Was Naboth in the right?

[heartstrings]

1 Kings 21:1
And it came to pass after these things, that Naboth the Jezreelite had a vineyard, which was in Jezreel, hard by the palace of Ahab king of Samaria.

2And Ahab spake unto Naboth, saying, Give me thy vineyard, that I may have it for a garden of herbs, because it is near unto my house: and I will give thee for it a better vineyard than it; or, if it seem good to thee, I will give thee the worth of it in money.

3And Naboth said to Ahab, The LORD forbid it me, that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee. 4And Ahab came into his house heavy and displeased because of the word which Naboth the Jezreelite had spoken to him: for he had said, I will not give thee the inheritance of my fathers. And he laid him down upon his bed, and turned away his face, and would eat no bread.

5But Jezebel his wife came to him, and said unto him, Why is thy spirit so sad, that thou eatest no bread?

6And he said unto her, Because I spake unto Naboth the Jezreelite, and said unto him, Give me thy vineyard for money; or else, if it please thee, I will give thee another vineyard for it: and he answered, I will not give thee my vineyard.

7And Jezebel his wife said unto him, Dost thou now govern the kingdom of Israel? arise, and eat bread, and let thine heart be merry: I will give thee the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite.

What Ahab did......
Debate thy cause......Proverbs 25:9 Notice that Ahab, by all indications, talked with Naboth privately; he didn't try to manipulate Naboth into giving in. He could have talked to Mrs. Naboth or sent her gifts to get her all stirred up to influence him but he didn't do that. He went straight to the head of the household to talk business.
Ahab's offer was just and fair. Proverbs 11:1 Ahab offered a better vinyard and fair payment. Clearly, it was a just and fair offer.
Ahab could have forced Naboth; he was, after all, the king. But he didn't do that either.

What Naboth did.....
He said "no"...... and he explained why 1 Kings 21:3
What Naboth did not do....
Obey them that have the rule over you..........and submit yourselves Hebrews 13:7 (also see 1 Peter 2) Clearly, Naboth did not submit to the king.

We all know that king Ahab forsook the good, went with the evil, and suffered the consequences.
But....should Naboth have submitted to the king? Why or why not?

Edited February 14, 2011 by heartstrings

[John81]

According to the law of inheritance Naboth had the right to reject the deal.

Ahab didn't order the land be given to him so Naboth couldn't have been refusing to submit himself to the king. Ahab made him an offer and Naboth didn't agree to the terms. That should have settled it. From the rest of the story, it seems Ahab realized this, which is why he was pouting. Ahab's wife, the uber-wicked one, then took over.

[HappyChristian]

The law God set up precluded Naboth's right to sell his family land.

No, Naboth wasn't in the wrong. That verse is absolutely taken out of context if applied to Naboth's situation (actually, that verse is often twisted...not saying you are heartstrings, but it is overused to excuse much wrong on the part of leadership).


Had Naboth been wrong, I doubt God would have avenged him.

[heartstrings]

The law God set up precluded Naboth's right to sell his family land.

No, Naboth wasn't in the wrong. That verse is absolutely taken out of context if applied to Naboth's situation (actually, that verse is often twisted...not saying you are heartstrings, but it is overused to excuse much wrong on the part of leadership).


Had Naboth been wrong, I doubt God would have avenged him.

Do tell.........
Because I am in a certain situation; and this is the reason I posted this.

[anime4christ]

1 Samuel 8:

11And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.

12And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.

13And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.

14And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.

15And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.

16And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.

17He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.

18And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.

According to Samuel in verse 14, the king had a right to take the vineyard. Also, the next verse suggests that the king has a right to the tithes, which before belonged to God. So, while Naboth was in the right according to the law of Moses, he should have considered that since the time a king was set over Israel, some of the laws could be overridden by the kings rights. Of course, Ahab went a worse route than just exercising his rights and did far worse than Naboth did.

[Invicta]

1 Samuel 8:

11And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.

12And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.

13And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.

14And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.

15And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.

16And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.

17He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.

18And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.

According to Samuel in verse 14, the king had a right to take the vineyard. Also, the next verse suggests that the king has a right to the tithes, which before belonged to God. So, while Naboth was in the right according to the law of Moses, he should have considered that since the time a king was set over Israel, some of the laws could be overridden by the kings rights. Of course, Ahab went a worse route than just exercising his rights and did far worse than Naboth did.

Samuel was not saying what was the right of kings, but what the king would do if the Israelites chose a king.

