When Solomon was old, his wives turned away his heart after other gods; and his heart was not perfect with Yahweh his God, as the heart of David his father was. For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites. Solomon did that which was evil in Yahweh’s sight, and didn’t go fully after Yahweh, as David his father did. Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, on the mountain that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech the abomination of the children of Ammon. So he did for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and sacrificed to their gods. Yahweh was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned away from Yahweh, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice, and had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods; but he didn’t keep that which Yahweh commanded. Therefore Yahweh said to Solomon, “Because this is done by you, and you have not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom from you, and will give it to your servant. Nevertheless, I will not do it in your days, for David your father’s sake; but I will tear it out of your son’s hand. However I will not tear away all the kingdom; but I will give one tribe to your son, for David my servant’s sake, and for Jerusalem’s sake which I have chosen.”
Yahweh raised up an adversary to Solomon: Hadad the Edomite. He was one of the king’s offspring in Edom. For when David was in Edom, and Joab the captain of the army had gone up to bury the slain, and had struck every male in Edom (for Joab and all Israel remained there six months, until he had cut off every male in Edom); Hadad fled, he and certain Edomites of his father’s servants with him, to go into Egypt, when Hadad was still a little child. They arose out of Midian, and came to Paran; and they took men with them out of Paran, and they came to Egypt, to Pharaoh king of Egypt, who gave him a house, and appointed him food, and gave him land. Hadad found great favor in the sight of Pharaoh, so that he gave him as wife the sister of his own wife, the sister of Tahpenes the queen. The sister of Tahpenes bore him Genubath his son, whom Tahpenes weaned in Pharaoh’s house; and Genubath was in Pharaoh’s house among the sons of Pharaoh. When Hadad heard in Egypt that David slept with his fathers, and that Joab the captain of the army was dead, Hadad said to Pharaoh, “Let me depart, that I may go to my own country.”
Then Pharaoh said to him, “But what have you lacked with me, that behold, you seek to go to your own country?” He answered, “Nothing, however only let me depart.”
God raised up an adversary to him, Rezon the son of Eliada, who had fled from his lord Hadadezer king of Zobah. He gathered men to himself, and became captain over a troop, when David killed them of Zobah. They went to Damascus, and lived there, and reigned in Damascus. He was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon, in addition to the mischief of Hadad. He abhorred Israel, and reigned over Syria. Jeroboam the son of Nebat, an Ephraimite of Zeredah, a servant of Solomon, whose mother’s name was Zeruah, a widow, also lifted up his hand against the king. This was the reason why he lifted up his hand against the king: Solomon built Millo, and repaired the breach of his father David’s city. The man Jeroboam was a mighty man of valor; and Solomon saw the young man that he was industrious, and he put him in charge of all the labor of the house of Joseph. At that time, when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him on the way. Now Ahijah had clad himself with a new garment; and the two of them were alone in the field. Ahijah took the new garment that was on him, and tore it in twelve pieces. He said to Jeroboam, “Take ten pieces; for Yahweh, the God of Israel, says, ‘Behold, I will tear the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to you (but he shall have one tribe, for my servant David’s sake and for Jerusalem’s sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel); because that they have forsaken me, and have worshiped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, Chemosh the god of Moab, and Milcom the god of the children of Ammon. They have not walked in my ways, to do that which is right in my eyes, and to keep my statutes and my ordinances, as David his father did.
“ ‘However I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand; but I will make him prince all the days of his life, for David my servant’s sake whom I chose, who kept my commandments and my statutes; but I will take the kingdom out of his son’s hand, and will give it to you, even ten tribes. I will give one tribe to his son, that David my servant may have a lamp always before me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen for myself to put my name there. I will take you, and you shall reign according to all that your soul desires, and shall be king over Israel. It shall be, if you will listen to all that I command you, and will walk in my ways, and do that which is right in my eyes, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as David my servant did; that I will be with you, and will build you a sure house, as I built for David, and will give Israel to you. I will afflict the offspring of David for this, but not forever.’ ”
Therefore Solomon sought to kill Jeroboam; but Jeroboam arose, and fled into Egypt, to Shishak king of Egypt, and was in Egypt until the death of Solomon.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv4, 5, 7, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 23, 24, 28, 30, 33, 36, 37, 39 He served not God with a pure heart.
He served not God with a pure heart.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv4–40 1Ki 11:4 For it came to pass, when Solomon…
1Ki 11:4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, [that] his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the LORD his God, as [was] the heart of David his father.
Ver. 4. For it came to pass, when Solomon was old.] And therefore the less to be excused, because his soul had had so long communion with God and experience of his goodness: as also because his body had now despumed, and was declining, so that his lust was the more monstrous, like as it is to behold green apples on a tree in winter. Augustine inveigheth against those - and worthily - who consecrate the flower of their youth to the devil, and reserve for God the dregs of their old age: Solomon offended on the contrary part. Let every man look to what lord he dedicateth both his youth and his age: for it sometimes falleth out, that Satan preyeth upon those when old, whom he could not prevail with when they were young; and it is not for nothing that the heathen sages say, that old age is to be feared, as that which cometh not alone, but is itself a disease, and bringeth with it not a few diseases both of body and mind.
Read full note →
That his wives.] Working upon his impotencies, and having him wholly in their power, as it was said of the Persian kings, that they were captivarum suarum captivi, {a} slaves to their concubines, though lords of many nations.
And his heart was not perfect.] Magnae artis magnaeque sapientiae est, saith one, {b} It is a high point of heavenly skill, to take heed by Solomon’s example, that thou use not thy happiness and welfare otherwise than well, and to thy spiritual disadvantage.
{a} Plutarch.
{b} Bucholcer.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 When Solomon was old; as having now reigned nigh…
When Solomon was old; as having now reigned nigh thirty years, when it might have been expected that age should have cooled his lust, and experience have made him wiser and better, and when probably he was secure as to any such miscarriages; then God permitted him to fall so shamefully, that he might be to all succeeding generations an example of God’s severity, and of the folly, and weakness, and wickedness of the wisest and best men, when left to themselves.
Turned away his heart after other gods, not that they changed his mind or opinion about the true God and idols, which is not credible; but that they cooled his zeal against them, obtained from him a public indulgence for their worship, and money for the making of idols, and the support of the charges of their priests and sacrifices, and possibly persuaded him sometimes in complaisance to join with them in the outward act of idol worship, or, at least, in their feasts upon their sacrifices, which was a participation of their idolatry. See Psa 106:28; 1Co 10:20.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On vv9, 14, 26 Here is, I. God's anger against Solomon for his…
Here is, I. God's anger against Solomon for his sin. The thing he did displeased the Lord. Time was then the Lord loved Solomon (Sa2 12:24) and delighted in him (Kg1 10:9), but now the Lord was angry with Solomon (Kg1 11:9), for there was in his sin, 1. The most base ingratitude that could be. He turned from the Lord who had appeared unto him twice, once before he began to build the temple (Kg1 3:5) and once after he had dedicated it, Kg1 9:2. God keeps account of the gracious visits he makes us, whether we do or no, knows how often he has appeared to us and for us, and will remember it against us if we turn from him. God's appearing to Solomon was such a sensible confirmation of his faith as should have for ever prevented his worshipping any other god; it was also such a distinguishing favour, and put such an honour upon him, as he ought never to have forgotten, especially considering what God said to him in both these appearances. 2. The most wilful disobedience. This was the very thing concerning which God had commanded him - that he should not go after other gods, yet he was not restrained by such an express admonition, Kg1 11:10. Those who have dominion over men are apt to forget God's dominion over them; and, while they demand obedience from their inferiors, to deny it to him who is the Supreme.
II. The message he sent him hereupon (Kg1 11:11): The Lord said unto Solomon (it is likely by a prophet) that he must expect to smart for his apostasy. And here, 1. The sentence is just, that, since he had revolted from God, part of his kingdom should revolt from his family; he had given God's glory to the creature, and therefore God would give his crown to his servant: "I will rend the kingdom from thee, in thy posterity, and will give it to thy servant, who shall bear rule over much of that for which thou hast laboured." This was a great mortification to Solomon, who pleased himself no doubt with the prospect of the entail of his rich kingdom upon his heirs for ever. Sin brings ruin upon families, cuts off entails, alienates estates, and lays men's honour in the dust. 2. Yet the mitigations of it are very kind, for David's sake (Kg1 11:12, Kg1 11:13), that is, for the sake of the promise made to David. Thus all the favour God shows to man is for Christ's sake, and for the sake of the covenant made with him. The kingdom shall be rent from Solomon's house, but, (1.) Not immediately. Solomon shall not live to see it done, but it shall be rent out of the hand of his son, a son that was born to him by one of his strange wives, for his mother was an Ammonitess (Kg1 14:31) and probably had been a promoter of idolatry. What comfort can a man take in leaving children and an estate behind him if he do not leave a blessing behind him? Yet, if judgments be coming, it is a favour to us if they come not in our days, as Kg2 20:19. (2.) Not wholly. One tribe, that of Judah, the strongest and most numerous, shall remain to the house of David (Kg1 11:13), for Jerusalem's sake, which David built, and for the sake of the temple there, which Solomon built; these shall not go into other hands. Solomon did not quickly nor wholly turn away from God; therefore God did not quickly nor wholly take the kingdom from him.
