let you down. Put God first in your life, and then everything else can find its proper place.[12] Now, with this understanding of the book, what lessons about leadership should the son (we) derive from Ecclesiastes?

Lessons on Leadership

Qohelet was a wise man who wanted to discover the meaning of life under the sun. He tried to find it in work, money, pleasure, wisdom, relationships, and elsewhere, but came up empty (“meaningless, meaningless, everything is meaningless”). He also gave advice about how to live life in a meaningless world. As we have seen, he encouraged people to try to distract themselves with small pleasures of life (eating and drinking for instance) to distract themselves from the harsh realities of a difficult life. But he also imparted advice and made observations about various areas of life including, as we will see, leadership.

By now we should realize that Qohelet’s advice and his observations will be deeply affected by his rather jaundiced view of “under the sun” life. To quote Qohelet and say “thus says the Lord” is as naïve as quoting the “three friends” of Job in the book of Job and assuming that their thinking represents God’s truth. That said, as long as we acknowledge that Qohelet’s thinking, which is “under the sun” thinking, we can learn helpful things from his reflections and thus, it is here where we will start reflecting on leadership. We will conclude the chapter by examining Qohelet himself as an object lesson on leadership, and this personal example might be even more helpful in our pursuit of a theology of leadership from Ecclesiastes.

Qohelet’s Reflections on Leadership

If this were a chapter on the book of Proverbs and leadership, the main lesson would be clear: Seek wisdom to lead well! Wisdom, on a practical level, points to the ability to read people and situations in order to be able to say the right thing at the right time and do the right thing at the right time.[13]On this practical level, wisdom is very similar to what we call emotional intelligence and studies have shown that emotional intelligence has a much higher correlation with life and leadership success than a high IQ.[14]

Qohelet too knows that wisdom is better than folly, but that ultimately, particularly in the light of death, wisdom is meaningless (2:12–17). This observation is applied to leadership in one of his anecdotes, “A poor but wise youth is better than an old and foolish king who no longer pays attention to advice, though he came from a prison to become king, even though he was born poor in his kingdom. I observed all who lived, those who walked under the sun, with the next youth, who replaced him. There was no end to all the people, to all those whom he led. Yet people who lived later did not like him. This too is meaningless and chasing wind” (4:13–16). There is a measure of ambiguity about this anecdote (are there two or three characters), but no ambiguities about the main point which is that in the short run wisdom is superior to folly,[15] but in the long run wisdom brings no advantages. Indeed, the same point is made in a second anecdote, “Moreover I observed this example of wisdom under the sun, and it made a big impression on me. There was a small city and there were a few people in it. A great king invaded and surrounded it. He built huge siege works against it. A poor but wise man was found in it, and he rescued the city by means of his wisdom, but no one remembered that poor wise man. And I said, ‘Wisdom is better than power.’ But the wisdom of the poor man was despised! His words were not heeded” (9:13–16).

As we read Qohelet’s observations what we learn is that there are no guarantees or formulas that lead to surefire success, “Then I turned and observed something else under the sun. That is, the race is not to the swift, the battle not to the mighty, nor is food for the wise, nor wealth to the clever, nor favor to the intelligent, but time and chance happen to them all. Indeed, no one knows his time. Like fish that are entangled in an evil net and like birds caught in a snare, so people are ensnared in an evil time, when it suddenly falls on them” (9:11–12). Relating this passage to leadership, we can work the hardest, be the best qualified, most capable people in the world, but if we aren’t in the right place at the right time, then we won’t be successful. And this is important to learn because we live in an “under the sun” world. If becoming a leader is all important to us (that is, it becomes an idol), and we don’t get the position we want and even deserve, then we will become deeply depressed and even feel that God has let us down. In reality, our frustration reveals our idolatry.

In the light of the “under the sun” reality that life is not predictable or controllable, Qohelet gives some helpful advice: ”There is an evil that I have observed under the sun, an error indeed that originates from the ruler. The fool is placed in important positions, while the rich sit in low places. I observed slaves on horses and nobles walking on foot like slaves” (10:5–7).

Woe to you, O land whose king is immature

and whose leaders feast in the morning.

Blessed are you, O land whose king is a noble

and whose leaders eat at the appropriate time—

for strength and not to get drunk (10:16–17).

