Sermon, Hillcrest UMC, June 13, 2010
Naboth's Vineyard, 1 Kings 1-10, (11-16), 17-21a
We might describe the story of Naboth's Vineyard as a tax protest that failed, but it was more than that. Confiscation of Naboth's property by King Ahab and Queen Jezebel was illegal by Israelite law, and it led to a cover-up in complicity with the elders and nobles—if we can call them that—in Naboth's town, Jezreel, for Naboth was falsely accused and murdered.
1 Kings has reported Elijah's confrontation with the 400 prophets of Baal (chap. 18), his flight from Jezebel's wrath, his meeting God at Mt. Horeb, and enlisting Elisha as his disciple (chap. 19), and Ahab's wars with the Arameans and prophetic opposition to Ahab (chap. 20). As our scripture reading begins with the word “Later,” it refers to some or all of these events, adding “the following events took place: Naboth the Jezreelite had a vineyard in Jezreel, beside the palace of King Ahab of Samaria” (1 Kgs. 21:1). Samaria, of course, was the main capital of North Israel, but Ahab had a second palace in Jezreel. According to Nancy L. Lapp, Jezreel was “A town on the southern border of Issachar, commanding the Valley of Jezreel, identified with modern Zer'in at the foot of Mt. Gilboa” (HarperCollins Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Jezreel). That would be some 20 miles north of Ahab's capital in Samaria, and some 50 miles north of Jerusalem (by the scale of the Oxford Bible Atlas map, pp. 62-63, 3rd ed., 1984, reprinted 1985). According to Lapp, “The valley of Jezreel, in addition to providing a fertile growing area, provided one of the few ways of access to the Jordan Valley and the east” (loc. cit.).
In our scripture reading, we are told that “Ahab said to Naboth, 'Give me your vineyard, so that I may have it for a vegetable garden, because it is near my house; I will give you a better vineyard for it; or, if it seems good to you, I will give you its value in money' ” (1 Kgs. 21:2). According to Walter Dietrich,
The farmer Naboth has the right and indeed the duty to bequeath his land to his family and not to outsiders. The ruling ideal in ancient Israel was that each farming family—over 90 per cent of the population—was given a secure economic existence and thus firm citizen's rights by the allocation of sufficient land. This is shown by the attempt to legally protect landownership for everyone (Lev. 25; Deut. 5:21). (The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, p. 247, on 1 Kgs. 21:1-16)
So Naboth doesn't respond as Ahab had hoped; he “said to Ahab, 'The LORD forbid that I should give you my ancestral inheritance” (1 Kgs. 21:3). J. Mauchline says, “Ahab offered a fair deal to Naboth; there was no thought of summary expropriation of him; but Naboth refused to surrender a portion of his family inheritance, honouring the Israelite tradition that land is held in trust from the Lord and is not to be alienated from the family” (Peake's Commentary on the Bible, eds. Matthew Black and H. H. Rowley, 1962, repr. 1972, p. 347, sec. 299 e).
So far, the story seems to be on the up-and-up. But Ahab is unhappy. “Ahab went home resentful and sullen,” we are told, “because of what Naboth the Jezreelite had said to him; for he had said, 'I will not give you my ancestral inheritance” (1 Kgs. 21:4a). Earlier, Moses, speaking for the LORD, had said, “The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine; with me you are but aliens and tenants. Throughout the land that you hold, you shall provide for the redemption of the land” (Lev. 25:23-24, in the regulations for the sabbatical and jubilee years). So Ahab “lay down on his bed, turned away his face, and would not eat” (1 Kgs. 21:4b). According to Robert R. Wilson, “Ahab is resentful and sullen not just because he does not get his way but because Naboth's oath (v. 3 ['The LORD forbid . . .]), precludes the possibility precludes the possibility of further negotiations” (The HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 1 Kgs. 21:4). According to Mauchline, “The king took it in bad grace and sulked, but there is no sign that he proposed compulsory acquisition; he knew the strength of the Israelite tradition in such matters” (loc. cit.).
You probably know how it is. If your wife, or your husband, has a problem and is unhappy, you try to fix it. This Jezebel does with a vengeance! (Not, of course, that any of you are like her!). Ahab's “wife Jezebel came to him and said, 'Why are you so depressed that you will not eat?” (1 Kgs. 21:5). And Ahab tells her the story. “Because I spoke to Naboth the Jezreelite and said to him, 'Give me your vineyard for money; or else, if you prefer, I will give you another vineyard for it'; but he answered, 'I will not give you my vineyard' ” (1 Kgs. 21:6). Whether the idea of getting Naboth's vineyard came from Jezebel or Ahab, to begin with, is not clear. But she certainly joins the game at this point, if not earlier. She as much as says what another queen says in a different situation in a recent movie, “You're the king aren't you?” The implication there was that the king could change the law. In Jezebel's case, as a foreigner to Israel, that is, of Phoenician origin, she may not have known the Israelite tradition. More likely, she simply didn't care. She “said to him, 'Do you now govern Israel? Get up, eat some food, and be cheerful; I will give you the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite' ” (1 Kgs. 21:7).