Read full note →
Upon this message which God graciously sent to Solomon, to awaken his conscience and bring him to repentance, we have reason to hope that he humbled himself before God, confessed his sin, begged pardon, and returned to his duty, that he then published his repentance in the book of Ecclesiastes, where he bitterly laments his own folly and madness (Ecc 7:25, Ecc 7:26), and warns others to take heed of the like evil courses, and to fear God and keep his commandments, in consideration of the judgment to come, which, it is likely, had made him tremble, as it did Felix. That penitential sermon was as true an indication of a heart broken for sin and turned from it as David's penitential psalms were, though of another nature. God's grace in his people works variously. Thus, though Solomon fell, he was not utterly cast down; what God had said to David concerning him was fulfilled: I will chasten him with the rod of men, but my mercy shall not depart from him, Sa2 7:14, Sa2 7:15. Though God may suffer those whom he loves to fall into sin, he will not suffer them to lie still in it. Solomon's defection, though it was much his reproach and a great blemish to his personal character, yet did not so far break in upon the character of his reign but that it was afterwards made the pattern of a good reign, Ch2 11:17, where the kings are said to have done well, while they walked in the way of David and Solomon. But, though we have all this reason to hope he repented and found mercy, yet the Holy Ghost did not think fit expressly to record his recovery, but left it doubtful, for warning to others not to sin upon presumption of repenting, for it is but a peradventure whether God will give them repentance, or, if he do, whether he will give the evidence of it to themselves or others. Great sinners may recover themselves and have the benefit of their repentance, and yet be denied both the comfort and credit of it; the guilt may be taken away, and yet not the reproach.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv4–39 And it came to pass, when Solomon was old,....…
And it came to pass, when Solomon was old,.... Toward the latter end of his reign, when he might be near sixty years of age; for Rehoboam his son and successor was forty one when he began to reign, Kg1 14:21 which is observed either as an aggravation of the sin of Solomon, that in his old age, when by long experience he might have been thought to be still wiser, and less lustful: and yet
that his wives turned away his heart after other gods; or as pointing at the advantage his wives took of his age:
Read full note →
and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father; who, though guilty of many sins, never inclined to idolatry; his heart was always right in that point, and sincere in his worship, see Psa 18:20.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 15, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 39, 40 Was old - As having now reigned nigh thirty…
Was old - As having now reigned nigh thirty years. When it might have been expected that experience would have made him wiser: then God permitted him to fall so shamefully, that he might be to all succeeding generations an example of the folly, and weakness of the wisest and the best men, when left to themselves. Turned his heart - Not that they changed his mind about the true God, and idols, which is not credible; but they obtained from him a publick indulgence for their worship, and possibly persuaded him to join with them in the outward act of idol-worship; or, at least, in their feasts upon their sacrifices, which was a participation of their idolatry.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, 26, 29, 31, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 Verse 7. The hill that is before Jerusalem] This…
Verse 7. The hill that is before Jerusalem] This was the Mount of Olives.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 34, 37, 38, 39, 40 1Ki 11:4. For it came to pass when Solomon…
1Ki 11:4. For it came to pass when Solomon was old, &c. — Having now reigned nigh thirty years, when it might have been expected that experience would have made him wiser; then God suffered him to fall so shamefully, that he might to all succeeding generations be an example of the folly and weakness of the wisest and the best men, when left to themselves. His wives turned away his heart after other gods — Not that they altered his judgment respecting the true God and idols, which is not credible; but they obtained from him a public indulgence for their idol-worship, and possibly persuaded him to join with them sometimes in the outward acts of it; or at least, in their feasts upon their sacrifices, which was a participation of their idolatry. And his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God — He did not entirely forsake the service of Jehovah, but joined the worship of other gods with him, which he never could have done, after the true knowledge which he had of God, and the solemn profession he had made of adherence to him, unless he had been greatly fallen.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv4, 5, 7, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 34, 36, 38, 39, 40 Old - About fifty or fifty-five. From his age…
Old - About fifty or fifty-five. From his age at his accession (1Ki 2:2 note) he could not have been more than about sixty at his death.
The true nature of Solomon’s idolatry was neither complete apostasy - an apostasy from which there could be no recovery; nor a mere toleration, rather praise-worthy than blameable. Solomon did not ever openly or wholly apostatize. He continued his attendance on the worship of Yahweh, and punctually made his offerings three times a year in the temple 1Ki 9:25; but his heart was not “perfect” with God. The religious earnestness of his younger days was weakened by wealth, luxury, sensualism, an increasing worldliness leading him to worldly policy and latitudinarianism arising from contact with all the manifold forms of human opinion. His lapse into deadly sin was no doubt gradual. Partly from ostentation, partly from that sensualism which is the most common failing of Oriental monarchs, he established a harem on a grand and extraordinary scale. To gratify “strange women,” i. e., foreigners, admitted either from worldly policy, or for variety’s sake, he built magnificent temples to their false gods, right over against Jerusalem, as manifest rivals to “the temple.” He thus became the author of a syncretism, which sought to blend together the worship of Yahweh and the worship of idols - a syncretism which possessed fatal attractions for the Jewish nation. Finally, he appears himself to have frequented the idol temples 1Ki 11:5, 1Ki 11:10, and to have taken part in those fearful impurities which constituted the worst horror of the idolatrous systems, thus practically apostatising, though theoretically he never ceased to hold that Yahweh was the true God.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 Old; about fifty. (Salien) (Calmet) --- This is an…
Old; about fifty. (Salien) (Calmet) --- This is an aggravation of his guilt. (Haydock) --- Solomon spent the first thirty years of his reign in virtue: but towards the termination of it, he gave into idolatry, and into such excesses, that he deserves to be ranked with Henry VIII, who began well, but ended with dishonour. (Haydock) --- Heart, and mind also, ver. 9. He sacrificed to idols, not only externally, but gave them internal worship; (Salien) so much was his understanding darkened, unless (Haydock) he acted against his better knowledge, Ecclesiastes ii. 9. (Tirinus) --- Father who did not continue long in sin. (Du Hamel) --- "The wisdom, which had been given to him, entirely abandoned his heart, which the discipline even of the smallest tribulation had not guarded." (St. Gregory, Pastoral. p. 3.) --- "He had commenced his reign with an ardent desire of wisdom, and when he had obtained it by spiritual love, he lost it by carnal affections." (St. Augustine, Doct. iii. 21.) --- "Prosperity, which is a severe trial for the wise, was more disadvantageous to him than wisdom herself had been profitable." (St. Augustine, City of God xvii. 20.) --- The Fathers do not attempt to palliate the guilt of Solomon; and those aggravate his crime, who endeavour to excuse him by saying, that his mind was still convinced that there could be but one God, and that his adoration of idols was merely external, and out of complaisance to his wives. See Santius,&c. (Calmet)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v14 Solomon’s Adversaries and Death
Solomon’s Adversaries and Death
B.— 1Ki_11:14-43
Read full note →
14And the Lord [Jehovah] stirred up an adversary unto Solomon, Hadad6 the Edomite: he was of the king’s seed in Edom. 15For it came to pass, when David was7 in [with, i. e., at war with] Edam, and Joab the captain of the host was gone up to bury the slain, after he had smitten every male in Edom; 16(for six months did Joab remain there with all Israel [i. e., the host], until he had cut off every male in Edom:) 17that Hadad fled, he and certain8 Edomites of his father’s servants with him, to go into Egypt: Hadad being yet a little child. 18And they arose out of Midian, and came to Paran: and they took men with them out of Paran, and they came to Egypt, unto Pharaoh king of Egypt; which gave him a house, and appointed him victuals, and gave him land. 19And Hadad found great favor in the sight of Pharaoh, so that he gave him to wife the sister of his own wife, the sister of Tahpenes the queen. 20And the sister of Tahpenes bare him Genubath his son, whom Tahpenes weaned in Pharaoh’s house: and Genubath was in Pharaoh’s household among the sons of Pharaoh. 21And when Hadad heard in Egypt that David slept with his fathers, and that Joab the captain of the host was dead, Hadad said to Pharaoh, Let me depart, that I may go to mine own country. 22Then Pharaoh said unto him, But what hast thou lacked with me, that, behold, thou seekest to go to thine own country? And he answered, Nothing: howbeit, let me go in any wise.
23And God stirred him up another adversary, Rezon the son of Eliadah, which fled from his lord Hadadezer king of Zobah: 24and he gathered men unto him, and became captain over a band, when David slew them of Zobah: and they went to Damascus, and dwelt therein, and reigned in Damascus. 25And he was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon,9 beside the mischief that Hadad did: and he abhorred Israel, and reigned over Syria.
26And Jeroboam the son of Nebat, an Ephrathite of Zereda, Solomon’s servant, whose mother’s name was Zeruah, a widow woman, even he lifted up his hand 27against the king. And this was the cause that he lifted up his hand against the king: Solomon built Millo, and repaired the breaches of the city of David his father. 28And the man Jeroboam was a mighty man of valor: and Solomon seeing the young man that he was industrious, he made him ruler over all the charge of the house of Joseph. 29And it came to pass at that time when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, that the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him in the way; and he had clad himself with a new garment; and they two were alone in the field10: 30and Ahijah caught the new garment that was on him, and rent it in twelve pieces: 31and he said to Jeroboam, Take thee ten pieces: for thus saith the Lord [Jehovah], the God of Israel, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee: 32(but he shall have one11 tribe for my servant David’s sake, and for Jerusalem’s sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel:) 33because that they have forsaken me, and have worshipped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians,12 Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom13 the god of the children of Ammon, and have not walked in my ways, to do that which is right in mine eyes, and to keep my statutes 34and my judgments, as did David his father. Howbeit, I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand: but I will make him prince all the days of his life for David my servant’s sake, whom I chose, because he kept my commandments and my statutes: 35but I will take the kingdom out of his son’s hand, and will give it unto thee, even ten tribes. 36And unto his son will I give one tribe, that David my servant may have a light alway before me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen me to put my name there. 37And I will take thee, and thou shalt reign according to all that thy soul desireth, and shalt be king over Israel. 38And it shall be, if thou wilt hearken unto all that I command thee, and wilt walk in my ways, and do that is right in my sight, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as David my servant did; that I will be with thee, and build 39thee a sure house, as I built for David,14 and will give Israel unto thee. And I will for this afflict the seed of David, but not fore1 Kings 1Ki_11:40 Solomon sought therefore15 to kill Jeroboam. And Jeroboam arose, and fled into Egypt, unto Shi-shak king of Egypt, and was in Egypt until the death of Solomon. 41And the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written in the book of the acts of Solomon? 42And the time that Solomon reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel was forty years. 43And Solomon slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.
Exegetical and Critical
1Ki_11:14. And the Lord stirred up an adversary unto Solomon, &c. It is clear and beyond dispute that the whole section, from 1Ki_11:14-40, which treats of the different adversaries that God raised up against Solomon, is intimately connected with the immediately preceding account of his fall, and of the impending and threatened division of the kingdom. The latter was not to occur till after Solomon’s death; but the presages of it were already appearing. The peace of the kingdom hitherto undisturbed was endangered from that time on, both by internal and by external adversaries. The two external ones, Hadad and Rezon, had, indeed, always been foes to Israel and Solomon, but they had never ventured to show their animosity in open deed, inasmuch as the kingdom had become powerful and respected under Solomon. But Solomon, in permitting the idolatrous worship, gave great dissatisfaction to all the faithful servants of Jehovah, and with his own hands he shook the foundations of the kingdom. Other measures also, more or less connected with the former, caused him to lose, more and more, the esteem and confidence of his subjects; and then the long pent-up hatred of his old foes began to show itself more; their courage grew, and though they did not proceed to formal attack or to open rebellion (of which our narrative says nothing) Solomon had occasion to fear them more than ever before; the tranquillity and peace of his kingdom was endangered, and the time of prosperity past. Every one will admit that this is what the author meant to convey. But recent criticism reckons him a “later worker-up of Deuteronomy,” and accuses him of a shifting of the historical facts. According to Ewald (Gesch. Isr. III. s. 274–281), uproar and rebellion did not first break out towards the end of Solomon’s reign, but immediately after the death of David and of his formidable army-chief, Joab, in the beginning of the reign of the young and inexperienced king, both in the south (Edom) and in the north (Syria), as depicted by Solomon himself in the second Psalm With the divine courage and the admonition supported by prophetic assurance, which this Psalm expresses, together with wonderful firmness of spirit, Solomon met the storm of rebellion, and deprived his foes of their chief weapon of attack by his alliance with Egypt. Against the northern insurgents he himself marched, and stormed Hamath. Thus were the ragings of the people stilled, and in a brief space he became master of the situation. This view has been reiterated in several books (cf. for instance Eisenlohr, das Volk Isr. II. s. 47 and 57; Duncker, Gesch. des Alt. I. s. 387), and has been accepted as a matter of course; although there are the strongest reasons for rejecting it. (a) Our historical book says repeatedly how, and that the kingdom of Solomon became established (1Ki_2:12; 1Ki_2:46), without making the remotest allusion to rebellion having broken out in the lands David had conquered, and being put down by Solomon; yet this would especially have tended to establish his throne and increase the esteem in which he was held. Even in the chapter we are considering, no mention is made of actual rebellion, but only of adversaries; therefore to say there were certainly such, is not writing history, but making history. (b) The rebellion of whole nations which, like Edom, lived far off, could have been put down only by force of arms, and not by “reproof” or “strength of mind;” but the history says nothing of Solomon’s marching into Edom. He went indeed to Hamath, but not to conquer it, only to “fortify” it (חזק cf. 2Ch_11:11-12; 2Ch_26:9), as the short notice stands in 2Ch_8:3, in the middle of the details of the different city-buildings. In fact we do not hear of a single warlike enterprise of Solomon’s; he was, as his name denotes, the king of peace, the “man of rest,” in distinction from David, the man of war (1Ch_22:9); and his reign was distinguished by works of peace (building, commerce, intellectual culture), above that of all other kings. (c) The 2d Psalm does not contain a history, and our narrative cannot be completed, much less contradicted or corrected by it. It is a mere unproven hypothesis that this psalm was composed by Solomon, and that the rebellion alluded to in it took place during his reign, not in the last years of it, but in the first. What is here said of Hadad and Rezon certainly occurred at an earlier period, but is repeated, “because its influence only began to be felt in the latter part of Solomon’s reign, and should have guarded him from over-security from the beginning” (Keil).
