The Seizure of the Throne by Demetrius I Soter (1 Macc 7:1-4). Theological Interpretation of a Historical Event (original) (raw)

Ancient Kings and Modern Rulers: Israel’s Monarchy and the Construction of Political Power

ETS, 2024

This paper examines some ways the Old Testament narrative accounts of Israel’s monarchy have, and might continue to, contribute to western political theology. Mostly, the narratives of Israel’s great kings have been used as exemplars of what righteous political rule should be like. There are plentiful examples. As we saw recently, English monarchs continue to be coronated in ceremonies that draw explicitly on Solomon’s anointing. They are anointed with oil and crowned as “defender of the faith” to Handel’s resounding anthem, Zadok the Priest. Josiah was a popular model amongst the magisterial reformers to show the way God’s appointed monarch should exercise authority over ecclesiastical matters. Edward VI was framed precisely as a new Josiah for this reason. But Josiah’s reforms were also appropriated by more radical branches of the reformation to justify the destruction of property and dethroning rulers, in order to establish a more pure form of Christendom. The pilgrim settlers in the Americas also looked to Josiah, both as a model of how righteous political society should function, and the manner in which heathens and apostates should be dealt with. The US ideal of the “city on the hill,” a common motif in political discourse since that time, originates from the idea that righteous civil society is a real possibility, modelled after the reforms of the righteous Israelite monarchs. The common thread across a wide variety of western cultures over a long historical period is a hermeneutic that appropriates Israel’s story as a model for Christian society, and the righteous Old Testament kings as a paradigm for Christian rule. But a more nuanced reading of both Kings and Chronicles, within a Biblical Theological framework, would question such appropriation. I explore some ways that the narratives of Kings and Chronicles frame the question of the Kingdom of God, as the kingdom promised to David, both in relation to internal political structures and external political threats. The concern of both books, in different ways, is twofold. First, they show that political power cannot establish a righteous kingdom, no matter how well intentioned. The narrative histories of Israel do not support most expressions of Christian nationalism. Second, they show it is feasible for the promised kingdom to be expressed within the realpolitik of this world in various modes, with or without political power. The powerless, underground Afghani churches are no less valid expressions of the kingdom promised to David, than the Zambian nation who are constitutionally Christian. Even though Israel’s histories expect the realisation of a Kingdom of God ruled by an anointed King, they allow in the meantime an expression of it administered by Babylon and Persia, a kingdom “not of this world.”

The End of the Israelite Monarchy

Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 1999

A biographical sketch of the eighteenth century evangelist George Whitefield claims: ÒHis voice had the range of an organ and with it he could reduce grown men to tears by the mere pronunciation of the word ÔMesopotamiaÕÓ (Hallo 1980: 1). Perhaps a Judean exile who sat down in the land Òbetween the rivers,Ó hung his harp upon the willows and remembered Jerusalem (see Ps 137) would also be moved to tears at the mention of ÒMesopotamia,Ó but not because of the wordÕs acoustic power. It was from this region, drained by the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, that the Assyrians came to obliterate the northern kingdom of Israel and the Babylonians came to demolish the southern kingdom of Judah. In terms of geopolitical ebb and flow, the Israelite monarchies were simply crushed by revived Mesopotamian superpowers (Bright 1972: 267). The Bible and Mesopotamian documents agree that the Israelites were defeated by superior military forces. However, the biblical record penetrates to a deeper level of causality: The Israelites were defeated by superior forces because they neglected and disobeyed YHWH (= Jehovah), 1 their God. Having forsaken him, despised His covenant and polluted His temple, they were forsaken by him. According to Ezekiel, when YHWHÕs temple was filled with abominations (Ezek 8), His glorious Presence departed in the direction of the Mount of Olives (Ezek 9:3; 10:4,18-19), the way David had gone when he fled from Absalom (2 Sam 15:23ff). 2 At the Mount of Olives, the divine Majesty lingered (Ezek 11:23) Òas though loath to abandon the city altogetherÓ (Greenberg 1983: 191). As He was leaving, the sound of the wings of the cherubim which bore him away was Òlike the voice of God Almighty when he speaksÓ (Ezek 10:5). The 1 YHWH, transliterating the unvocalized tetragrammaton, the personal name of IsraelÕs God. 2 W. Shea interprets this passage within the context of an investigative judgment of Judah in Ezek 1-10 (1992: 15-23). JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY 334 unspoken message was the same as that pronounced by Jesus over half a millennium later when history repeated itself: ÒJerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often have I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! See, your house is left to you, desolate.Ó (Matt 23:37-38, NRSV here and in subsequent biblical quotations unless indicated otherwise) Without YHWH, the temple and the city were soon destroyed. The present paper explores the end of the Israelite monarchy in terms of political events, underlying spiritual causes connected with those events, and results of the fall of the monarchy for GodÕs people. The end of northern Israel is covered here to some extent, but the primary focus is on factors leading to the death throes of Judean independence. Political Events The tumultuous final years of the monarchy are richly documented. Historical sources include especially (1) the biblical books of 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, (2) inscriptions from Syria-Palestine, Assyria, and Babylon, (3) accounts of Herodotus and Josephus, and (4) archaeological evidence. Although the sources differ in purpose and orientation, 3 they are complementary and there is a high degree of agreement between them in terms of what happened on the surface level (Stern 1975: 30; cp. Mitchell 1991a: 343). Some problems remain, such as the chronological relationship between SennacheribÕs invasion, HezekiahÕs last fifteen years, and the beginning of ManassehÕs reign. 4 But problems like this do not seriously affect our understanding of the period. After a period of prosperity for the independent kingdoms of Israel in the north and Judah in the south (Mitchell 1991a: 322), the beginning of the end came with the accession of Tiglath-pileser III (744-727 B.C.) to the Assyrian throne. Because his campaigns in the west threatened Syria and Israel, they put their old animosities aside, made a defensive alliance and attempted to force Judah to join with them. To avoid fighting against Assyria without being replaced by a puppet ruler set up by the Syro-Israelite alliance, Ahaz of Judah sent a huge gift to 3 The Bible selects historical details primarily as background for conveying understanding of deeper spiritual realities. Inscriptions served purposes such as communication, record-keeping, and/or propaganda. Herodotus and Josephus were early historians who were somewhat detached by space or time from the political convulsions of sixth century Palestine. Archaeological evidence is concrete in the sense that it deals with material remains, but it is often ambiguous regarding the precise relationships between objects and events. 4 If HezekiahÕs sickness, when he was promised another fifteen years (2 Kgs 20:6; Isa 38:5), occurred about the time of SennacheribÕs invasion, as the narrative suggests (2 Kgs 20:1ÑÓIn those days. . .), we would figure that Hezekiah reigned fifteen years after about 701 B.C. But his reign would overlap with that of Manasseh. A co-regency between Hezekiah and Manasseh is a possible solution (Thiele 1965: 157-161). But some scholars do not accept this idea (see e.g. Miller and Hayes 1986: 351).

The Later Monarchy in History and Biblical Historiography

The Oxford Handbook of the Historical Books, 2020

A of the reigns of Hezekiah, Manasseh, and Josiah are found in both the books of Kings and Chronicles. The majority of historical issues related to their reigns are tied up with our understanding of the actions of the neo-Assyrian Empire, with its great expansion and dominance of Syria-Palestine, and then its decline and eventual collapse. This chapter will focus on historical issues that affect the way we understand these biblical kings and the biblical books in which their accounts are found.