Moses, Moses
Part
3 No Kings
“In
those days [there was] no king in Israel, [but] every man did [that
which was] right in his own eyes.” Judges
17:6
Moses managed a society of about three
million people by establishing captains of ten families. Who
were these captains, how were they chosen and what authority did they
have?
The captains were chosen by the
people. They were not appointed from the top down until men sinned
against God. They had no power to rule, but were respected leaders by
consensus. They did not make laws nor exercise authority, but stood in service of the people and the Law of God. The people
were sovereign over themselves under God, not the people sovereign
over their neighbor. Individually, they were the fountainheads of
justice.
There are at least two
responsibilities or duties of government. The first is the duty of
protecting against actual theft, injury, or invasion. The second
responsibility of government is the common welfare of the people,
benevolent relief from famine, failure, or fiasco.
There often arises needs of the family
and community where families must work together for the common good.
There also is the case where the family breaks down and widows and
orphans fall upon the charity of the community for assistance.
In Israel, these powers, rights, and
responsibility rested in the hands of the individual freeman. It was
the individual freeman who was required to see to the common defense
against crime, whether domestic or foreign. It was the individual
freeman who was responsible for the funding of the common welfare and
daily ministration.
The people chose the public servant to
handle these duties of government. They chose the captains from
amongst the princes of Israel, who were the heads of each family
group, and they chose the priests from amongst the Levites as a
people, those of whom came out to service first and who had no other
inheritance in the land.
This system was not perfect because
the people were not perfect, but it was designed to strengthen the
people and the family under the authority of God the Father, not the
gods of men. There were fundamentals of the law of God that were
common in all men for society to function. Justice was the
responsibility of every man and, therefore, remained his right.
“And
if ye offer a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD,
ye shall offer it at your own will.” Leviticus 19:5
One basic rule of that system of
governance was that your offerings or contributions to the government
of Israel were freewill offerings.
Leviticus
19:11 “Ye shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither lie
one to another.”
No one could force the people to
contribute. There was a basic rule against stealing.
“Thou
shalt not defraud thy neighbour, neither rob [him]: the wages of him
that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until the morning.”
Leviticus 19:13
Again, we see basic guidelines about
fraud, theft, and extortion. But here is one of the most basic of all
laws in both the Old and New Testaments:
“Thou
shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy
people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the
LORD.” Leviticus 19:18
Jesus emphasized this very concept of
the law in Mark 12:31. You not only are responsible for defending
your own rights, family, and property, but you are also responsible
for defending your neighbor's rights as much as your own. Everyone in
the kingdom is made acutely aware of this fact. It took years to
develop the skill to do this as a whole nation, but it made Israel
stronger and more successful than almost everyone else.
How did Israel manage the daily
ministration, which included the common welfare of the people? Not
only widows and orphans but plagues, floods, storms, and earthquakes
could all raise havoc with the community. How did the whole nation
protect itself from such calamity through their godly government
without the loss of rights?
“And
some of the things that should not have been forgotten, were lost.”
Judea at the time of Christ was
clearly in apostasy. What was ancient Israel like in the beginning?
If the Jews in the days of Herod could not see the error of their
ways, then the difficulty is compounded by an additional 2000 years
of obscure history through which we must gaze. To see a more modern
example, we can jump to an era some 500 years after the kingdom of
God was preached in Europe by the faithful ministers of God.
In the first millennium after the
Apostles preached the Kingdom of Heaven the Anglo-Saxon form of
government had something called a Tithingman, who oversaw ten
families composed of freemen, a Hundredman (or gerefa - in
Saxon language, it became reeve) who oversaw ten Tithingmen, and an
Eoldorman who was overseer to a thousand families and known as a
Shire. A tithing, in English Law, was formerly a district containing
ten men with their families. The key to their success was the
intimate consensus of each group.
The Tithingmen were often the center
in resolving disputes. These were positions of trust that sometimes
included donations of limited property to carry out the function and
duties of his office. The same was true of Hundredmen and Eoldormen.
Ten Tithingmen, a Hundredsman, and a
clerk of the kingdom, a clergyman, often met on the full moon at
the time of the filling of the butts. The filling of the butts
referred to target practice with their bows and arrows. The full
moon, marking the time of the meeting, aided all in returning home
when the meetings ran late. This intimate group of twelve was the
foundation of the national government.
Most of the ministration of justice
was through these men by the mutual consent and aid of the people.
The prime responsibility for bringing offenders to justice still
remained with the victim and their family, but, through these men and
the customary law, an organized structure to assist the Hue and
Cry of the people was established. In the case of more national
calamities or needs, this network could immediately muster a
well-regulated army of thousands. They were the minutemen of the
national militia.
The right to bear arms was a
responsibility as was the ministration of justice. A twelve-man jury
was also the law of custom and, again, chosen with consent of the
parties in dispute through the process of Voir Dire.
The Tithing bound by virtue with love and charity could settle most
dispute with reason and brotherhood without ever going to trial.
These ancient systems of law and
justice were well understood for generations. If attended to by
decent men, they formed a wall of protection for individual liberty
and national security. By their nature, they cultivated the virtues
of sacrifice and courage, so necessary in maintaining a free society.
To retain rights in such a free association, it was essential that
individuals exercise a responsibility and concern for their
neighbor’s rights equal to their own.