1Ki_11:14-22. Hadad, the Edomite. He is called Ahad [the English version does not distinguish] in 1Ki_11:17. A Hadad is mentioned among the Edomite kings as early as Gen_36:35; who evidently belonged to an earlier period. It is quite uncertain whether our Hadad was the grandson of the last king of Edom, whom 1Ch_1:50 wrongly calls Hadad instead of Hadar (Gen_36:39) (Ewald, Thenius). Details of his former fortunes are no doubt designed to show how firmly he clung to his native land, and therefore how much more he was to be dreaded. For David’s war with the Edomites cf.Sam. 1Ki_8:13 sq. “The slain, whom Joab came out to bury, cannot be the Israelites who fell in the battle of the valley of salt, but those killed on the invasion of the country by the Edomites, and who lay yet unburied. After performing this act Joab defeated the Edomites in the valley of salt, and dwelt six months in Edom, till he had extirpated all the males (i. e., all those capable of bearing arms that fell into his hands, and especially those of royal blood”) (Keil). Midian, 1Ki_11:18, cannot certainly be the town Madian mentioned by Arabian geographers, but a district; it is not very well defined, but it must have been between Edom and the desert, south-west of Palestine, Paran (Num_13:3; Num_13:27; Num_10:12); the road from Egypt still leads across the latter, through Aila to Mecca. The people whom the followers of Hadad took from Paran with them, were to lead the way across the desert. The Pharaoh who entertained the fugitives with such friendliness, and not only supported Hadad himself, but gave land to those with him, could scarcely be Solomon’s father-in-law, but his predecessor. His consort is here named הגְּבִירָה, the Queen-mother’s usual appellation (1Ki_15:13; 2Ch_15:16); but it does not always necessarily mean that; and consequently we are not obliged to accept Hitzig’s and Thenius’ reading of הַגְּדוֹלָה, i. e., the elder. The weaning of a child (1Ki_11:20) usually took place the second or third year (2Ma_7:27), and was observed as a family feast (Gen_21:8). Genubath was thus adopted among the royal children, and brought up with them (Winer, R.-W.-B., I. s. 657). Hadad’s petition (1Ki_11:21) was not so much because he had now no longer any fear for his life, but because he, as a royal prince, hoped to ascend the throne, and free his land from the Israelitish yoke; this was the only reason why he is named an adversary. Pharaoh’s question, 1Ki_11:22, contains the counsel to remain where he was, where he was well off, rather than undertake a dangerous and uncertain enterprise. This advice of his near relative was well meant, and did not spring from the policy of seeking to acquire or keep Solomon’s friendship. Hadad, however, remained firm in his resolve; we are not told of his actual departure, but it is to be understood; so that the Sept. addition, καὶ ἀνέστρεφεν ‛Αδερ εἰς τὴν γῆν αὐτοῦ, considered as original by Thenius, is unnecessary. It appears from 1Ki_9:26 sq.;1Ki_10:11, that Hadad was not able to carry out his plans at once, but, the fire smouldered under the ashes, and threatened to break out as soon as Solomon began to be less respected. Ewald continues Hadad’s history further. He says the Egyptian king received him in so friendly a manner, “evidently intending to make use of him in the future against the growing power of Israel.” Genubath must have “acted an important part in Asia, later, or he would otherwise not have been named at all.” When the feeling of the Egyptian court changed towards Israel’s kings, “an evasive answer” was returned to the Idumæan prince; he would “not be detained, however, but fled secretly to his ancestral mountains, was there acknowledged by many of his people as king, and caused Solomon much perplexity, though he was never completely victorious.” Every one who can read may see that there is not a single word of all this in the text, and yet Eisenlohr has blindly followed the writer l. c., s. 58). Cf. also on 1Ki_22:48.
1Ki_11:23-25. And God stirred him up.… Rezon … the son of Eliadah, &c. 1Ki_11:23. 2Sa_8:3 sq. mentions that David smote Hadadezer, king of Zobah, in Syria, whereupon Rezon forsook his master, gathered together an army from the remains of the Syrian host, and proceeded later to Damascus, settled there, and usurped the chief power. This may have occurred in David’s time, or in the beginning of Solomon’s reign. It is nowhere said that he rebelled on Solomon’s accession, and was conquered by him, and there is nothing to show “that he was at least twenty or thirty years older than Solomon” (Ewald). It is not impossible that he survived Solomon, for had he died sooner it could not be, as in 1Ki_11:25, that “he was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon.” He did not undertake any enterprise against the powerful king, but is he had always entertained hostile feelings to him, he now became a more dangerous and open enemy, as the power and fame of Solomon were declining. The words וְאֶת־הָרָעָה אֲשֶׂר הֲדָד are difficult, but can be translated only as many old translators give them, and among the recent ones, De Wette, Gesenius, Keil, Philippson; and “beside the mischief that Hadad (did).” וְאֶת is as in 1Ki_11:1 and Exo_1:14. We are not told what the mischief that Hadad did really was; the writer only means that Rezon’s enmity was added to that of Hadad. This view, which suits the context, relieves the following sentence of all difficulty: “and he (Rezon) abhorred Israel, and reigned over Syria.” Whilst Hadad agitated the south, Rezon rebelled from Solomon in the north, and took the supreme power. The Sept. translates as if it read זֹאת instead of ואת and אֱדֹם instead of ארם: Αὕτη ἡκακία ἥν ἐποίησεν ’Αὁάρ. καὶ . . . ἐβασίλευσε ἑν γῇ ’Εδώμ, i. e., this is the mischief which Hadad did; he abhorred Israel and was king in Edom. Thenius asserts that this was the original text. But in this case the whole sentence could not be here, where the question is about the second adversary, Rezon, but should have followed 1Ki_11:22. It is incomparably less probable that it was there passed over by the oversight of a copyist (Thenius), and inserted here, than that the Sept. misunderstood the ואת, &c., and translated wrongly as it so often does, and was then obliged to change ארם to אדם because it did not suit Hadad. The Sept. has arbitrarily mixed the two accounts of the adversaries together (it puts 1Ki_11:23-24 into 1Ki_11:14), so that we should be very foolish to follow it in this case. Ewald translates, “as for the mischief which Hadad did, he was hostile to Israel and reigned over Edom;” but then the sentence should be back of 1Ki_11:22 and not here. It is not right to change ארם into אדם, because the two foregoing verses absolutely require that Rezon should be considered as subject to וַיָּקָץ. Cf. Keil on the place.
1Ki_11:26-27. Jeroboam the son of Nebat. Hadad and Rezon were dangerous “adversaries” to Solomon, but Jeroboam, though a subject and servant of Solomon, lifted up his hand against the king, i. e., he actually rebelled. His personal circumstances are given more at length because of his vastly greater importance. Zereda is not Zarthan, as Keil thinks (1Ki_7:46); the latter is not in Ephraim; but Zereda is Zerira in the mountains of Ephraim (cf. Thenius on 1Ki_12:2). The second half of 1Ki_11:27 says, like 1Ki_9:15 : “to build Millo and the walls of Jerusalem;” there is, therefore, no question here of stopping “a gap in the city of David” (Luther), but of the closing up of a ravine (Vulgate, vorago) in the city, which was done by walls. By פֶּרֶץ is meant the once very deep ravine of what was subsequently the Tyropœon, which separated Zion from Moriah and Ophel. This ravine became part of the interior of the city through these walls, and was made inaccessible to enemies (Thenius). The words, he made him ruler over all the charge of the house of Joseph, are not in contradiction with 1Ki_9:22; for slave-levy is not spoken of here (מַס־עֹבֵד), but that of the Israelites (מַם מִכָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל) 1Ki_5:13, who worked alternately. It is not, therefore, necessary to suppose that the “house of Joseph,” i. e., the Ephraimites (Jos_17:17) were obliged to work at Millo, as a punishment for their rebellion under Sheba (2 Samuel 20). But the Ephraimites, who had an old and irrepressible jealousy of Judah, submitted very reluctantly to labor in the king’s citadel and the royal city of Judah; their compulsory work increased their dislike to hatred, so that it was easy to fan the flame of insurrection among them.
1Ki_11:29. And it came to pass at that time,i. e., not at the time Jeroboam made the insurrection, but—taken with 1Ki_11:28—the time when he entered upon the office of superintendent over all the Ephraimite levy; therefore, before he lifted his hand against the king, and proceeded to acts, but still he was brooding over insurrection. The notion that 1Ki_11:29-39 is a section taken from another source and inserted here (Thenius) is, to say the least, unnecessary; it contains an explanatory and needful account, which is closely connected with 1Ki_11:28. Jeroboam’s banishment from Jerusalem was probably the occasion for preparations of rebellion. The prophet Ahijah was of the same tribe as Jeroboam, for Shiloh was in the tribe of Ephraim, north of Bethel, south of Lebonah (Jdg_21:19), and was the seat of the tabernacle from Joshua to Eli (Jos_18:1; 1Sa_21:3). They no doubt knew each other well. The Sept. adds to the words in the way (for explanation): καὶ ἀπἐστησεν αὐτὸν ἐκ τῆς ὁδοῦ.
