Abstract
The purpose of the paper is to offer a set of applicable recommendations regarding the National Security Council (NSC) membership and operations based on the examination of the Old Testament kings’ advisors. The Scripture offers a number of invaluable lessons related to political leadership and a ruler’s need for council, in particular. The Bible supports the idea of a limited government, justifying it by point at God as the ultimate authority, which is why the advice from others can often be discredited. Any leader, Christian or not, can learn a lot from the Bible about serving the people and not abusing the power endowed upon them.
Introduction
Ever since Jesus Christ sacrificed himself to pay the ultimate price for the entirety of humanity’s sins, Christians have wrestled with the notions surrounding the connection between Christian faith and statecraft. Even more complex is the linkage of the Scripture to America’s national security policy, which is why it is crucial for political scholars and theologists to examine the integration of a religious worldview into modern government structures. The Bible features a number of examples illustrating the impact advisors of the king can have, both positive and negative. Although the needs of a modern political environment differ greatly from those described in the Old Testament, 21st century policy advisors and leaders can discover a lot of insightful lessons in the Bible.
Advisors to the Old Testament Kings
From a modern standpoint, it seems self-explanatory that an effective and successful leader has to surround themselves with people, who are able to assist and direct them (Kvanvig, 2017). The Bible is filled with numerous examples of the sheer power advisors to kings possessed as a result of their coordinated efforts to influence the actions of rulers (for better or worse). According to Helge S. Kvanvig (2017), the Scripture features a number of such advisors responsible for administering “different sectors of the society” and being “the consultants of the king in cases where the king was in need of special counsel” (p. 688).
The Old Testament demonstrates the intricacy of the civil and political systems established in the kingdoms, which implied the creation of institutions fueled by bureaucracy. Although the number of high officials assisting King David was relatively low, the list of advisors in the kingdom of Solomon was not as sparse. Due to the expansion and growing prosperity of the kingdom, Solomon’s need for consultants increased significantly.
Another great point Kvanvig (2017) makes is that the Bible reveals that the ruler’s need for guidance and additional assistance did little to diminish his imminence. In fact, kings remained the only humans deemed worthy enough to communicate with the divine, thus securing their status as special kinds of individuals. Kvanvig (2017) notes that the text Creation of Humankind and the King best illustrates that rulers were created separately from ordinary people, which gave the kings access to God. Thus, the modern notion that everybody is created equal is challenged by the Scripture in terms of the set of exceptional abilities rulers are endowed with.
The Bible is filled with a variety of examples demonstrating that a unique position a ruler holds requires the consultancy and assistance of trusted advisors. Such aides and confidants contribute to the stability of a king’s rule even though their influence may be destructive (just as the lack of it).
The Scripture emphasizes the flaws of kings such as David and Solomon, rulers powerful and influential enough to appear as God (Rawat, 2018). However, despite their special status in the eyes of the Lord, Solomon and David were just human beings, who had imperfections (Rawat, 2018). Thus, they could not rule alone and required the assistance of councilors or mentors. The great empire King Solomon managed to establish could not prosper and grow without the council the King often received, including the advice of Zabud, Ahishar, Adoniram, and many others (Friedman & Friedman, 2019). Despite numerous mistakes during the rule of King Solomon, Scripture illustrates that the King could always rely on his advisors (Friedman & Friedman, 2019).
On the other hand, advisors may serve as a force of destruction and manipulation, which is why it is crucial for every ruler to choose their aides carefully (Knoppers, 1990). The Bible is full of examples demonstrating the importance of the king making the final decision, sometimes in opposition to the advice of the councilors. For instance, King Rehoboam asked for help from elders (or “veterans”), who were the beneficiaries of his father’s policies (Baptist Center for Ethics, 2003). The elders told him to be a servant to the people, which might have appeared as an advice of righteousness at first, but was ultimately an attempt at manipulation (Knoppers, 1990).
Due to the competing interests at the time, wealthy landowners and farmers, who constituted the council of Solomon (King Rehoboam’s father), wanted to mold the new King to their own liking by advising him to feign service to the people in hopes of controlling them (Baptist Center for Ethics, 2003). As a “servant,” King Rehoboam would most likely gain the respect of the people, which the elders could use to exploit them just as they had done under the previous administration. Had Rehoboam followed this advice, he would contribute to the growth of an existing system of abuse and manipulation (Baptist Center for Ethics, 2003).
King Rehoboam’s story should teach Christians that choosing advisors is not a matter of two options: either one or the other. After listening to the elders, Rehoboam sought the council of the young men, who he grew up with (Baptist Center for Ethics, 2003). Thus, these “newcomers” entered the Israeli political arena in the hopes of grabbing any chance of seizing power they could get their hands at (Knoppers, 1990). Unlike the majority of the elders, they had never known real hardship. As a result, they offered the King advice, which reflected their own privilege (Baptist Center for Ethics, 2003). Newcomers thought they were entitled to certain rights due to their closeness with the King. Rehoboam spent his childhood and adolescence with these people, which is why they were successful in influencing him (Knoppers, 1990).