[John81]

Samuel was not saying what was the right of kings, but what the king would do if the Israelites chose a king.

Exactly.

[anime4christ]

Well, the Hebrew word for "manner" could also be translated "right" and is so translated in the Russian Synodal Translation (based on the same manuscripts as the KJV), to which I am still quite used to. In any case, Ahab asked Naboth if he wanted to sell his vineyard. I don't know how nicely Naboth answered, but he answered honestly and according to the law. While he should have been aware that the king could take his vineyard, he didn't do wrong in answering the question. What Ahab did in response (or didn't stop his wife from doing) was absolutely wrong, however.

[Annie]

"Land" was a huge thing to Israelites. God, not men, apportioned the land and assigned it to various tribes, families, etc., which in turn handed it down within the same family through the generations. That's why Naboth said it would be displeasing to God to give up the land He had assigned his family. That land was not rightfully Ahab's, and Ahab should not have been surprised or dismayed when Naboth refused to sell it to him. Naboth was actually doing right to refuse Ahab the land, since God Himself intended for Naboth's family to have that land.

I don't think this situation is really comparable to anything I can think of in modern commercial society, since "the land" isn't understood the same way it was back then. Sure, every day the government buys land (a.k.a. people's front yards) to widen roads, etc. I'm sure there are laws which govern the fine lines between "asking" and "taking over/demanding" for a person to sell private property for these purposes. From what I hear, usually the government makes an offer that can't be sensibly refused.

Edited February 15, 2011 by Annie

[JerryNumbers]

"Land" was a huge thing to Israelites. God, not men, apportioned the land and assigned it to various tribes, families, etc., which in turn handed it down within the same family through the generations. That's why Naboth said it would be displeasing to God to give up the land He had assigned his family. That land was not rightfully Ahab's, and Ahab should not have been surprised or dismayed when Naboth refused to sell it to him. Naboth was actually doing right to refuse Ahab the land, since God Himself intended for Naboth's family to have that land.

I don't think this situation is really comparable to anything I can think of in modern commercial society, since "the land" isn't understood the same way it was back then. Sure, every day the government buys land (a.k.a. people's front yards) to widen roads, etc. I'm sure there are laws which govern the fine lines between "asking" and "taking over/demanding" for a person to sell private property for these purposes. From what I hear, usually the government makes an offer that can't be sensibly refused.

It can be sensibly refused, yet the government will force it on you. The person who has a spot of land handed down to them, many times its worth more than money to them, the government does not recognize that, you take what they offer. Or else!

If you remember some of this has been all the way to the 'big court.' Cities taken personal property to hand over to a developer that makes tons of money off of the deal. 60 Minutes.


I have seen situations where some land owners made out like bandits, yet other land owners treated like bandits

[Annie]

It can be sensibly refused, yet the government will force it on you. The person who has a spot of land handed down to them, many times its worth more than money to them, the government does not recognize that, you take what they offer. Or else!

If you remember some of this has been all the way to the 'big court.' Cities taken personal property to hand over to a developer that makes tons of money off of the deal. 60 Minutes.


I have seen situations where some land owners made out like bandits, yet other land owners treated like bandits

Good points, Jerry; I agree with you. But, as I said, I don't think situtations like this are parallel to Naboth's situation. My point was that "the land" back in Israel's day was a divine birthright...not just procured/passed down because somewhere along the line it was purchased for money. IOW, "property rights" due to purchase are different than "divine birthright." God is not displeased if I sell my family property today (to the gov't or anyone else). My family bought it; we have the option of selling it if we want to. However, selling land to people outside the family or outside of Israel was displeasing to God, and disgraceful to the ancient Hebrew family, since it was given by divine birthright. That's why Naboth said, "The LORD forbid it me, that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee." Edited February 15, 2011 by Annie

[heartstrings]

As a young man, I was walking with my little daughter into a store in our tiny country town when we passed an old gentleman dressed in overalls. He stopped for a second , looked down at my daughter and said. "That's more gold than a mule could pull" and went on his way.
All of the lands you could acquire, all of the gold you could dig up could not even come close to the value of one of your children. That, is heritage.
I looked up the name "Naboth" and, from some of the definitions I found, it means "fruits".

Psalm 127:3
Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.

4As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth.

5Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.

Surely Naboth knew that real estate is actually worthless. But Naboth fully appreciated that his parents had left that land to him and he in turn was going to leave it to his children. That is a heritage worth dying for.