1Ki_11:30-39. Ahijah caught the new garment.שַׂלְמָה (for שִׂמְלָה) is “probably similar to the Arabian burnou; a large square piece of cloth, thrown over the shoulders and almost covering the whole person in the daytime, and used at night for a coverlet” (Keil). Hess wrongly imagines it to have been a “new mantle which Jeroboam had on;” and Ewald thinks it was his “new and splendid official uniform.” It was the prophet’s own cloak, as 1Ki_11:30 plainly says. The prophet himself explains the meaning of this symbolic act. Le Clerc says that the repetition of the word new shows that the prophet did what he did, non temere. Thenius thinks the new garment denoted the young and powerful kingdom; but both these explanations are strained. A new garment is one that is whole and complete, integer, without a rent or hole; the kingdom was hitherto without split or division, but was now to be torn and divided. קָרַע is usually applied to tearing the garments in sign of mourning (Gen_37:29; Gen_44:13; 2Sa_13:21; 2Ki_18:37), i. e., of inward rending. Now when the prophet tore the cloak into twelve pieces, and gave Jeroboam only ten pieces instead of eleven, we must of course infer that neither Benjamin nor Judah alone was meant here, or in 1Ki_11:13, by “one tribe,” but both together (cf. 1Ki_12:20-21; 2 Chron. 11:3; 12:23). Little Benjamin, over against Judah, came scarcely into consideration; and as, besides, the capital of the kingdom (Jerusalem) lay on the borders of both tribes, they might very well be reckoned as one. If, as Keil says, the number ten represents the total sum here, in distinction to the one part (all Israel fell away from the house of David, only a single portion remained to it), the prophet would have torn off only one small piece. For 1Ki_11:32 see above on 1Ki_11:12-13; and for 1Ki_11:33 see on 1Ki_11:5-8. The plural in 1Ki_11:33 is remarkable (all translations, except the Chaldee, have the singular, which we expect here); perhaps it only means our vague word “one;” it is plain, however, that Israelites had already abandoned themselves to the licensed heathen worship. In the words in 1Ki_11:36, that David may have a light always before me, “light” is not a symbol of prosperity (Keil), and ניר certainly does not mean breaking forth afresh (Hitzig), but it means simply the continuance of his race, as in 1Ki_15:4; 2Ki_8:19; 2Ch_21:7. As a house (dwelling) is dark (uninhabitable) without a light, so also is a house (family, race) without posterity; this is why we speak of the dying out of a race, at the present day, as its extinction. The same expression, 1Ki_11:37 : and thou shalt reign according to all, &c., is used in 2Sa_3:21, about David; it does not mean pro lubitu tuo imperabis Israelitis (Dathe), but, thou shalt have the dominion thou now strivest for, &c., &c. 1Ki_11:38. Jeroboam’s dominion then was connected with the condition upon which all dominion in Israel was based.
1Ki_11:40-42. Solomon sought therefore to kill Jeroboam. The immediate connection of these words with Ahijah’s address can scarcely mean otherwise than this: that Solomon heard of it, and sought to get Jeroboam out of the way by some means. Jeroboam could but know of this, and he lifted up his hand against the king, i. e., he proceeded to actual rebellion (1Ki_11:26-27). But not succeeding, he fled to Egypt. The king then reigning was not, of course, Solomon’s father-in-law, nor Sesostris, as older commentators think, but was probably Seconchis or Sesonchusis, the first king of the twenty-second dynasty (cf. Winer, R.-W.-B. s. v. Sishak). The reception he gave Jeroboam shows his feeling towards Solomon. 1Ki_14:21 sq. speaks of his open hostility to the kingdom of Judah.
1Ki_11:43. Solomon slept with his fathers, at about sixty years of age, as he very early succeeded to the throne (1Ki_3:7). Josephus thinks he was eighty or even ninety-four years old, but this is quite wrong, and was caused, probably, by confusion of the ciphers. All copies and translations give forty. Our author gives, in a general way, the “book of the acts of Solomon,” as the original source of his history; but 2Ch_9:29 names, with more exactness, the “book (דִּבְרֵי) of Nathan the prophet, the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and the visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam.” But it does not follow that these three writings are only extracts from one historical one (Bertheau), but it certainly does appear that each one wrote down his own experience. When Solomon fell away, and Ahijah appeared, Nathan must have been dead. Cf. the Introduction, § 2. Rehoboam was not a son of the first and real consort of Solomon, the Egyptian princess (1Ki_3:1; 1Ki_9:24; 1Ki_7:8), but the son of the Naamah the Ammonitess (1Ki_14:21; 1Ki_14:31). He appears to have been the only living son, as no children, especially sons, of Solomon are named (though he had so many wives), except the two daughters mentioned, 1Ki_4:11; 1Ki_4:15; and no brothers disputed the succession of Rehoboam, which was the case with Solomon. For his age at his accession see on 1Ki_14:21.
Historical and Ethical
1. The appearance of the various adversaries of Solomon seems to have been a special act of divine retributive justice; God is named as the direct agent. He is said not only to have permitted them, but to have “stirred them up,” called them to it. The word הֵקִים means, as here, the stirring up of enemies and rebels, also of deliverers, helpers, prophets (Jdg_2:18; Deu_18:15; Deu_18:18; 1Sa_2:35; Eze_34:23; Jer_29:15), where there is no allusion to mere permission. It is not indeed the absolutely Holy One who excites hatred, enmity, and revenge in one man towards another, for he tempts no man to evil (Jam_1:13); but the Almighty Ruler of the world can use the hatred that He sees in the hearts of sinful men, to fulfil, without their knowledge or wish, the purposes of His retributive justice and the chastisements of His love; and in so far, the stirring up is no passive permission, but the act of God. Thus Nathan announces to David, after his grievous sin, this word of the Lord, “behold I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house” (2Sa_12:11), and David himself says of Shimei who was cursing him, “so let him curse, because the Lord hath said unto him” (2Sa_16:10-11). The Assyrian is, without knowing it, the rod of His anger in the hand of Jehovah (Isa_10:1; Isa_10:5), and Solomon’s adversaries also served for instruments of divine justice. This expression of stirring up shows clearly that the appearance of the adversaries did not take place, as recent commentators say, in the beginning of Solomon’s reign, for up to that time Solomon had given no occasion for any act of retribution or discipline. Though he did not lose his throne through them, during his life-time; yet it was very humiliating to him, whose power and splendor had been a spectacle to the world, and whose wisdom people of all nations had come to hear (1Ki_4:14; 1Ki_10:24), to be obliged to fear these men, who were far inferior to him, and whom he had once despised.
2. While Hadad and Rezon did not affect materially the destiny of Israel, the third opponent of Solomon was of vastly greater significance. Jeroboam does not disappear, like them, without leaving a trace in the history of the kingdom. His entrance on the scene was felt profoundly for centuries; the breach and partition of the kingdom take place with and through him; a partition which was no temporary one, but lasted about three hundred years, and ended with the dissolution of the kingdom. In this respect he is one of the most important of the characters in the history of Israel. Witsius, in reference to his whole career says (Decaphylon, p. 307): vir sagax, inquietus et dominandi avidus atque ab ineunte œtate iis eruditus artibus, quibus ingenia ad magnœ fortunœ cultum incitantur. Here where he is first mentioned the question properly arises, how it came to pass that he lifted up his hand against the King. The text certainly says nothing explicit about it, but gives some distinct clues. It says, first of all, he was an Ephraimite, thus being a member of the largest, most powerful, and warlike tribe, that had always vied with Judah for pre-eminence; and that, even when David had subdued them, never renounced their deeply rooted jealousy and love of independence and dominion over the other tribes (2Sa_2:9; 2Sa_20:21). After the division of the kingdom, Ephraim stood at the head of the ten tribes, so that the kingdom of the ten was called Ephraim (Hos_4:17; Hos_5:9; Hos_12:1 sq.; Isa_7:2). Dislike of the supremacy of Judah was in the very blood of so young and powerful a man as Jeroboam, and it needed not much to excite thoughts of rebellion and independence in him. The fact that Solomon employed the Ephraimites not so much in the matter of levy-works as in building Millo, and in stopping up the ravine which served to fortify the city of David and to secure the supremacy of Judah, was calculated to increase the ancient jealousy and dislike to Judah, and to excite discontent and disgust. Recognizing the distinguished ability of young Jeroboam, Solomon made him overseer of his own people; thus feeding the ambition of this man who was born to rule. He now first became conscious of his powers, and soon acquired the confidence of his already discontented tribe by his prudence and energy, so that he could hope to succeed in placing himself at their head, and lifting his hand against the Judah-King. Perhaps he also perceived that the splendor of Solomon had lost its ground through the influence of his wives, the open introduction of idol-worship side by side with that of Jehovah, and the luxurious court life, and that his rule gave great dissatisfaction to the most worthy of the people. When we consider all this we readily conceive that a man like the Ephraimite, Jeroboam, should, without being especially influenced by any one, think of breaking loose from Solomon’s rule. The later critics have therefore no grounds for asserting that “the prophet Ahijah, who appeared at the head of a (discontented) faction,” induced Jeroboam to rebel against the king (Winer, R.-W.-B. I. s. 544). Thenius is quite right when he says, “Ahijah did not incite Jeroboam, but he knew the thoughts he cherished, and when Ahijah addressed him he was about taking steps to realize these thoughts, as 1Ki_11:37 says: the prophet then appeared, for he saw that the deed would infallibly follow the resolve in this case, and recognized in Jeroboam a capable man, knowing also the promise of success under condition of continuance in a God-fearing mind. This relation is quite in the spirit of prophecy, and is totally different from an intentional and forcible introduction.” The text says distinctly that Ahijah met Jeroboam when the latter “went out of Jerusalem” (1Ki_11:29) to lift up his hand against the king.
