Kings, etc, vs democracies

[JohnClay]

I was wondering if there are democracies in the Bible? Normally a single person is ruling, such as a king, or Moses.... sometimes the crowd is taken into account like Pilate and the crowd.

Maybe the early church could be considered a kind of democracy.... are there any other examples like that?

These days a ruler with absolute power can seem problematic. Presidents have a lot of power but they can be impeached.... though this isn't the case in some countries.

Then of course is the concept of God. He is a ruler with complete power and isn't required to take into account the wishes of his subjects.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

1 Samuel 8 is all about the tyranny that will result when people ask for kings.

It is the old issue - a good king is a good thing, someone who can get things done that need to be, without needing to pander or so. A bad king though, similarly has greater ability to do bad. The only reason to favour democracy is that it hobbles the powerful, so inevitably can only form amongst the prosperous and tends to run down into oligarchy or despotism anyway over time. All societies cycle through more democratic, more aristocratic and more monarchic structures, as each in its time degrades and either renews itself or breaks down for one of the other forms.

 

[JohnClay]

1 Samuel 8 is all about the tyranny that will result when people ask for kings.

I thought that involved "judges"..... what is the difference between judges and kings? Do judges share the power with each other?

All societies cycle through more democratic, more aristocratic and more monarchic structures

Are there any times in the Bible where society was democratic?

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

I thought that involved "judges"..... what is the difference between judges and kings? Do judges share the power with each other?

Samuel was a Judge, but that passage is about what will happen when a king is appointed. Prior to Saul, Israel was a tribal confederation. A judge in this set-up is basically just that - someone to whom neighbours come to resolve disputes they can't resolve amongst themselves. In difficult times, inevitably such judges became the leaders - as Judges in small towns remain foremost civic leaders today. Judges were not formally appointed, but came into prominence. If you look at Judges, the premier judge jumps from tribe to tribe, with only really Gideon perhaps beginning to form a proto-monarchy. Even here, Samuel's sons did not naturally succeed him, as it was more by informal popular consent. Going back into Deuteronomy, you see that disputes are judged by the Elders of the tribes, which is the natural human tendency to defer to the elderly as more wise.

This is in contrast to a king, who is anointed in the Bible and inherits his role often - or seizes it himself by force. So the Judges are often called the Republican strain in the Bible, versus the Monarchist.

 

[Tolworth John]

Maybe the early church could be considered a kind of democracy.... are there any other examples like that?

Democracy is not found in the bible.
the early leaders of Israel were judges, men like moses etc who primarily dealt with how the people lived and socially and spiritually. They sometimes lead in times of war.
None were appointed by the people.
Saul the first King was a rejection of Gods leadership through prophets and judges.
The kings were like the judges a mixture of good and bad.

The early church met together to discus problems, but was still essentially following either the apostles or an appointed leader.

Democracy works if the people are involved and if they are motivated by a common world view.

In a tribal culture where the tribes view is important, people vote not according to the issues but according to their tribe and its views or the leaders views.