What is the definition of a theocracy?

The children of Israel were specially chosen to be God’s people, and their government was theocratic, in other words they were governed by the immediate direction of God. This is the ideal government. The last verse of the Book of Judges says, “In those days there was no king in Israel every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Jud. 21:25). The government should have been theocratic, but when democracy ran wild, it is aptly described by the words, “Every man did that which was right in his own eyes.”

The Lord did actually reign over Israel from their redemption out of Egypt till the days of Samuel. He not only reigned by that unseen providence in which, as we know, He governs all worlds, and superintends the affairs of the whole universe; but in such a sense, that instead of Israel's having a king like the nations around them, they had the Lord Himself for their king. His laws were those by which the nation was governed; and the entire administration of them was by officers of His appointment. HE WAS KING. All the functions of royalty, which in other nations were exercised by human monarchs, were in Israel exercised by the Holy One, who dwelt unseen between the cherubim in the most holy place. All the surrounding nations, too, were dealt with by Him according to two principles, both of which had respect primarily to Israel. On the one hand, when Israel was obedient, God gave them the ascendancy over surrounding nations; while, on the other hand, He used those nations to chastise Israel in case of their disobedience. It was in the midst of Israel that He dwelt; it was over Israel that He reigned; but surrounding nations were dealt with by Him according to the relations in which they stood to Israel. All this continued till Samuel's day, when, as my readers are well aware, the children of Israel rejected the Lord from being their King, and desired a King like the nations round about.

One word here as to the portion of the priests. First, the normal condition of the people was that of being guided by the priests, and, in case of need, by judges raised up in an extraordinary way; and to abide under the keeping of God in the land, enjoying His blessing. It was, properly speaking, theocracy. The laws of God directed the people; they enjoyed the blessing of God; and the priests settled any questions which arose, a judge being raised up in exceptional cases.

He takes the time of the Judges as that of the deepest corruption of Israel, which, under a certain aspect, is so far true that I accept it without raising more difficulties. What then was at that time the primitive state in question? It was that God Himself was their king; just as God Himself points it out to Samuel; 1 Sam. 8:7-8; chap. 12:12. The priest was the point of contact, the bond between the people and God; and God raised up judges when there was need of them.

1891 356 The first government given to Israel was the highest conceivable — the direct government of God. They could say with truth, The Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our Lawgiver, the Lord is our King." 'That they should prove themselves unworthy of this supreme honour, this exalted government, which set them above all the nations of the earth, might perhaps be expected; but that they should reject it was the basest ingratitude, and, surrounded as they were by powerful enemies on all sides, the greatest folly. It was this grave dishonour put upon the Lord which called forth the address that now invites our attention. "They have not rejected thee," God said to Samuel, "but they have rejected Me that I should not reign over them."

And when they crossed the Jordan, He still accompanied or went before them. The cloud of the divine glory, which had journeyed with them in the wilderness, now rested between the cherubim which overshadowed the mercy-seat; and after their conquest of the land under Joshua, the tabernacle of the congregation, enclosing alike the ark of the covenant, the mercy-seat, and the shekinah and cherubim above, was set up at Shiloh, which from that time became the seat of government. It was there, "before Jehovah," that Joshua "divided the land among the tribes for an inheritance" (Joshua 18:1-10). The house of God was there during the period of the Judges,* and up to the time of Eli and Samuel. It was in the days of the latter that the people, wearied of being under the direct government of God Who from time to time appointed judges over them, and desiring to be like the nations which surrounded them, asked Samuel to make them a king over them. This displeased Samuel, and he prayed to Jehovah. What was the answer of Jehovah to him? "And Jehovah said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them" (1 Sam. 8:7). This is very plain. Up to this time the government of Israel had been a pure theocracy. God was their King. He might act by Moses at one time, who is himself said in this sense to have been king in Jeshurun, (see Deut. 33:4), or by Joshua at another, or afterwards by the judges who were successively raised up. Still, God was their King.

It was in the counsels of God from the beginning, that royalty should be established in Israel, and that He whom we know as the blessed Heir of all things — David's son and David's Lord — should, amid all His other glories, sit "upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice for ever." (Isaiah 9:7.) This was the purpose of God from the beginning; but the due time for its disclosure had to arrive, ere it was made known. From Moses to Samuel, the government of Israel was a pure theocracy - God was their king. He raised up officers, indeed, such as Moses, Aaron, Joshua, and the Judges, by means of whom He administered the government of the nation; still there was no, king, but "the King eternal, immortal, invisible." In the law itself, however, God had provided for the event of a king being placed over the nation, and directed both who should be appointed ("him whom the Lord thy God shall choose") and how he was to conduct himself when he had been placed upon the throne. (See Deut. 17:14-20.) All this was anticipative; and, like all God's gracious provisions for man's need, its application was reserved, till man's sin afforded the occasion for its actual introduction. It was Israel's sin, in the days of Samuel, to ask a king — thereby rejecting the Lord from being their king; and Saul, the first king who reigned over them, was an answer in judgment to their request: — "I gave thee a king in mine anger, and took him away in my wrath." (Hosea 13:11.) It was with David that the kingdom, according to God's thoughts and counsels, began. He was the "man after God's own heart." With him God made a covenant. Some things in this covenant were conditional; others were unconditional. Of his son, who was to succeed him on the throne, God said, "If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men." (2 Sam. 7:14.) So far the covenant was conditional. But it is immediately added, "My mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee." Nothing was to cause the total forfeiture of God's mercy and favour by the house of David. However his sons might fail, and whatever chastening they might in consequence endure, nothing should interfere with the fulfilment of God's covenanted mercies. "And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever." It is well for us distinctly to bear in mind this two-fold character of the covenant with David. On the one hand, there were pledged and secured to him, and to his seed, an unfailing house, and an inalienable kingdom. On the other hand, if any of his offspring should commit iniquity, the transgressors were to be chastened with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men. In either case, it is with the house, and the throne, of David, that Israel stands or falls.

But in the maintenance of this, the claim of God was first, and thus the commandments as to idolatry follow this immediately. There was to be no toleration in such cases at all, but sharp excision by the sword of justice, the government being exercised by God openly among them, and the worship of other gods manifest rebellion. Church and state were here really one, and ecclesiastical penalties also civil ones. This is, of course, no justification of such a course in entirely different conditions under another dispensation. The kingdom of God is now "not of this world;" Christ's people reign not, but are patient sufferers; their weapons spiritual, and not carnal; and grace to be manifested by them while God in His grace forbears toward men.

God's counsels concerning the kingship being the principal truth of this book, we find in it of necessity, on the one hand, all that is linked together with the priestly organization, and on the other hand, to the political organization of the people. Indeed, the kingdom according to God is characterized by divine order in both the religious and civil sphere.

He put it upon the ground of bringing religion to their doors, of helping his people to a religion that would not be too costly or too difficult, in fact, was only seeking to make religion subserve his policy. Accordingly, he did this knowing well that it is impossible for a kingdom — more particularly Israel — God's people — to be strong in the earth, where there is not the owning of God — where there is not the owning of God blended with the government so that there should not be two contrary authorities — or, possibly, contrary authorities in the kingdom. For in fact the stronger of the two for the conscience is religion and not civil obedience.