The King took the advice of his friends and spoke to the people harshly threatening to discipline them “with scorpions” (Baptist Center for Ethics, 2003). Therefore, the Israeli tribes rejected Rehoboam and accepted Jeroboam as their leader. The actions and decisions of King Rehoboam exemplify the threat of taking advice based on personal sympathies, and not rational thought or the guidance of the Lord. The ultimate lesson is that a wise Christian leader should never stray away from the pursuit of God’s will and always remain impartial when it comes to his or her advisors.
The Distinction between Old Testament Advisors and NSC Council
In order to gain an in-depth understanding of the ways a Christian worldview can be integrated into modern policy, it is crucial to contrast the advisors from the Scripture to modern national security counselors. Firstly, it is evident that the option to ask for advice from trusted officials remains open for politicians nowadays just as it was centuries ago. However, the 21st century arena of domestic politics in the United States is much more bureaucratic, which means that the leader of the nation must ask for assistance from experts since the executive branch’s power is limited (Lucius, 2013).
Solomon and David were authoritarian rulers, who did not worry much about the power being stripped away from them by other branches or their subjects themselves (Abramson, 2014). Secondly, the number of advisors has grown tremendously over the centuries separating the fall of King Solomon’s empire and the 2016 presidential election. The development of democracy as well as the rise of the United States as a global power led to the substantial growth of the council surrounding the leader. Modern political realities require domestic institutions to employ numerous experts, who provide advice to the President in a variety of fields (Bobroske, 2016). Another crucial distinction worth noting is that Old Testament advisors did not face the same challenges modern NSC members have to deal with, which is why it is important to acknowledge that the needs of a modern “empire” such as the U.S. are very different.
Advocating Change
Based on the analysis of the advisory bodies during the time of Old Testament kings’ rule, it is apparent that the U.S. national security policy can be benefitted greatly as a result of deliberate change. Although it is important to recognize the entirety of diverse issues political leaders of the 21st century have to find solutions to, expertise the POTUS requires from their council should not justify the chaos in the NSC resulting from its fast expansion (Bobroske, 2016).
The number of NSC members should be strictly regulated and limited to no more than 200 (Bobroske, 2016). The Bible emphasizes that foolish kings took the advice of anyone, who offered it, even though the main source of wisdom and direction should lay in the Holy Spirit (Lucius, 2013). A Christian worldview dictates that the ultimate authority is the Lord, which is why relying on the assistance of others too much is a sign of drifting away from pursuing God’s will (Abramson, 2014).
Even in modern realities of religious freedom and separation of state and church, leaders can learn a lot from the stories of the Old Testament and limit the number of people, who have influence over their decisions and actions. In addition, adopting a Christian worldview can teach leaders to accept they are not the ultimate authority, which is why it is important to serve people, rather than try to exploit them (Abramson, 2014).
Conclusion
To sum it all up, the Old Testament is full of essential lessons that should be studied and integrated into modern policy. The Bible shows how influential advisors can be, which is why it is crucial to choose the council wisely and keep the number of members limited. Moreover, a good leader must stay impartial and recognize the ultimate authority is out of their hands. The aforementioned insights from the Scripture can help a leader to choose and operate their council in the most efficient way, while ensuring they do not abuse their power and continue to serve their people, and not manipulate them.
References
Abramson, P. R. (2014). The ways of a king: Legal and political ideas in the Bible. The Independent Review: A Journal of Political Economy, 19(1). Web.
Baptist Center for Ethics (2003). Looking at leadership: Lessons from 1 and 2 Kings. Web.
Bobroske, A. (2016). Reforming the National Security Council. American Action Forum. Web.
Friedman, H. H., & Friedman, L. W. (2019). What went wrong? Lessons in leadership from Solomon, the Bible’s wisest and worst ruler. The Journal of Values-Based Leadership, 12(1). Web.
Knoppers, G. N. (1990). Rehoboam in chronicles: Villain or victim? Journal of Biblical Literature, 109(3), 423. Web.
Kvanvig, H. S. (2017). Who were the Advisers of the King? A Comparative Study of Royal Consultants in Mesopotamia and in Israel. In J. Baden, H. Namjan, & E. J. Tigchelaar (Eds.), Sibyls, scriptures, and scrolls (pp. 688-713). Brill.
Lucius, C. (2013). Religion and the national security strategy. Journal of Church and State, 55(1), pp. 50-70. Web.
Rawat, S. S. (2018). Who are the King’s advisors? Medium. Web.