Not exactly. Your comments don’t look like they account for the main accountability mechanism being 2-part: yes pressure from other tribes. But also there is an overarching unity power.
So looking at the Bible stories, King David is one of these. I’d say hes the archetype.
But of course, the Christian form of this is Jesus of Nazareth.
But I make an argument for him as theological “king” for all religions and spiritualists. Through different forms of understanding him.
But of course, He’s not here directly, so who sits in that spot? And until he does, a representative council or committee is the best way to access his spirit.
This already happens (informally which I’m fine with), the issue is persuading people to accept kingship from the fully unifying lens on Jesus, rather than only the Christian divine lens.
For example: Christians typically won’t accept His kingship except in the divine sense because it sacrifices their sure primacy at his metaphorical right hand.
Once again, the restoration offers the best lens for this, with its framing of Christ as (sometimes covertly) behind all the light of all nations and tribes. The mechanism for this is typically seen as divinity, but it doesn’t have to be.
As a side note, I’ll give credit where it’s due to western secularism as very nearly accomplishing this over unity power correctly. But it went very sideways and now has been rejected. King Saul lol.
English