3. The prophet Ahijah stands in a relation to Solomon and Jeroboam analogous with that of Samuel to Saul and David (1Sa_15:16). “As Saul’s sentence of rejection was accompanied by the calling of David, so the prophetical announcement to Solomon was accompanied by the prophecy to Jeroboam” (v. Gerlach). Ahijah opened to him the same divine decision which he had first made known to Solomon (cf. 1Ki_11:11-13). In doing so he emphasizes two things particularly, and these are worthy of notice; the first is, that Solomon was to remain king of all Israel to the end of his life, and the division of the kingdom was to take place under his son (1Ki_11:31 sq.); the second, that Jeroboam only received dominion over the ten tribes, on the presupposition and condition that he would walk in all the commandments of Jehovah, as David did, and not sin like Solomon (1Ki_11:37 sq.). It is added also that David’s seed was to be humbled, but not forever (1Ki_11:39). We should not overlook the circumstance that the prophet met Jeroboam on the way as he came out of Jerusalem, and was proceeding to carry put his intentions, and that the prophet took him aside (as the Sept. at least has it) so that they “two were alone in the field” (1Ki_11:29). Ahijah’s communication was, therefore, not intended for the public, but was confidential, thus intimating to Jeroboam that he ought not to proceed to rebellion at once, but keep quiet, and wait till it might please the Lord to bring about circumstances to fulfil the purpose He had announced. The prophet, so far from counselling him to rebellion, warned him rather, and recommended patience as long as Solomon lived. But when Jeroboam, nevertheless, lifted up his hand against the king, he committed an inexcusable, sinful deed on his own responsibility, and anticipated divine providence. His conduct was just the opposite of David’s, who, though anointed to be king, and persecuted by Saul, endured every wrong, never revenged himself on the king, though the latter was often in his power, even mourned his death, and had the Amalekite who killed him executed as a traitor (2Sa_1:11-16). He believed that the Lord knew the right hour to fulfil his promise. It cannot, therefore, be accounted a crime in Solomon to strive to kill a man whom he had raised from nothing, and who then rebelled against him. From all this it appears that it is quite erroneous to account for Jeroboam’s appearance by saying that “the ancient prophetical estate wished, by the forcible introduction of a new royal house, to stand directly under the Lord and above the human monarchy;” so that the kingdom of the ten tribes was “the birth of this prophet-power,” and the latter “a retarded error” (Ewald). And it is equally untrue that the rebellion of the ten tribes was “an enterprise which the prophet had encouraged, to bring back the old national constitution, and restore the consideration in which his class was held in Samuel’s time, when he, their founder and representative, deposed a king who disobeyed him, and raised up another in his place” (Menzel, l. c. s. 152). When will men cease to compare the old prophets with modern demagogues and ambitious priests!
4. The symbolic procedure of the rending the garment into twelve pieces preceded the prophecy delivered by the prophet. It could not, therefore, have been intended to make that prophecy clear, but rather inversely, the prophecy explained the transaction. This was the case not only here, but the prophets generally performed a preliminary symbolic action which represented the substance of the meaning of the solemn prophecy which followed; and they performed this act on the impulse of the divine spirit, just as they proclaimed the word following in their divine commission. Cf. Isa_20:2 sq.; Jer_13:1 sq.; Jer_29:1 sq.; Jer_35:2 sq.; Jer_43:9 sq.; Eze_4:1 sq.; Eze_5:1 sq.; Eze_12:3 sq.; Eze_24:2 sq.; Eze_37:15 sq.; Eze_13:15 sq. From these passages we see that the performance of such actions was as much a part of the prophetic calling and office as the proclamation of the word. All revelation of God is in the way of act as well as of word: God’s deeds as well as His words are signs that testify of Him. His acts are also, as it were, speech, i. e., a revealing of Himself. The speaking of God is a sign-language, and therefore a symbol-language. The entire cultus has, hence, symbolic form as the real expression of the divine-human relation. When the prophets, therefore, appeared as such, i. e., as “men of God,” as mediators and instruments of divine revelation, they did not communicate it in words only, but in solemn acts, which were signs; and thus they proved themselves the servants of God, speaking in His language. Their prophetic acts, as well as their prophetic words, were announcements and revelations of the divine purpose. When they anticipate their words by an act commanded by God, this act is not to be viewed as a mere image, according to their own pleasure, but it represents the future which they had to reveal as a fact, as it were, a present deed of God, and therefore as something which would assuredly happen. The action, then, was an assurance and pledge of the fulfilment of the prophecy; and it was entirely natural that it should precede the word explaining and interpreting it. Besides, every thought which is embodied in a deed produces a much greater and more lasting impression than if only expressed in words. Of Christ, in whom all that is prophetic culminates, the disciple says (Luk_24:19): “which was a prophet mighty in deed and word,” thus proving that not words only, but actions also belong to the essence of the calling of the prophet. The people concluded from his deeds that “a great prophet is risen up among us” (Luk_7:16). His prophetic deeds were “signs” (Joh_6:26; Joh_20:20), not mere evidences of power, but of divine authority; and they spoke of divine things as loudly and, if possible, more loudly than His words. He himself says, “Though ye believe not me, believe the works” (Joh_10:38); “the works that I do in my Father’s name they bear witness of me” (Joh_10:25).
5. The rending of the ten tribes appears, in the prophet’s prediction here as in 1Ki_11:11-13, to be a punishment ordained and determined by Jehovah for Solomon’s falling away, not, therefore, as an event merely permitted by God but designed; and therefore announced beforehand. The question arises, in what relation did this partition, determined on by Jehovah, stand to His plans regarding Israel considered as one people composed of twelve tribes? The whole nation was His inheritance, for He had called them from among all nations to be a divine kingdom (Exo_19:5-6), i. e., a theocracy. The one God, Jehovah, was, as the true King and Lord of that people, so also the root and principle of their unity—the bond binding together all the tribes into one whole. The human monarchy afterwards established by the desire of the people did not destroy the theocracy but served rather to sustain and preserve it (see above). But it was not now absolutely necessary that all the tribes should have one head; in fact they might each have had a head, had they only acknowledged Jehovah as the one true king of all Israel, and held fast to the covenant, i. e., the law of God. “It was not contrary to the Mosaic constitution for Jehovah to weaken—not destroy—a royal house that had turned to idolatry; to rend away some tribes from it, and to place them under the government of another king. It was rather the fittest thing to be done; for otherwise the principles that lay in the very nature of the constitution—namely, that disaster should follow idolatry, and prosperity the fear of God, would have been violated. One of these two things must (according to these principles) have come upon David’s house after a lapse into idolatry, viz. either expulsion from the throne (which could not be on account of the promise of perpetual succession), or weakening such as was foretold by Jehovah,.… a falling away of some tribes” (Hess, Von dem Reiche Gottes, I. s. 301). As Jehovah had heretofore governed his people by one king (David and Solomon) he could also do it by two without destroying the theocratic principle. The new kingdom is offered to Jeroboam and continuance is promised to his dynasty on the express condition that he should, “like David,” faithfully adhere to the law; with the explanation, nevertheless (1Ki_11:39), that the humiliation of the house of David would be but temporary. Thus it is indicated that the promise of the everlasting kingdom would not be realized in Jeroboam’s race, “but in that of David” (Oehler). The prediction of Ahijah does not imply a partition of the theocracy or of Israel, but only of the human monarchy under two kings. The double nature of the kingdom was not the cause of the permanence of the division, nor of the commencement of the destruction of the kingdom; these were the results of the continued falling away from the supreme commandment of the theocratic law on the part of the ten tribes.
6. There are no accounts of Solomon’s end, nor of his life and acts from the time of his lapse till his death; all is reduced to the notice that he sought to kill Jeroboam, and that he died and was buried. This is the more remarkable as the life and acts of this king are more minutely narrated than those of any succeeding one, and that the last days and end of David in particular are recorded with such evident care both in our books and in the Chronicles. Had Solomon ended his life like David, who with joyous heart blessed the Lord to the last (1Ch_29:10 sq.), and charged his son and successor most emphatically to remain faithful to Jehovah (1Ki_2:1 sq.), and been anxious that the prosperity of the kingdom should endure on the basis of the covenant with Jehovah (2Sa_23:1 sq.), such a circumstance would not have been passed over. We must therefore conclude, from the entire silence of the history, that Solomon did not die as David died, that he remained in the state of mind into which he had fallen in his later age. The question whether Solomon was finally converted and saved was formerly discussed extensively (Buddeus, Hist. Eccl., II. p. 237 sq.), but we see no occasion to introduce it here. Both Hess and Niemeyer have endeavored to ascertain from Ecclesiastes what Solomon’s state of mind was in his last days; but apart from the mistaken presupposition that this treatise was composed by Solomon, no one could prove his conversion from it; and Niemeyer concludes his character-sketch with these words: “the cheerful peace of his soul was gone. Gloomy was his retrospect of life, and gloomy was his view of the near and of the distant future.” It is worthy of remark, that while Solomon (Suleiman) is held in high honor in the East at the present day, his memory is far less revered among the Jews than that of David, which could not have been the case had his reign ended as gloriously as it began. Bertheau justly remarks that Solomon “did more towards undermining the distinctive peculiarity of his people than any other king.” We are not, however, to seek the cause of this simply in his making a people who were adapted to agriculture, commercial, and in his splendid buildings, his harem, and his court, all hitherto unknown in Israel, but the real specific reason was that by the introduction and the toleration of foreign idolatrous forms of worship he undermined the religion of his people, forth from which religion flowed all the characteristics which distinguished them over against all other peoples; that was the worm at the root of the kingdom and the national life.
[7. It is extremely difficult to give a portraiture of Solomon which can harmonize at once both the demand for historic truth and the general estimation which tradition assigns to him. The story is extraordinary. David the father of the wise king founded and consolidated the kingdom. His life was stormy and checkered. His character was romantic and chivalric and generous. He showed himself capable both of great self-sacrifice and of revolting criminality and treachery. He was tender and he was brave. His soul rested upon the covenant-keeping Jehovah, yet he dared to violate all the duties of the decalogue which concern man’s dealings with his brother man. Solomon did not inherit the personal traits of his father. He was not warlike; he was a man of peace. He sought wisdom, and he sought it from Jehovah. He desired to administer his government according to the law and will of God. He had fine talent for observation. He was a naturalist of rare attainments. He knew much of the earth; he knew much of men. He was a man of understanding, expressing his thoughts and observations in proverbs. He was splendid in his tastes. He sought wealth by commerce and by trade with heathen nations. He made Israel a kingdom of this world; at the same time, he built the temple, lavishing upon it untold sums of money, and aiming to make it, according to Eastern conceptions, splendid in all respects. Certainly at its dedication he is one of the most imposing and majestic figures in all history. But by degrees, enervated by luxury, by pleasure, by plenty, he lost the strength of his convictions. He became wise in this world. The law of Jehovah lost its hold upon his conscience. He began to justify idolatry. “He that built a temple to the living God for himself and Israel, in Sion, built a temple to Chemosh in the Mount of Scandal for his mistresses of Moab, in the very face of God’s house. No hill about Jerusalem was free from a chapel of devils: each of his dames had their puppets, their altars, their incense; because Solomon feeds them in their superstition, he draws the sin home to himself, and is branded for what he should have forbidden.”—Bp. Hall. And by degrees the splendor passed away, and darkness and weariness, and hopelessness, and an ignoble old age came on. He forsook the noble path of his youth, and his glory was lost. See Stanley, Jewish Church, second series, Lect. 28., and F. D. Maurice, The Prophets and Kings of the Old Testament, Sermon on the Wise King. The sun of his life rose in all splendor, and shone brilliantly, to go down at last amid the heavy darkness of impending storm and night. The people lost their sense of the exclusive sovereignty of Jehovah; their burdens were heavy—and the brief glory of Israel as a kingdom of this world passed away forever.—E. H.]