Edited February 15, 2011 by heartstrings

[JerryNumbers]

It was you that brought of government buying property in order to widen roads or such and paying a sensible price, that is not always true so I followed up on that.


And it depends on why you sell your property and what you use the money on if God will be pleased or not. Of course today most Christians that goes that routes does so following what worldly ungodly people of this world do, they do so because of covetous and lust. In fact covetous and lust is the force that's driving America while they fail to heed God and His ways.



And of course Ahab wanted Naboth's land for all the wrong reasons and is a good example of covetous and lust.

[Covenanter]

How do these questions apply to us & our world today?

Do we see the property we hold as God's gracious provision for our families' needs, so that we can share his gifts?

Or do we see the acquisition of property to be our right, so that the rich get ever richer & poor are poor because God isn't blessing them? The 19th C hymn goes:

The rich man in his castle;
the poor man at his gate;
God made them high or lowly
and ordered their estate.
All things bright & beautiful....

Our nations have a history of legal stealing of land, & allowing the poor to work the land for the benefit of the rich. Where are the Irish? The English & Scottish poor? The American Indians? The American song runs:

...
Some rob you with a six-gun
and some with a fountain pen...
(Pretty boy Floyd.)

Legal, fountain-pen robbery still goes on. Even now the banks are plundering the property of the poor as they foreclose on their homes, having granted unsustainable mortgages. Instead of paying us interest on savings & pension plans, they are paying themselves obscene bonuses.

Do we support Israel as more & more Arab land is taken over by force for the benefit of Jewish settlers? Jewish settlers who may lose their rights if they convert & believe in Jesus as Saviour, Lord & Christ.

Should we see the Zionists as followers of Ahab, rather than Abraham? Abraham was given the promise of all the land, yet would not take even a burial place as a free gift.

Gen 23:11 Nay, my lord, hear me: the field give I thee, and the cave that [is] therein, I give it thee; in the presence of the sons of my people give I it thee: bury thy dead.
12 And Abraham bowed down himself before the people of the land.
13 And he spake unto Ephron in the audience of the people of the land, saying, But if thou [wilt give it], I pray thee, hear me: I will give thee money for the field; take [it] of me, and I will bury my dead there.

[John81]

How do these questions apply to us & our world today?

Do we see the property we hold as God's gracious provision for our families' needs, so that we can share his gifts?

Or do we see the acquisition of property to be our right, so that the rich get ever richer & poor are poor because God isn't blessing them? The 19th C hymn goes:


Our nations have a history of legal stealing of land, & allowing the poor to work the land for the benefit of the rich. Where are the Irish? The English & Scottish poor? The American Indians? The American song runs:

Legal, fountain-pen robbery still goes on. Even now the banks are plundering the property of the poor as they foreclose on their homes, having granted unsustainable mortgages. Instead of paying us interest on savings & pension plans, they are paying themselves obscene bonuses.

Do we support Israel as more & more Arab land is taken over by force for the benefit of Jewish settlers? Jewish settlers who may lose their rights if they convert & believe in Jesus as Saviour, Lord & Christ.

Should we see the Zionists as followers of Ahab, rather than Abraham? Abraham was given the promise of all the land, yet would not take even a burial place as a free gift.

Gen 23:11 Nay, my lord, hear me: the field give I thee, and the cave that [is] therein, I give it thee; in the presence of the sons of my people give I it thee: bury thy dead.
12 And Abraham bowed down himself before the people of the land.
13 And he spake unto Ephron in the audience of the people of the land, saying, But if thou [wilt give it], I pray thee, hear me: I will give thee money for the field; take [it] of me, and I will bury my dead there.

You like to think, don't you? (that's a good thing)

The actual point of the story of this as recorded in Scripture was mostly about the wickedness of Ahab and Jezebel and their wicked actions regarding Naboth factored into their ending.

There is no doubt that in the Western tradition property rights have been more akin to grants from the government rather than actual rights. If the government determines they want your land for some reason, they will take it. The government perpetually taxes the land we own under threat of having the land confiscated by the government and sold so they can get their tax payment...this amounts to us actually renting the land we buy.

That dealing with Israel and the Arabs is a matter for them to work out just as America worked out her issues with the Indians, Spanish, English, French, Mexicans and others over the course of her history. If Israel and the Arabs want to play "land for peace", that's up to them. If they want to play other games, that's their business. If they choose the path of war, they certainly won't be the first to have done that nor the last. That said, I don't think this matter has much to do with the OP.

Given the fact we live in a fallen world embroiled in sin, we really shouldn't be surprised when the world operates in that way.