Jezebel does not wait for Ahab to take action; she takes matters into her own hands, for “she wrote letters in Ahab's name and sealed then with his seal” (1 Kgs. 21:8a). “In the estimation of Jezebel,” says Mauchline, “Naboth's act was one of gross insubordination and she had no compunction about handling him. Presumably Ahab must have connived at the use of his name and of the royal seal in the letter Jezebel sent to the elders and nobles of the city” (ibid., sec 299 f on 1 Kgs. 21:5-14). “She sent the letters to the elders and the nobles who lived with Naboth in his city. She wrote in the letters, 'Proclaim a fast, and seat Naboth at the head of the assembly; seat two scoundrels opposite him, and have them bring a charge against him, saying, “You have cursed God and the king.” Then take him out and stone him to death' ” (1 Kgs. 21:8b-10). According to Wilson,
Unlike other stories about Elijah and Ahab, where the underlying issue is religious apostasy, this story focuses on the king's willingness to violate individual rights. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, monarchs had, or sought to have, absolute control over their subjects. As this story illustrates, however, such control was never an ideal in Israel, where the king was never above the law and was always subject to divine judgment. (op. cit., on 1 Kgs. 21:1-16).
According to a Jewish author, Ziony Zevit,
In relating how Jezebel corrupted the legal system using two corroborating witnesses (cf. Deut. 17:6; 19:15), the prophetic story reveals that Israel did have a legal system with defined laws and procedures, some of which are found in the Torah. The crime of which Naboth is accused, and its prescribed punishment, is only partially known from the Torah (Lev. 24:15-16). No Torah legislation explicitly criminalizes cursing the king (but see Exod. 22:27). (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on 1 Kgs. 21:8-13)
In the verses in parentheses in the scripture reference (1 Kgs. 21:11-16), we learn that the elders and nobles whom Jezebel's letter addressed carried out her instructions to the letter. They weren't very noble, were they? “They proclaimed a fast and seated Naboth at the head of the assembly” (1 Kgs. 21:12). “The two scoundrels came in . . . and brought a charge against Naboth, in the presence of the people, saying, 'Naboth cursed God and the king.' So they took him outside the city, and stoned him to death” (1 Kgs. 21:13). And they reported to Jezebel that Naboth was dead (1 Kgs. 21:14).
When Jezebel heard that Naboth was dead, she tells Ahab to “Go, take possession of the vineyard” (1 Kgs. 21:15), which he proceeds to do (1 Kgs. 21:16). According to Mauchline, “Ahab did not shrink from going down from Samaria to his country residence at Jezreel to take possession of the vineyard,
although the LXX says Ahab tore his clothes and put on sackcloth (cf. v. 27) before he went, which, if true, makes the king still more despicable” (loc. cit.).
So the king went, but Elijah meets him in the vineyard, for “Then the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying Go down to meet King Ahab of Israel, who rules in Samaria; he is now in the vineyard of Naboth, where he has gone to take possession” (1 Kgs. 21:17-18). Elijah is to say to Ahab, “Thus says the LORD: Have you killed, and also taken possession? . . . Thus says the LORD: In the place where dogs licked up the blood of Naboth, dogs will also lick up your blood” (1 Kgs. 21:19). Later, the narrator tells us that this prophecy was fulfilled (1 Kgs. 22:38), and Jezebel would die even more ignominiously (2 Kgs 9:30-37). But in the case of Ahab, due to his reported self-humbling (1 Kgs. 21:27), the LORD relents a little and softens the predicted disaster (1 Kgs. 21:28-29). But as our scripture ends disaster is predicted for Ahab, who “said to Elijah, 'Have you found me, O my enemy?' He [ie Elijah] answered, 'I have found you. Because you have sold yourself to do what is evil in the sight of the LORD, I will bring disaster on you” (1 Kgs. 21:20, 21a).
Dietrich summarizes:
Initially, King Ahab was forced to capitulate to [the right of Israelites to keep their land in the family], the right of his subjects: an idea which paints a positive picture of the monarchy. Nevertheless, this story shows how unscrupulously the king's power over the civilian rights could still be used and how compliant the lay assessor's court was to his wishes. The queen is the driving force behind this, since she comes from abroad and does not respect Israelite ethics, or perhaps does not know them. I any case, nobody attempts to stop her, so that evil can poison society from the top down—not merely a modern experience. If the scandal of Naboth is still an individual case for which the royal court is responsible, the theft of land by the ruling class 100 years later becomes an economic principle (Isa. 5:8; Am. 2:6; Mic. 2:1-2). (loc. cit.)
-------