Naboth's Truth (I); I Kings 21

The entire story is too long to print here, but is one well worth considering because of its fascinating and larger-than-life portrait of human character(s). We have the sullen, variable, pliable King Ahab and his conniving wife Jezebel. We have the prophet Elijah, who seems to show up just at the wrong time (from the perspective of the royal couple). We have a mock judicial process which puts new meaning into the concept of "kangaroo court." Finally, we have God, who always seems to act "behind the scenes" but is very much present in the affairs of the people of Israel. The interplay of characters in this boldly drawn narrative makes for hours of engaging reflection.

The literary shape of this section of I Kings also should be noted. Beginning with the Elijah narrative of I Kings 17 the author has given us chapter-long stories depicting some aspect of the prophet's life. The first three chapters (17-19) show Elijah's struggle with his own faith; the second two (20-21) depict faith in its outworking in the public sphere. In chapters 17-19 we see Elijah in some very private moments, with the widow and her son (17) or alone with his complaints to God (19) as well as in a public competition with the prophets of Baal (18). But then, in ch. 20, public concerns take over. A war with a neighboring king, and Ahab's leniency toward that king, is the subject of I Kings 20. We discover that Ahab is not only a petty ruler who is worried about his image and his power, but one who seems to be influenced by "the last person he talks with"--for he gives generous terms of surrender to a mortal opponent immediately after these are proposed by that opponent (I Ki. 20: 34). Then, in ch. 21, we are brought into the private life of the king and his desire to possess Naboth's vineyard. The narrator moves from dramatic "international affairs" (ch. 20) to an intimate portrait of the king in the space of a few verses. We humans may make a distincition between the public and private life of monarchs, but to God and the narrator, they all are one. Character is the foundation and the driving interest in both spheres.

In retelling some of the story in I Kings 21, I will be looking four things: (1) Ahab's Proposal; (2) Jezebel's Counter-Proposal; (3) The Elimination of Naboth; and (4) God--Who has the Last Word.

I. Ahaz's Proposal (vv. 1-4)

The scene changes dramatically from the "international" battle of ch. 20. We begin, actually, with Naboth, a neighboring (probably wealthy) landowner who lived near Ahab. The word nabata in Arabic means "vineyard," and so Naboth's name may have been derived from his holdings. It is as if his vineyards had become renowned in the region and he was simply known as the "vineyard guy." If Napa is synonymous in America with wine, so Naboth in ancient Israel was synonymous with a fine vineyard. Ahab longed to possess this vineyard. We aren't told whether there is a long family dispute between Ahab's and Naboth's people or whether Ahab, always sensitive to his "back side," is trying to clip the wings of another prominent noble. We are just told that he wants Naboth's vineyard.

But before we dump on Ahab, we ought to look more closely at how things are described. He makes a proposal to Naboth which is actually not a bad one, from one perspective. In our common law system of law, we have the concept of "eminent domain." It provides that the State may take any and all of your private land as long as it pays you "just compensation" for it. Sometimes the state doesn't have to compensate you at all if it is just a "partial taking." Actually, this area of law is really a "hot button issue" in many states in America today. In Ahab's case he is giving Naboth the choice not only of just compensation but of what we might call a "comparable parcel." From the perspective of our system of property law, what Ahab does is perfectly reasonable, merciful--and legal.

But Israel has a particular attachment to land, much greater even than we have. Land is not only a source of wealth and security; it gives a family identity and continuity. The whole principle of the Jubilee year in Israelite life presupposes that the land ought never to leave the family's possession or, if it does, it is restored to the family in the 50th year. Well, the concept of the Jubilee was just that--a brilliant idea that probably never was actually put into effect, but it reflects the strong values of the people. Land is inviolate. Even if the king wants the land.

So, Naboth reports this to King Ahab. "The Lord forbid that I should give you my ancestral inheritance" (v. 3). If he were to accede to the King's request, he would become a sort of royal dependent, a pawn in Ahab's quest for power. His name, also, would be dishonored in town, as the man who had betrayed his ancestors. He simply won't be bought.

We get a picture into Ahab's character as a result of Naboth's rebuff. Instead of sweetening the pot, or sending in his troops to displace Naboth, Ahab seemingly accepts Naboth's refusal. But he doesn't do so with grace or class. He becomes "sullen and resentful," words used also to describe him in 20:43 when he received "bad news" from a prophet of God. The author if I Kings seems to be having fun in describing Ahab. He not only has an attitudinal problem, but he refuses to eat and "turned away his face" (i.e., lay on his couch and faced the wall). One commentator on this passage suggests that Ahab's "bed" in v. 4 is really his "couch," the couch or bench on which celebrations and parties are held. Thus, Ahab has turned his "dancing into mourning," to paraphrase a biblical passage. Life is over for him. He doesn't have the skills or the insight to cope with rejection. He who can "have his way" even with Benhadad in a battle, can't even "win one" with his next-door neighbor. Sulking, sullen behavior and resentful feelings take over.

What is interesting is that Ahab apparently "accepts" Naboth's answer. This either is an indication of something possibly praiseworthy (or, at least, something not worthy of condemnation) in Ahab's character or is an illustration that he so lacks skills to deal with disagreement that he simply has to withdraw or capitulate. We don't know, but a tantalizing character is before us, lying with his face to the wall.

II. Jezebel's Proposal

Enter Jezebel, his wife. She has, no doubt, seen this kind of infantile behavior before. And, like any good wife, she knows how to manipulate her husband when he acts like this. The more a person (usually a man) enters into his infantile state--by refusing to eat, by facing the wall, by acting sullen--the easier it is for someone to manipulate him. Just think of a child. When a five year-old gets into one of his "states" where he refuses to cooperate, a good parent knows the best "medicine" to bring him out. Maybe it is just to give the person some time. Maybe you ply him with sweets. Maybe a threat or two will work. Jezebel plays her husband like Van Cliburn plays the piano or Wynton Marsalis the trumpet. She knows what he wants. She knows he has been rebuffed. She knows how Ahab can get what he wants.

We can look at her in two ways--either as a conniving "Lady Macbeth"-type of woman, who upbraids her husband for his lack of manliness in not initiating a palace coup against Duncan, or as a loyal wife who just wants her husband to succeed. The words of v. 7 suggest the former. We can read v. 7 in one of two ways--as a statement or a question. But, however we read it we can almost hear its searingly mocking tone. "Are you the king in Israel?" She is saying, 'are you really in charge?' 'Are you really a man, Ahab?' We can almost taste the biting sarcasm. This is just the type of behavior calculated to draw the king out of his funk. But then, once he is brought out of his own reverie of self-pity and resentment, she springs into action. Actually, the text doesn't even have her telling Ahab her proposal. She just writes letters.

The content of the letters is most interesting. She urges the elders and nobles of the city to proclaim a fast, place Naboth at the "head of the assembly" (most scholars see this as a place of honor), and then, when he is at his moment of seemingly greatest honor, have two miscreants accuse him of cursing God and the king.' Then, take him out and stone him to death. That is, Jezebel knows how to get to the root of the problem. Naboth, as it were, must be "rooted out." He will yield to no other form of cajoling or economic incentive. This has to be the way that people of expedience deal with people of principle--they eliminate them. Principle and expedience can co-exist under some circumstances and in some relationships, but when push comes to shove, one of the two has to be eliminated. In this case it will be expedience that triumphs.

Let's now turn to the judicial "process," such as it was, and the Word of God in all of this.

2697