When we get to the flashpoint moment in 1 Samuel 8 where Israel demands a king, we assume that it’s an outrageous request. God responds to Samuel that they have not rejected him, but God Himself. From that moment, it seems that their fate is sealed.
Looking back, obviously, that’s not the case. The period of the Judges was horrendous—they needed numerous heroes to save them—and the time of Samuel’s own childhood was laden with false priests and prophets that did little to encourage Godliness.
Nevertheless, 1 Samuel 8 is unique because of the request. But what if I told you that God not only expected the people to demand a king, but made provisions for it just in case?
That’s what we see in Deuteronomy 17. In these verses, God outlines how a king should act: He shouldn’t multiply horses, wives, or money. Instead, a true king will rely on God for everything and stay faithful to Him and Him alone.
God knows that if a king goes down this path, it’ll only lead to apostasy. Arrogance often follows wealth, and a king that is already elevated above his brothers will be tempted to elevate himself further.
So why does God put these warnings about a king in Deuteronomy if He never wanted it to begin with? Why regulate something instead of just disallowing it?
For starters, take a look at the actual statements about the king. He’s given no real power, no real authority to do anything. The assumed responsibility to defend Israel and make war with other nations isn’t given until 1 Samuel 8. It was the people who gave that responsibility to the king, not God.
The only thing that God tells the king to do is make a copy of the Law in the presence of the Levites. He’s to keep it readily available and read from it often, in order to remind him who the true King really is.
In the end, it seems like the appointment of a king was optional. If they wanted one, fine—provided he stayed within his lane.
The later kings of Israel and Judah did not, nor were they expected to be from the outset. That’s where things went haywire.