Of course, these are observations, but in the observations we can see advice for leaders. In the first passage (10:5–7), we see evidence for the view that Qohelet himself is a social snob, who believes the noble rich class should rule (see also 10:17a, “Blessed are you, O land, whose king is a noble”), while the lower classes should be the ruled. That said while at the same time remembering that Qohelet’s comments, like those of Job’s friends, are not to be taken automatically as normative biblical teaching, we can still appreciate his insight that leaders should be mature and experienced and should also exercise self-control and restraint in their personal life. In this Qohelet offers advice to leaders that sounds very similar to that which the mother of King Lemuel gives him at the end of the book of Proverbs. She urges him to avoid drinking heavily and thus “forget what has been decreed, and deprive all the oppressed their rights” (see Prov. 31:1–9, particularly v. 5).

Another example of good advice for leaders in a chaotic and unpredictable world has to do with risk taking:

Send your bread upon the surface of the waters, for after many days you may find it. Give a portion to seven, even to eight, for you do not know what evil may occur in the land. If the clouds are full, they will empty rain on the earth; and whether a tree falls south or north, the place where the tree falls, there it is. Those who watch the wind do not sow, and those who observe the clouds do not harvest. In the same way that you do not know what is the way of the wind or how the bones are formed in the mother’s womb, so you do not know the work of God, who does all things (11:1–5).

In this interesting passage, Qohelet again reminds his readers that there are no magical formulae that guarantee success. The second part of the passage speaks to those who might be paralyzed from action or making decisions because of this truth (“those who watch the wind do not sow, and those who observe the clouds do not harvest”). The first part of the passage says that we should act, but that we should diversify our efforts since we can’t be sure exactly what will work. The enigmatic opening about “sending bread on the waters” is best understood as a reference to maritime trade, and the need to diversity one’s efforts is because we are not sure which will succeed and which will not because “you do not know what evil will occur in the land.” This thought is picked up and expressed in agricultural terms in 11:6: “In the morning plant your seed and do not let your hand rest at evening. For you do not know which will succeed, whether this or that, or whether both will do equally well.”

These passages are not the only ones from Qohelet’s reflections on a fallen world that prove to be helpful not only to living in, but also leading in a fallen world. That said, as we have repeated several times, Qohelet is an “under the sun” thinker and we have to be cautious in how we appropriate his insights.

Qohelet/Solomon as Object Lesson on Leadership

The superscription to the book identifies Qohelet as a king who is a “son of David” (1:1). He is wealthy and wise. While other descendants of David share many characteristics with Qohelet,[16]Solomon is the closest match, so it is not surprising that many lay readers think that Qohelet is Solomon. However, not everyone believes that the historical Solomon lies behind the figure of Qohelet [17] Nevertheless, for our purposes it does not matter whether Qohelet is Solomon. Further, it also does not matter whether the author of Ecclesiastes is making a connection between Qohelet and the historical Solomon. The main point to be made is regarding wisdom “above the sun”.[18]

The point is that even the richest, wisest, hardest-working, most pleasure-seeking man known to the ancient audience, namely Solomon, could not find meaning in money, wealth, work, or pleasure.[19] Thus, “What more can the king’s successor do than what has already been done?” (2:12). In other words, while readers might live with the illusion that “if I only had more money, wisdom, pleasure, etc., then I would find meaning in life.” Solomon had it all and he failed to find meaning. Furthermore, not only did he ruin himself, he destroyed the kingdom. Thus, he becomes an object lesson or warning about bad leadership.

Of course, he does not start his reign as a bad leader, but as one of the best. Why? Because he put God and his people first. His concern for God and others expresses itself soon after he becomes king, when God gives him a choice of whatever gift he would like God to bestow on him. Solomon shows that he has his priorities straight when he goes to the holy place at Gibeon in order to offer numerous sacrifices. In response, God gives him a remarkable opportunity when he says to Solomon: “Ask for whatever you want me to give you” (1 Kings 3:5).

Solomon immediately asks for wisdom, a “discerning heart to govern your people and to distinguish between right and wrong. For who is able to govern this great people of yours?” (3:9). God is so pleased with his request for wisdom that benefits others, that he also gives him “wealth and honor” as long as he lives an obedient life before God (1 Kings 3:13–14).

