THEME Leading in a Fallen WorldChapter 12Leading in a .docx

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]
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:
…
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
…

THEME Leading in a Fallen WorldChapter 12Leading in a .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to THEME Leading in a Fallen WorldChapter 12Leading in a .docx

Similar to THEME Leading in a Fallen WorldChapter 12Leading in a .docx (20)

More from susannr

More from susannr (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

THEME Leading in a Fallen WorldChapter 12Leading in a .docx