To Ordain or
Bestow Authority. The people who
were elected, designated, appointed, set apart, and consecrated were assigned specific
tasks. This commissioning was also an integral aspect or a distinct function of
anointing. The one who was anointed was given the right, ability, and authority
to perform. The distinction between authority and qualifications must be
maintained. For example, Saul was given the authority to reign. David always
maintained, the correctly so, that it was Saul’s right to be acknowledged as
the anointed king. Moreover, he recognized that Saul possessed the authority to
reign. However, in time Saul indicated that he did not have the qualifications to
reign. David recognized this fact. But Saul, having been given the office and
the authority to function therein was not to be removed from that office by
men. Only God could do that. And until God did so, in spite of lack of qualifications,
Saul was to be honored as the anointed holder of the office. To be anointed was
to be placed in a position of specific authority. This certainly is true of the
anointed priests. When the Lord instructed Moses concerning the proper manner
of Israel’s worship, he commanded Moses to anoint Aaron and his sons so that
they would become priests (Exod. 30:30; 40:13, 15). The emphasis in these
passages is not first of all on what these anointed men were to do, but
rather on what they were to be. By their anointing, the acquired the position
of priest, a God-given position. It was their right and they had the authority
to function in God’s presence, on behalf of God and his people. It must be
added, however, that once they were placed in this authoritative position.
There is another phrase expressing the idea of “giving authority” to the priests
who were anointed. It is the phrase millē’ yādām (fill their hand; Exod.
28:41; Num. 3:3), which is translated, as a rule, by the term ordain.
Much debate has been generated as scholars have sought to determine the exact
meaning or reference of this phrase. In view of the fact that the hand in the
Old Testament is often associated with the exercise of authority, preference
must be given to the idea of delegating authority or giving the symbol of
authority to the one who is anointed as priest.
The idea of giving authority to a prophet
is present in the transferal of the prophetic office from Elijah to Elisha. The
casting of the prophetic mangle on Elisha by Elijah conveys this idea. (cf. 1
Kings 19:19-21; 2 Kings 3:9-14) It is a well known fact that in the Old
Testament, the robe was a symbol of office and authority. (Psalm 93:1—2 gives
eloquent expression to this, the phrase robed in majesty and the term throne
being synonyms expressing the authority of Jehovah who reigns) Elisha
demonstrated that he had, indeed, inherited the office and authority of Elijah
the prophet when, calling on the name of the Lord, he struck the waters (2 Kings
2:14-15). The parting of the waters confirmed his office and authority.
With regard to the anointing of kings,
the concept of authority is unmistakably clear. As we pointed out, David
realized that Saul, by virtue of his anointing, was separated to and protected
by God, and so possessed a unique position in the kingdom of Israel. Saul held
the office of headship (nāgîd, head or preeminent one). When Samuel
anointed Saul, he told Saul that he was anointed as ruler (1 Sam. 10:1); and
when Samuel reminded Saul that the Lord had sent him to anoint him to be “king
over the people” (lĕmelek ‘al-‘ammîm, cf. 1 Sam. 15:1, 17), the message
is clear. The Lord had given Saul authority to represent him as head, ruler,
prince, and king over his people (1 Sam. 15:17). The phrase over Israel (‘al-yiśrā’ēl)
is used repeatedly the phrase is quite meaningless if it does not express the
idea of divine authority over the people. (Gerard Van Groningen, Messianic
Revelation in the Old Testament, 2 vols. [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book
House, 1990 repr., Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf and Stock, 1997], 1:26-28)