As a result of Solomon’s humility before God and his people, Israel prospers in every way. Justice reigns so that even the marginal benefit from his wise rulings (1 Kings 3:16–28, the story of the two prostitutes). He organizes his kingdom to achieve maximum prosperity (1 Kings 4). Solomon’s wisdom is so great that his reputation, and that of Israel, reverberates throughout the world (1 Kings 4:29–34). His building projects, most notably the temple, are a further indication of his wisdom and the blessing that it brings to his people (1 Kings 5:1–9:9). The benefits that Solomon’s godly leadership brought to Israel are described in 1 Kings 10:14–29, and is well-captured by the statement of the visiting Queen of Sheba:

The report I heard in my own country about your achievements and your wisdom is true. But I did not believe these things until I came and saw them with my own eyes. Indeed, not even half was told to me; in wisdom and wealth you have far exceeded the report I heard. How happy your people must be! How happy your officials, who continually stand before you and hear your wisdom! Praise be to the Lord your God, who has delighted in you and placed you on the throne of Israel. Because of the Lord’s eternal love for Israel, he has made you king to maintain justice and righteousness (1 Kings 10:6–9).

What a wonderful picture of the benefits of godly leadership, and one for which all leaders today should strive and pray. But as the association between Solomon and Qohelet reminds us, that is not the end of the story. Indeed, when Solomon dies, he does not leave a harmonious, peaceful, prosperous, and happy kingdom to his son, but one that is racked by external enemies and eternal fragmentation. Indeed, the immediate aftermath of Solomon’s leadership at the end of his life leads directly to the division of the kingdom into two parts (1 Kings 12).

What happened that transformed Solomon from being the epitome of wise leadership to being the epitome of foolish leadership? In retrospect, the seeds for this transformation come even before Solomon asks God for wisdom. The narrator begins the story of Solomon’s request for wisdom by informing the reader that “Solomon made an alliance with Pharaoh king of Egypt and married his daughter” (1 Kings 3:1). But this marriage to a foreign pagan woman was just the beginning. Toward the end of the account of Solomon’s reign, the author of Kings tells us that “King Solomon loved many foreign women, as well as the daughter of Pharaoh: women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians, and Hittites—from the nations of whom the Lord had said to the children of Israel, ‘You shall not intermarry with them, nor they with you. Surely they will turn away your hearts after their gods.’ Solomon clung to these in love” (11:1–2).

The result of these marriages was Solomon’s apostasy: “his wives turned his heart after other gods; and his heart was not loyal to the Lord his God, as was the heart of his father David” (11:4). The consequences were devastating, “Because you have done this, and have not kept My covenant and My statutes, which I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom away from you and give it to your servant” (11:11).

What then do we learn about leadership in this reflection on the life of Solomon through the figure of Qohelet in the book of Ecclesiastes? The story of Qohelet/Solomon gives leaders and potential leaders a clear warning. God must be the center of your life or else even “successful” leadership is a failure. Unless God is the one who guides your life, you will never find satisfaction in your leadership, because leadership itself can become an idol and idols always let you down. Also, if God is not the center of your life, then when difficulties and setbacks happen you will not have the strength to survive, they will fill your life with disappointment, bitterness, and regret.

Indeed, the message of the book of Ecclesiastes should prepare us for the difficulties of life. If Qohelet was right about anything at all, it is that “life under the sun” is hard. After all, the world and its inhabitants suffer from the consequences of human sin. And this includes, of course, our life’s work. God specifically spoke to the effect that sin had on work when he said to Adam: “Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat, saying ‘You shall not eat of it’: “Cursed is the ground for your sake; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, and you shall eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for dust you are, and to dust you shall return” (Gen. 3:17b–19). This punishment applies to all work, not just agricultural work, including the work of leadership. Thus, the wise leader will not be surprised by difficulties and setbacks, but will expect them. And expecting them means that we will be prepared for them and we will try to minimize them. We should not understand the punishments of the Fall as things we should simply accept without a fight. We do our best to remove the thorns and thistles from our gardens, but don’t panic when they grow back.

Conclusion

While there is much debate among Ecclesiastes’ scholars about the details of the book’s interpretation, there is little doubt about its central message. No one can find meaning in life by staying “under the sun,” to live a successful life and to become an effective leader one must adopt an “above the sun” perspective on life (fear God, obey his commandments, and live in the light of the future judgement), while acknowledging that we still live in a fallen world. Leaders who find meaning in life in God will not treat leadership like an idol. They will realize that, while there may be helpful principles of leadership, that there are no guarantee to success. Good leaders will anticipate disappointments but will not avoid action. They will be willing to take risks by diversifying their options.

Ecclesiastes is not a manual of leadership or even often directly speaks to leadership. Even so, its message about life “under the sun” and “above the sun” do have important implications for how we think of ourselves and conduct ourselves as godly leaders in every walk of life.

Reference information

[Benjamin K Forrest (2018). (p. 172). Biblical Theology for the Church: Biblical Leadership: Theology for the Everyday Leader. Retrieved from https://app.wordsearchbible.com]