As a leader, David was outstanding. God called him a man after His own heart (1 Samuel 13:14) who would be the ruler. As king, it is interesting to note how God described him at various times. For example, in 2 Samuel 3:18, He called him “My servant David.” In 2 Samuel 7:5, he again called him His servant. These terms are repeated in 1 Chronicles 17:4 and 1 Chronicles 17:7. When David turned to God in confession, he described himself as a servant. In each of the above references the term “servant” is from the same Hebrew word “ebed.” As a revered king, no one would have raised any eyebrows if a nobler title was ascribed to David. After all, he had been adjudged by God as a man after his heart. Yet, he is called a servant. His leadership was about servanthood.
Uniquely, one account that may be easily missed is in the story of Job. While many think of the tragedy and sorrow that plagued Job, yet there is much that can be gleaned about leadership from Job. After all, he led as a husband and father. Additionally, he led as a successful and wealthy person as well as in the midst of catastrophe and disaster. Job certainly did not take his responsibilities lightly before God. He always led in ensuring that he and his …show more content…
Slavery meant a loss of identity and dignity. The new “ebed” meant a life designed to serve God by trusting Him in obvious obedience to His way. Thus “to claim the status of (a) servant without a commitment to serve is an utter and intolerable contradiction.” Herbert Young agrees with this view too. In his article, he submitted that the word “ebed,” was a usage synonymous to slave but had morphed to mean a trusted servant and was indicative of those “who did a work for a ruler or God. Kings and prophets were often called servants of the Lord.” In other words, a servant, even if he holds a high office, was not a lord. He worked for someone else and served the purpose of his
Uniquely, one account that may be easily missed is in the story of Job. While many think of the tragedy and sorrow that plagued Job, yet there is much that can be gleaned about leadership from Job. After all, he led as a husband and father. Additionally, he led as a successful and wealthy person as well as in the midst of catastrophe and disaster. Job certainly did not take his responsibilities lightly before God. He always led in ensuring that he and his …show more content…
Slavery meant a loss of identity and dignity. The new “ebed” meant a life designed to serve God by trusting Him in obvious obedience to His way. Thus “to claim the status of (a) servant without a commitment to serve is an utter and intolerable contradiction.” Herbert Young agrees with this view too. In his article, he submitted that the word “ebed,” was a usage synonymous to slave but had morphed to mean a trusted servant and was indicative of those “who did a work for a ruler or God. Kings and prophets were often called servants of the Lord.” In other words, a servant, even if he holds a high office, was not a lord. He worked for someone else and served the purpose of his