Homiletical and Practical
1Ki_11:14-40. Solomon’s enemies. 1. They are roused against him by God, so that he may know and confess what heart-suffering it brings to forsake the fear of the Lord his God (Jer_2:19). Cramer: So marvellously does God bring it about, that he who will not fear him, must needs fear his fellow-men. Once the man of rest, and the Prince of Peace (1Ki_5:4), now he is pressed sore by enemies from the north, from the south, and from his midst; they are the scourges with which the Lord chastises him. When foes and opponents rise against thee, and cause thee care and anguish, then think: The Lord has summoned them on account of thy sins, and unfaithfulness. The hostility of men is a sermon of repentance from thy God to thee. 2. They were in God’s hand, and could do no more than he permits; they rebelled, but they were powerless to take from Solomon the throne and kingdom during his lifetime. The Lord commands our foes: So far shalt thou go, and no further.—J. Heermann: If thou speakest the word, they soon become friends: they must needs lay down arms and defences, and stir no finger.—P. Gerhardt: If I am beloved of God, and have the Head for my friend, what can troops of foes and opposers do to me? For he can humble the proud (Dan_4:35). Formerly all kings did homage to Solomon, and brought him gifts, and journeyed from all countries to see and to hear him; his power was as great as his kingdom. But now his power and might are abased before those who hitherto ranked far below him, whom he had regarded as the least of his slaves and vassals. Humiliation coming through weak and inferior means is much more bitter than the same humiliation through strong and powerful means; the latter we can ascribe to men, but in the former we must recognize the will and power of God.
1Ki_11:14-22. The fate of Hadad is recounted to us not so much on his account as on our own, in order that we may learn to regard the ways of God with man, and order our own ways by Him, who is ever mercy and wisdom (Psa_25:10). If God brought back the heathen Hadad by mysterious ways to his native land, how much more will he lead those who keep his covenant and testimony to the true native land, and to the eternal rest, how dark and inscrutable soever may be the ways by which he leads them. 1Ki_11:21. Let me go into mine own country. The power of love of country. Not ubi bene, ibi patria, but ubi patria, ibi bene. Yet must we not in the earthly country forget the heavenly “Fatherland.” 1Ki_11:23-25. Though vanquished and cast down, tyranny and ambition do not forget; they think perpetually of vengeance, and seek to satisfy it, now by rough means now by subtle ones, whenever an opportunity offers. Therefore, warns the apostle so earnestly (Rom_12:19) against those secret and mighty motives in the natural heart of man.
1Ki_11:26-28. God is wont to chastise the rebellion of princes against his will, by means of the rebellion of their own subjects; as Solomon raised his hand against Jehovah, so did his servant Jeroboam against him. Destruction from above unites with ruin from below. Whatever Solomon undertook after his fall, was deprived of God’s blessing. By the building of Millo he intended still further to strengthen his dominion over all his enemies, and to render impregnable his dwelling-place, but this very building was the cause why his throne began to totter, and why he lost the greater part of his kingdom. Here applies Psa_127:1. It was by divine decree that Solomon himself, without his own will or knowledge, should raise from the dust to high places the very man appointed by God to abase him, and to dismember his kingdom. Conspiracies and rebellions are chiefly led by those who have to complain least of injustice or oppression, but have been pampered and favored until ambition incites them to suppress every feeling of gratitude (Joh_13:18).
1Ki_11:29-39. cf. above 1Ki_11:9-13. The prediction of the prophet Ahijah announces 1. the division of the kingdom as a consequence of the going astray to the worship of strange gods (1Ki_11:31-33); 2. the preservation of the kingdom of Judah on account of the promise given to David (1Ki_11:34; 1Ki_11:36; 1Ki_11:39); 3. the choice made of Jeroboam, on condition of inflexible fidelity to Jehovah and to his law (1Ki_11:37-38). 1Ki_11:31. All the world must confess, upon beholding the abasement of the house of David and the elevation of Jeroboam, that the Most High has power over the kingdoms of men, and bestows them upon whom he will (Dan_4:29; 1Sa_2:7-8; Luk_1:52). 1Ki_11:36. Even in the midst of his just anger the Lord is merciful, and the inconstancy of man can never shake His fidelity. The fulfilment of 2Sa_7:14-15, is seen in Solomon’s history. The house of David remained a light “forever,” until that Son of David came who is the light of the world, which lighteth all men who come into the world (Joh_1:9; Rom_15:12).
1Ki_11:40-43. These three truths are nowhere more powerfully exemplified than in the life of Solomon: What availeth it a man, &c., (Mat_16:26); Vanity of vanities, &c. (Ecc_1:2), and The world passeth away, &c. (1Jn_2:17; cf. 1Pe_1:24). 1Ki_11:40. Roos: Sin obscures the soul. He who turns aside from God departs from wisdom; and let those who, instead of bowing and submitting with resignation to the chastisements of God, haughtily strive against them, contemplate the fate of Jeroboam, who, doubtless, stirred up the plot against Solomon, since he afterwards eagerly abetted the desertion of the ten Tribes. Even as Solomon, when he sought to slay Jeroboam, must have felt that in vain he resisted the divine decrees, and was powerless to hinder them, so likewise Jeroboam, compelled to fly to Egypt, must have become conscious that in vain he strove rashly and insolently to anticipate the execution of the divine decrees. We must even make bitter expiation when we haughtily resist and oppose the Lord, or when we strive to hasten his designs, or to appoint time and place for their fulfilment. The life of Solomon closes with the words: Therefore Solomon sought to kill Jeroboam. Instead of seeking forgiveness from Him who forgiveth much, and himself granting forgiveness, he is thinking of murder and vengeance. How great and noble the contrast between this and the Figure of Him who in the face of death upon the cross cried: Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do. Let us strive to become like unto his image, and that our last thought in life may be of love and reconciliation, and not of revenge and hatred. Solomon possessed the fairest and noblest crown that mortal can wear, yet it was perishable, not enduring beyond death and the grave. The Lord promises an immortal crown to those who love and follow Him. Be faithful unto death, then He will give thee the crown of life; blessed is he who endureth unto the end.
Footnotes:
[6]1Ki_11:14.—[This name is variously written in the printed Heb. text הֲדַד and אֲדַד; in some MSS. and in the Syr. it is uniformly written הדר. The Sept. has Ἄδερ, and the Vulg. Hadad. The Chald. follows the variations of the Hebrew. After the mention of his name the Vat. Sept. subjoins a summary of 1Ki_11:23-25, omitted in their place.
[7]1Ki_11:15.— Instead of בִּהְיוֹת the Sept ., Syr., and Arab. read בְּהַכּוֹת (when David had slain the Edomites), which Maurer and Thenius consider right. But according to 1Ch_20:5; Gen_14:9 [add Num_20:13], the reading of the text is not to be peremptorily rejected.
[8]1Ki_11:17.—[The Sept., in curious contradiction to 1Ki_11:15-16, has here “all the Edomites,” &c.
[9]1Ki_11:25.—[The Vat. Sept. here resumes the course of the Heb. narrative, but gives quite a different sense: “this is the evil which Hadad did: he abhorred Israel and reigned in Edom.” On the true rendering of the verse see Exeg. Com. In regard to the last word, three MSS., followed by the Sept., Syr., and Arab., have אדם for ארם: but, as pointed out in the Exeg. Com., the true reading must necessarily be that of the text. Our author in his translation, in opposition to his own exegesis, follows the Sept.
[10]1Ki_11:29.—[The Sept. renders or replaces the last clause by “and he took him aside from the way.”
[11]1Ki_11:32.—[The Sept. has δύο σκῆπτρα—two tribes. So also 1Ki_11:36.
[12]1Ki_11:33.—[Instead of the peculiar form צִדֹנִין many MSS. read צִדוֹנִים.
[13]1Ki_11:33.—[The Sept. has evidently understood in מִלְכֹּם the final ם as a pronominal suffix, and so translate “their king, the stumbling-block of the children of Ammon.” Throughout this verse the Sept. puts the verbs in the singular as having Solomon for their nominative.
[14]1Ki_11:38.—[The Vat. Sept. omits the clause “and will give Israel unto thee.”
[15]1Ki_11:40.—[וַיְבַקֵּשׁ שְׁלֹמֹה = but Solomon sought. The word “therefore” of the ancient version is not necessary, and connects the attempt of Solomon quite too distinctly with the communication of Ahijah, which may have been known to him (see Exeg. Com.) or may not. The true connection of 1Ki_11:40 is with 1Ki_11:26, 1Ki_11:27-39 being parenthetical.—F. G.]
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv4, 5, 8, 9, 13, 14, 26, 29, 40 when Solomon was old--He could not have been more…
when Solomon was old--He could not have been more than fifty.
his wives turned away his heart after other gods--Some, considering the lapse of Solomon into idolatry as a thing incredible, regard him as merely humoring his wives in the practice of their superstition; and, in countenancing their respective rites by his presence, as giving only an outward homage--a sensible worship, in which neither his understanding nor his heart was engaged. The apology only makes matters worse, as it implies an adding of hypocrisy and contempt of God to an open breach of His law. There seems no possibility of explaining the language of the sacred historian, but as intimating that Solomon became an actual and open idolater, worshipping images of wood or stone in sight of the very temple which, in early life, he had erected to the true God. Hence that part of Olivet was called the high place of Tophet (Jer 7:30-34), and the hill is still known as the Mount of Offense, of the Mount of Corruption (Kg2 23:13).
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 4. When Solomon was old — What sight on…
4. When Solomon was old — What sight on earth more sad than the disgraceful fall of an old man, whose youth had been devout and promising and his manhood noble? Well did Solon, the Athenian, insist that no man should be counted blessed until he had nobly ended a happy, noble life.
His heart was not perfect — But whose heart is perfect before God? ask many. We may here infer the latitude in which the word perfect is used in Scripture. He who abstained from idolatry, and was devoted to Jehovah, and walked in all the commandments of the law, was the perfect man. Herein Solomon was sadly defective, as were many of his descendants after him. David is spoken of as perfect, though he was not without sin. See more on 1Ki_15:14.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 4. when Solomon was old] At least half of…
4. when Solomon was old] At least half of the king’s reign was over before the Temple and the king’s house and the other buildings were completed. It was therefore in the latter half of his reign, and probably towards the close of that, when the influence of his wives gained undue sway over him.
perfect with the Lord] i.e. Completely devoted to His service, see note on 1Ki_8:61. Solomon has described the state in his prayer (1Ki_8:61) ‘to walk in His statutes, and to keep His commandments.’ The language of the verse indicates, not that Solomon forsook for himself the worship of Jehovah, but that he was less earnest about it, and allowed side by side with it the temples of heathen gods to be erected, and their worship to be something more than tolerated, even perhaps abundantly supported from his means. As it is said below in 1Ki_11:6, ‘he went not fully after the Lord.’
