King Gideon


Then the Israelites said to Gideon, `Rule over us, you and your son and your grandson also; for you have delivered us out of the hand of Midian.' Gideon said to them, `I will not rule over you, and my son will not rule over you; the Lord will rule over you.'  Then Gideon said to them, `Let me make a request of you; each of you give me an ear-ring he has taken as booty.' (For the enemy had golden ear-rings, because they were Ishmaelites.)  `We will willingly give them,' they answered. So they spread a garment, and each threw into it an ear-ring he had taken as booty.  The weight of the golden ear-rings that he requested was one thousand seven hundred shekels of gold (apart from the crescents and the pendants and the purple garments worn by the kings of Midian, and the collars that were on the necks of their camels).  Gideon made an ephod of it and put it in his town, in Ophrah; and all Israel prostituted themselves to it there, and it became a snare to Gideon and to his family.
Judges 8:22-27 NRSV

In the past, being of republican sympathies, I was always glad that Gideon refused the kingship and was, indeed, a cheerful champion of the anti-monarchist tradition in the early history of Israel.  Having revisited these passages I can now see that my republicanism is an irrelevant distraction to understanding the important processes surrounding the eventual establishment of the monarchy in Israel and have come to believe that these  stories have some helpful insights into the nature of institutional change.

Gideon is unique amongst the judges for seriously addressing the idolatry of the Israelites.  His vocation is rooted in the destruction of an altar of Baal and he seems to be uniquely aware of the religious heritage of his people - when he meets the angel of God he challenges him with the disjunction between the history of God's saving action and His present inaction.  Gideon's whole approach is unusually thoughtful and reflective.  Whilst Gideon is a man of action he is also a man of doubts and strategy.  Ehud possessed a streetwise cunning and Deborah a calm wisdom but Gideon is subtle and thoughtful at every point - his response to the Ephraimites (8:1-3) is astute, his punishment of Succoth is carefully planned (8:14-16) and the only mention of writing in Judges, and his response to the offer of the kingship theological and reasoned (8:23).  Gideon is tough and clever but beneath this competent exterior there is a critical lack of confidence.  In fact he seems caught in the dilemma of Hamlet; where his very thoughtfulness makes it more difficult for him to act decisively.

The fascinating thing about Gideon's story is despite his great success and acclaim - no other Judge was offered the kingship, the aftermath of his life was unmitigated disaster.  Why was this the case?  Three critical factors can be identified:

1.    The snare of the ephod
2.    The vengeance against internal opposition
3.    The creation of the possibility of kingship

The story of the ephod is slightly strange for us, as no one seems very confident about saying what an ephod is, in this particular context.  It clearly isn't a idol and it seems to be rooted in the worship of Yahweh but no one knows how.  Some scholars are tempted to reject the criticism of the ephod as a later interpolation.  My instinct is to see it as some kind of mediatory device between the people and their invisible God.  Maybe it is the lavish wealth that the ephod displays which is the root of its destructive influence.  Clearly it is a means to placate the people which goes badly wrong.

But other reasons for the disastrous aftermath of Gideon's life can be discerned.  His vengeance against Succoth and Peniel is the first instance of a judge punishing fellow Israelites for not working together (8:5-17).  Deborah regrets the lack of cooperation but takes no action.  Gideon's example sets a terrible precedent.

Lastly Gideon creates the possibility for an Israelite king.  Here was a man of action who was also thoughtful and spiritually mature, he was able to defeat the enemies of Israel like Ehud and Barak but he also had a leadership potential and stature unknown elsewhere in Judges.  Deuteronomy 17 creates the option to have a king, here is someone who could make kingship work for the Israelites, but it is a dangerous legacy.

The dangerous legacy finds all too real form in Abimelech (who's name significantly means My father is a King).  He is a classic man of action, grasping his opportunity with utter ruthlessness and protecting his position with great success until stopped in his tracks by a woman and her millstone.  He is able to take the idea of kingship which Gideon's remarkable abilities had created and turn it into something corrupt and dreadful.  We have to wait until David to see what could be made of the kingship - alien idea that it was.

Kingship may have been an alien idea but times were changing and the old model of occasional charismatic judges was passing.  Enemies like the Midianites and the Philistines couldn't be combated by the old structures, only kingship offered a way forward.  Gideon's greatest failing was his own lack of confidence in taking on the challenge of kingship, he was uniquely equipped amongst the Judges to take on the role, for like David he was a spiritual man deeply concerned with his relationship to the God of Israel.  Gideon created the possibility of a new way for the Israelites but stepped back at the crucial moment preferring a quiet retirement where he could enjoy the benefits of his fame and power.

The story of Gideon and the kingship therefore provides us with a challenge to look beyond our prejudices concerning organisational structures and models of leadership and discern what is necessary in the changing contexts in which we find ourselves.  The problem, of course, is discerning when it is right to leave behind what has been the tried and God approved structure to take on the foreign innovation which God is able to transform into something fresh and new. Without Israel taking on the risk of the kingship, could there have been the idea of a Messiah, and could there have been the possibility of Jesus - the King of Kings?