There were as many people living in
Europe in 176 AD as there were in 1776. The difference was that the
former mostly lived on their own land as freeman with the latter
living as subjects and serfs. There is an ancient story of some
uncivilized barbarians of Germany who stood together when faced with
the invasion of three Roman legions.
The Germans or Teutons had migrated
from the far north with their own customs and culture. They were a
practical liberty-loving people who believed that the actions and
deeds of a man spoke more of his character than preached philosophies
and sermonized dogmas. Their ancestral roots and customs, along with
their personal family honor, sealed in their hearts the virtuous
ideal that “freedom is better than slavery.”
They gathered together in groups
called kindreds. Kinship was at the core of their society and these small groups
gathered together in larger groups forming a Hundertschaften. The leaders of these groups became the tribal counsel. These men were
not rulers but leaders. As leaders, they were titular and held no
power over the families, as “it was the family that wielded the
most power. While families were the principle enforcers of the
law...” The leaders could be called on in managing the settling of disputes
or coordinating large activities, but could not make law nor tax the people. The families remained
sacred units which were never to be violated. These Germanic tribes
had fought many battles, but had never faced such an organized army
as the Romans.
When Publius Quinctilius Varus marched
into Germany to keep the peace and tax the Teutons, the people needed
someone to lead the whole populace if they were to be free of the
imposed excise of Rome. They chose Hermann the Cheruscan as their commander-in-chief against the occupational peace keepers. In
the Teutoburg Forest, he lead the people against all three legions
and destroyed the invading usurpers to the last man.
The Romans knew him as Arminius the
Traitor and Rebel, but the people of Germania knew him as
Hermannsdenkmal, or Hermann
the Hero. In fact, Hermann was a little of both. He was
an officer for the Romans and was in their employ when he began to
prepare for their overthrow. The Romans had come because some of the
Teutons were raiding their neighbors across the Rhine in Gaul. Gaul
had fallen under Roman “protection” during the exploits
of Julius Caesar, who came to Gaul for much the same reason. Although
most of the Teutons did not raid their neighbors, they benefited from
the spoils spent and traded back home by the marauders and turned a
blind eye to the robbery. Such sloth on the part of a free citizenry
inevitably brings tribute and tyranny.
The
hand of the diligent shall bear rule: but the slothful shall be under
tribute. Pr 12:24
Due to their own civil war and the
high cost of oppression in other lands, they were forced to raise
taxes in Germania. This disregard for the rights of neighbors and the
desire for power and continued control led Herman, with the aid of
his strongest supporters and using methods he had learned from the
Romans, to compel the people to remain under his capable leadership
and authority. He virtually sought to crown himself over the people.
Though the people were grateful for his service, his own family
judged him a dictator and executed him as a traitor and a tyrant.
The people of Germania are difficult
for historians to understand from a modern or Roman point of view. As
freemen they opposed all forms of tyranny, whether foreign or
domestic. There opposition to any kind of central ruler was so
absolute that, when the Romans came back to reap revenge, Tacitus
reported that, "Germanicus, who had torn off his helmet so as to
be recognized, ordered his men to kill and kill. No prisoners were
wanted. Only the total destruction of the tribe would end the war."
Who were these people who valued
freedom and family, strength and courage, kinship and honor and the
essential realities of a vigorous life? There was a custom of severe penalties for adultery, cities were
despised, usury unheard of, and a passion for justice and liberty.
They knew that freedom did not come without constant vigil and
actions in time of war and peace.
Their customs of sumbels and blóts were not originally designed to appease imaginary pagan gods with
superstitious sacrifices. Through their chosen ministers or priests,
these blots were a practical method of charity, intended to bind
neighbors and communities in a fellowship of love. When they began to
lose sight of the need to protect their neighbors and their
neighbors’ rights, both those near and far, their days of
liberty were numbered as the world shrank about them.
The word "German" is of
uncertain origins. Some say it means "one who shouts as a
warrior" or perhaps "neighbors who shout." If they, as a people, had more fully remembered the wisdom and
practice of the prophets and loved their neighbors freedom as much as
they loved their own, their fate would have been much different.
Thou
shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy
people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the
LORD. Leviticus 19:18, Matthew 5:43
In 600 AD, a wealthy landowner in
central Europe began to exercise authority by oppressing some of his
neighbors. The news got around quickly and, soon, a host of men
marched toward this tyrant’s castle. More volunteers joined
their ranks until an army approached the fortified dwellings of the
potential despot. He sent an ambassador to make peace with their
king, hoping to bribe him with a sufficient sum.
After some time, the emissary returned
totally confounded with no agreement. When the ruler nervously
inquired as to the reason he could not obtain a treaty, the
frustrated ambassador replied that he could not make a bargain
because, “They say they are all kings.”
This was the right hand of government
that stood for justice in the face of criminal or tyrant, but was
bound together in times of peace by the daily practice of charity.
This was the result of the Testaments. There is no King in the
Kingdom of God, for each man is possessed of God-given rights and
responsibilities. Wise men knew they could not shirk obligation or
covet their neighbors' goods without bringing their rights into
jeopardy. The building block of this heavenly kingdom was the
autonomous family, which was independent and sovereign within each
home, but bound by love and charity with faith and hope.
And
ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout
[all] the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubile
unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye
shall return every man unto his family. Leviticus 25:10
Order the book
Thy Kingdom Comes
http://www.hisholychurch.org/order/ordertkc.php