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 40 (4) When Solomon was old.—It is clearly implied that…
(4) When Solomon was old.—It is clearly implied that the evil influence belonged to the time of senile feebleness, possibly the premature result of a life of indulgence; for he could not have been very old, if he was “but a child” at the time of his accession. But, as it is not at all likely that Solomon forsook the worship of God (see 1Ki_11:5-6; 1Ki_9:25), it would seem that his idolatry was rather the inclination to an eclectic adoption of various forms of faith and worship, as simply various phases of reverence to the One Supreme Power, each having its own peculiar significance and beauty. Such a spirit, holding itself superior to the old laws and principles of the faith of Israel, was the natural fruit of an overweening confidence in his own wisdom—the philosophic spirit, “holding no creed, but contemplating” and condescending to “all.” Whatever it may have owed to the baser female influence, so well known in the countries where woman is held a mere toy, it seems likely to have been, still more naturally, the demoralising effect of an absolutely despotic power, of a world-wide fame for wisdom, and of an over-luxurious magnificence. It may have even had a kind of harmony with the weary and hopeless conviction that “all things were vanity:” for there is something of kinship between the belief that all worships are true, and that all worships are false. It may also have been thought good policy to conciliate the subject races, by doing honour to their religions, much as the Roman Empire delighted to do, when faith in its own religion had died out. How absolutely incompatible such a spirit is with the faith in the One only God of Israel, and in itself even more monstrous than avowed devotion to false gods, is indignantly declared by Ezekiel (Eze_14:3-4; Eze_20:39). How utter the practical incongruity, is obvious on the slightest consideration of the contrast between the impure and bloody worship of the false gods, and the lofty spiritual worship of the God of Israel.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv4–40 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old…
For it came to pass, when Solomon was old As he was but sixty at the time of his death, "old" is here a relative term, and must mean "toward the close of his life," i.e., when he was about 50 or 55, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods The text does not limit Solomon"s polygamy to the time of old age, but his idolatrous leanings. I say leanings, for it is doubtful to what extent Solomon himself took part in actual idolatry. Both Bahr and Keil the latter in opposition to the views he held in 1846 not to speak of others, deny that he shared the idolatries of his wives, and the former labours hard, and on the whole, it seems to me, successfully, to prove that he was only guilty of sanctioning idolatrous worship in the vicinity of Jerusalem. His arguments, briefly stated, are these:
(1) It is nowhere said that he "served" (db) other gods the expression constantly used of the idolatrous kings; cf. 16:31; 22:53; 2Ki_16:3, etc.
Read full note →
(2) Neither the son of Sirach nor the Talmud nor the Rabbins know anything of his personal idolatry.
(3) Had he formally worshipped idols, his sin would have been greater than that of Jeroboam as to which, however, see on 1Ki_12:29 sqq. (The "sin of Jeroboam" lay in "making Israel to sin," i.e., in forcing his people into schismatic and unauthorized worship, rather than in any practices of his own.) (4) The expressions "his heart was not perfect," below, and "he went not fully" (ver. 6) are inconsistent with the idea of idolatry. Similarly Ewald says, "There is no evidence from ancient authorities that Solomon, even in advanced life, ever left the religion of Jahveh, and with his own hand sacrificed to heathen gods. All traces of contemporary history extant testify to the contrary" (vol. 3. p. 297). See, however, on ver. 5: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God It is instructive to compare with this the words of 1Ki_8:61, "Let your heart be perfect," etc. Wordsworth remarks that "the defection even of Solomon from God through the influence of his strange wives is one of the best justifications" of the commands of (Exo_34:12-16; Deu_7:2-4, etc.) as was the heart of David his father.
Vers. 4-8.
The Sin of Solomon.
Three questions will suffice to bring this subject before us. First, what was this sin? secondly, by whom was it committed? thirdly, when, and under what circumstances?
But first, it is well we should understand what this sin was not.
(1) It was not actual idolatry. True, Solomon built the altars, but he built them for his wives (vers. 7, 8). The wisest of men never stooped so low as to "project his person" to dumb idols (note on ver. 4). To him, an idol was "nothing in the world". (1Co_8:4) That, of all things, was "vanity of vanities;
(2) Nor was it the outcome of simple sensuality. The wives who "turned away his heart," and to whom he "clave in love it was not passion but pride had collected them in such numbers under his palace roof. "His crowded seraglio was but one instance more of the sort of ambition which made him seek to surpass all men in his gardening, his agriculture, his treasures of gold," etc. (Keble). See on ver. 1. But when he had them, he must humour them, even in their idolatries. He was very far, we may be sure, from thinking that all religions were alike, which has been "the disease of some great wits;" but he flattered himself that he was tolerant and liberal, and as he claimed liberty of conscience, so he must concede it to others.
We see, then, that the essence of this sin was that having permitted himself, or purposes of state and pride and ostentation, the love of many strange women, he permitted them, and possibly some of his subjects also, to worship their false gods. And by so doing
1. He gave a direct sanction to superstition. He may have argued, like some in later times and some who bear the Christian name, that these things, though nothing in themselves, were all very well for women, that the ignorant must have material objects of worship, etc. But it was not thus that the God of his fathers viewed the deed. This philosophic tolerance of other creeds, He called the teaching of falsehood. This liberality, in His sight, was "damnable uncharitableness the expression is Jeremy Taylor"s for it was leading poor souls away from the light and changing the truth of God into a lie. (Rom_1:25) It was "making the blind to wander out of the way" (Deu_27:18) in the worst possible sense of the words.
2. He encouraged immorality and cruelty. For it must never be forgotten what the "abominations" of these Semitic divinities were like. The idolatry of the East always involved impurity; hence its powerful hold on a nation like the Jews, for whom the worship of "silver and gold, the works of men"s hands," could have had but little charm. Its "vile affections" (Rom_1:26) were its chief attractions. And Solomon, who knew what the worship of Baal and Ashtoreth meant, who knew how unclean were their rites, and what painful and shameful sacrifices Molech and Chemosh demanded of their votaries, nevertheless gave the word, and presently the hills about Jerusalem were crowned with chapels of devils.
3. He dishonoured the one true God. For if "Polytheism is not exclusive," Monotheism, in the very nature of things, is and must be. Its basis, its fundamental conception, is that there are not "gods many and lords many." Its keynote is the Shema Israel, (Deu_6:4) "the Lord our God is one Lord." It proclaims a "jealous God" who will not give His glory to another, nor His praise to graven images. (Isa_42:8) But Solomon robbed Him of His rights; of the exclusive sovereignty and the undivided authority which belonged to Him alone. By building idol altars he claimed homage for idol deities; before the eyes of the Lord"s people, he thrust rivals and pretenders on to the Lord"s throne, and degraded "the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man.". (Rom_1:23)
4. He defied the Holy One of Israel. For these altars of lust and cruelty were not built in a corner. They did not shrink from the light as in a past age; they were not frequented by pagani. They rose "on the hill that is before Jerusalem;" they fronted the altar of Jehovah; their priests were visible to the priests in the temple court; their smoke ascended to the sky along with the smoke of the daily sacrifice. If insult had been designed, it could hardly have been more open or obtrusive.
II And by WHOSE permission, at whose bidding were these shrines of infamy erected? They were built by
1. The wisest of men. In science, (1Ki_4:33) in philosophy (ib. vers. 29-32), in self knowledge (see Homiletics, pp. 78, 79). Cf. 1Ki_3:12, 1Ki_3:28.
2. The most favoured and enlightened of men. The Lord "appeared unto him twice" (ver. 9). His was "abundance of revelations" (cf. 2Co_12:7) To him it was said, "Ask what I shall give thee". (1Ki_3:5) This was Jedidiah. "There was no king like Solomon, who was beloved of his God, yet even him did outlandish women cause to sin". (Neh_13:26)
1. The builder of the temple. To him had been granted the high honour which was denied to pious David. He had "found a place for the Lord, a
2. habitation for the mighty God of Jacob". (Psa_132:5) The golden altar, the brazen altar; he had planned and reared them both. And now he builds altars to "horrors". (see note on 1Ki_15:13) "He that burneth incense, he blessed an idol" (Isa_66:3, Hebrews)
3 The teacher of the Church. He was "that deep sea of wisdom which God ordained to send forth rivers and fountains of all Divine and human knowledge to all nations, to all ages;" he was "one of those select secretaries whose hand it pleased the Almighty to employ in three pieces of the Divine monuments of sacred Scriptures" (Bp. Hall). He is fallen, but his writings stand. He still preaches to others, though himself a castaway. There have been authors whose pestilent writings go on corrupting and destroying souls for ages after they have ceased to speak. But Solomon"s is in some respects a sadder case than theirs. His writings have taught and blessed the world for nigh three thousand years after he himself fell into "utter wretchlessness of most unclean living.
1. A man who warned others. It is only when we study his fall in the light of his prayer and proverbs, with their many admonitions, that we realize how great a wreck he became and how appalling is the lesson of his fall "Since the first man, Adam, the world hath not yielded either so great an example of wisdom or so fearful an example of apostasy, as Solomon" (Hall).
III But WHEN was it, let us now ask, that Solomon fell into this deadly sin? At what period of his reign, and under what circumstances, did he sink to such depths of degradation? Observe
1. It was not after sudden or special temptation (see Homiletics, p. 216). We may truly say of him, "There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man." No Delilah, no Bathsheba wrought his ruin. It is instructive to compare 1Ki_4:20-24 with the account of our Lord"s temptation. (Mat_4:3-11) Solomon was not tempted by hunger; his "provision for one day was," etc. The enemy could not offer him "the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them:" he had them already; (1Ki_4:21, 24 ch 10. passim) he could only use the common weapon of presumption, of spiritual pride, and it was by this that Solomon was slain.
2. It was not after great trials or adversity. His career, how unlike David"s! "Rest on every side." "Neither adversary nor evil occurrence". (1Ki_5:4) "Eating, drinking, and making merry". (1Ki_4:20) Compare 1 Samuel chs. 18-30. And yet David stood and Solomon fell. What we call adversity (compare Jacob"s "all these things are against (Gen_42:36) is often spiritual prosperity. "Tribulation" is a significant word. The tribulum was the threshing sledge which separated the chaff from the grain. It is said by some that wax is necessary for nations to preserve them from corruption and decay; it is certain that peace is not always good for princes. The man of peace and rest, who was "not plagued like other men," has furnished the world with the most terrible example of apostasy. Well may the apostle bid us to "rejoice in tribulation also," to "count it all joy when," etc.. (Jam_1:2)
3. It was when he was old." St. Paul speaks of "youthful lusts," but old age has its special dangers and temptations. It was in the time of mature experience, when the hot blood of youth should have cooled, when he should have known the world and his wisdom should have been ripest, that his wives turned away his heart. Perhaps he presumed upon his exalted gifts and revelations. With age came selfconfidence. It is thus that many strong cities have been taken. Praeruptum eoque neglectum" discloses the secret of their fall
4. It was when his riches had increased. The greater his store, the leaner his soul. "It is easier for a camel," etc.. (Mat_19:24) "The deceitfulness of riches" choked the word. (Mat_13:22) The Latin proverb which says that "every rich man is either a knave or the son of a knave" has some truth in it. Happy are those who have "neither poverty nor riches"; (Pro_30:8) happiest those who can say, "My riches consist, not in the abundance of my possessions, but in the fewness of my wants.
5. It was when his prosperity was at its highest. It was when he "waxed fat" that "Jeshurun kicked." It is when men "have eaten and are full" that they most need to "beware that they forget not the Lord their God". (Deu_8:10, Deu_8:11) Observe, it was not until he had reached the very pinnacle of greatness and felicity that Solomon fell. "His prosperity, which even wise men find a constant wear and trial to the spirit, did him more harm than even his wisdom did him good" (Augustine). How appropriate that prayer, "In all time of our wealth good Lord, deliver us." "The food convenient which Agur prayed for is safer than the food abundant which even Solomon was surfeited with" (M. Henry).
6. It was after his wives were multiplied. Polygamy has ever been a snare to rulers. It is said that Scripture nowhere condemns it. If the letter does not, the spirit does. Scripture tells of the misery it has occasioned. Witness the families of Abraham, Jacob, Elkanah, and David. It was the immediate cause of Solomon"s ruin. There are few partnerships which are so lightly entered into as the one which lasts for all life. And yet how completely is a man"s honour, prosperity, and peace in his wife"s keeping. "How many have we known whose heads have been broken by their own rib" (Bp. Hall). It is a quaint but true saying, "If a man would thrive, he must ask his wife." How strange that he who knew the priceless value of one true woman"s love (Pro_31:10-31) should surrender himself to immodest and forbidden attachments. Can there be a reference to his thousand wives and concubines in those pessimist words of Ecc_7:26-28? "If one woman undid all mankind, what marvel is it if many women undid one?". (Hall) "Thou didst bow thy loins unto women, and by thy body wast thou brought into subjection" (Ecc 47:19).
7. It was after repeated warnings. He had had
(1) the standing warning of Scripture, (Deu_17:16 sqq.)
(2) the special warnings of his father David (1Ki_2:8, 1Ki_2:4, and especially, 1Ch_28:9)
(3) the supernatural warnings of God.. (1Ki_3:14 1Ki_6:12, 13 9:6, 7) And to these may surely be added
(4) the repeated and emphatic warnings which he had himself addressed to others. But all these went for nothing. And so it is too probable his own (Pro_29:1) found a fulfilment in his own person. The saddest consideration of all is that this great preacher has unconsciously predicted his own fall, and passed sentence on himself. "Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee," etc.. (Luk_19:22)
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv4, 6, 7, 12, 14, 21, 31 When Solomon was old.
1Ki_11:4
When Solomon was old.
Read full note →
An aged sinner
Colporteur Pantel of Marseilles once offered a Bible to an old man who angrily replied, Wine is my god. Indeed, said Pantel, then let me tell you that you have not imitated your god. What do you mean? Well, wine becomes better as it grows old, while you, as you have grown old, have become more wicked! The man was taken aback by this reply. Look here, he said, Ill buy a Bible. It is least I can do after such an answer. (British and Foreign Bible Societys Report, 1902.)
Deterioration with years
A picture of a man who has grown in the wrong direction! Backwards--downwards! A bright morning ending in a stormy night. What are these snowy leaves which strew the ground? Perished buds and blossoms of holy character. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Age reveals character
Age seems to take away the power of acting a character, even from those who have done so the most successfully during the main part of their lives. The real man will appear, at first fitfully, and then predominantly. Time spares the chiselled beauty of stone and marble, but makes sad havoc in plaster and stucco.
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain On v14 "He that soweth to his flesh shall of the…
THE WIND AND THE WHIRLWIND
1Ki_11:14-41
Read full note →
"He that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption."
- Gal_6:8
SUCH degeneracy could not show itself in the king without danger to his people. "Delirant reges, plectuntur Achivi." In the disintegration of Solomons power and the general disenchantment from the glamour of his magnificence, the land became full of corruption and discontent. The wisdom and experience of the aged were contemptuously hissed off the seat of judgment by the irreverent folly of the young. The existence of a corrupt aristocracy is always a bad symptom of national disease. These "lisping hawthorn-buds" of fashion only bourgeon in tainted soil. The advice given by the "young men" who had "grown up with Rehoboam and stood before him" shows the insolence preceding doom which had been bred by the idolism of tyranny in the hearts of silly youths who had ceased to care for the wrongs of the people or to know anything about their condition. Violence, oppression, and commercial dishonesty, as we see in the Book of Proverbs, had been bred by the mad desire for gain; and even in the streets of holy Jerusalem, and under the shadow of its Temple, "strange women," introduced by the commerce with heathen countries and the attendants on heathen princesses lured to their destruction the souls of simple and God-forgetting youths. The simple and joyous agricultural prosperity in which the sons of the people grew up as young plants and their daughters as the polished corners of the Temple was replaced by struggling discontent and straining competition. And amid all these evils the voices of the courtly priests were silent, and for a long time, under the menacing and irresponsible dominance of an oracular royalty, there was no prophet more.
Early in Solomons reign two adversaries had declared their existence, but only became of much account in the darker and later days of its decline.
One of these was Hadad, Prince of Edom. Upon the Edomites in the days of David the prowess of Joab had inflicted an overwhelming and all but exterminating reverse. Joab had remained six months in the conquered district to bury his comrades who had been slain in the terrible encounter, and to extirpate as far as possible the detested race. But the kings servants had been able to save Hadad, then but a little child, from the indiscriminate massacre, as the sole survivor of his house. The young Edomite prince was conveyed by them through Midian and the desert of Paran into Egypt, and there, for political reasons, had been kindly received by the Pharaoh of the day, probably Pinotem I of the Tanite dynasty, the father of Psinaces whose alliance Solomon had secured by marriage with his daughter. Pinotem not only welcomed the fugitive Edomite as the last scion of a kingly race, but even deigned to bestow on him the hand of the sister of Tahpenes, his own Gebria or queen-mother. Their son Genubath was brought up among the Egyptian princes. But amid the luxurious splendors of Pharaohs palace Hadad carried in his heart an undying thirst for vengeance on the destroyer of his family and race. The names of David and Joab inspired a terror which made rebellion impossible for a time; but when Hadad heard, with grim satisfaction, of Joabs judicial murder, and that David had been succeeded by a peaceful son, no charm of an Egyptian palace and royal bride could weigh in the balance against the fierce passion of an avenger of blood. Better the wild freedom of Idumea than the sluggish ease of Egypt. He asked the Pharaohs leave to return to his own country, and, braving the reproach of ingratitude, made his way back to the desolated fields and cities of his unfortunate people. He developed their resources and nursed their hopes of the coming day of vengeance. If he could do nothing else he could at least act as a desperate marauder, and prove himself a "satan" to the successor of his foe. Solomon was strong enough to keep open the road to Ezion-Gebir but Hadad was probably master of Sela and Maon.
Another enemy was Rezon, of whom but little is known, David had won a great victory, the most remarkable of all his successes, over Hadadezer, King of Zobah, and had then signalized his conquest by placing garrisons in Syria of Damascus. On this occasion Rezon, the son of Eli, who is perhaps identical with Hezion, the grandfather of Benhadad, King of Syria in the days of Asa, fled from the host of Hadadezer with some of the Syrian forces. With these and all whom he could collect about him, he became a guerilla captain. After a successful period of predatory warfare he found himself strong enough to seize Damascus, where, to all appearance, he founded a powerful hereditary kingdom. Thus with Hadad in the south to plunder his commercial caravans, and Rezon on the north to threaten his communication with Tiphsah, and alarm his excursions to his pleasances in Lebanon, Solomon was made keenly to feel that his power was rather an unsubstantial pageant than a solid dominion.
The enmity of these powerful Emirs of Edom and Syria was a hereditary legacy from the wars of David and the ruthless savagery of Joab. A third adversary was far more terrible, and he was called into existence by the conduct of Solomon himself. This was Jeroboam, the son of Nebat. In himself he was of no account, being a man of isolated position and obscure origin. He was the son of a widow named Zeruah, who lived at Zarthan in the Jordan valley. The position of a widow in the ancient world was one of feebleness and difficulty; and if we may trust the apocryphal additions to the Septuagint, Zeruah was not only a widow but a harlot. But Jeroboam, whose name perhaps indicates that he was born in the golden days of Solomons prosperity, was a youth of vigor and capacity. He made his way from the wretched clay fields of Zeredah to Jerusalem, and there became one of the vast undistinguished gang who were known as "slaves of Solomon." The corvee of many thousands from all parts of Palestine was then engaged in building the Millo and the huge walls and causeway in the valley between Zion and Moriah, which was afterwards known as the Valley of the Cheesemongers (Tyropaeon). Here the unknown youth distinguished himself by his strenuousness, and by the influence which he rapidly acquired. Solomon knew the value of a man "diligent in his business," and therefore worthy to stand before kings. Untrammeled by any rules of seniority, and able to make and unmake as he thought fit, Solomon promoted him while still young, and at one bound, to a position of great rank and influence. Jeroboam was an Ephramite, and Solomon therefore "gave him charge over all the compulsory levies (Mas) of the tribe of the house of Joseph"-that is, of the proud and powerful tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, who practically represented all Israel except Judah, Benjamin, and the almost nominal Simeon.
The spark of ambition was now kindled in the youths heart, and as he toiled among the workmen he became aware of two secrets of deadly import to the master who had lifted him out of the dust-secrets which he well knew how to use. One was that a deep undercurrent of tribal jealousy was setting in with the force of a tide. Solomon had unduly favored his own tribe by exemptions from the general requisition, and Ephraim fretted under a sense of wrong. That proud tribe, the heir of Josephs preeminence, had never acquiesced in the loss of the hegemony which it so long had held. From Ephraim had sprung Joshua, the mighty successor of Moses, the conqueror of the Promised Land, and his sepulcher was still among them at Timnath-Serah. From their kith had sprung the princely Gideon, the greatest of the judges, who might, had he so chosen, have anticipated the foundation of royalty in Israel. Shiloh, which God had chosen for His inheritance, was in their domains. It required very little at any time to make the Ephraimites second the cry of the insurgents who followed Sheba, the son of Bichri, -
"We have no part in David, Neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse. Every man to his tents, O Israel."
Jeroboam, who was now by Solomons favor a chief ruler over his fellow-tribesmen, had many opportunities to foment this jealousy, and to win for himself by personal graciousness the popularity of Solomon which had so long begun to wane.
But a yet deeper feeling was at work against Solomon. The men of Ephraim and all the northern tribes had not only begun to ask why Judah was to monopolize the kings partiality, but the much more dangerous question, What right has the king to enforce on us these dreary and interminable labors, in making a city of palaces and an impregnable fortress of a capital which is to overshadow our glory and command our subjection? With consummate astuteness, by a word here and a word there, Jeroboam was able to pose before Solomon as the enforcer of a stern yoke, and before his countrymen as one who hated the hard necessity and would fain be their deliverer from it.
And while he was already in heart a rebel against the House of David, he received what he regarded as a Divine sanction to his career of ambition.
The prophets, as we have seen, had sunk to silence before the oracular autocrat who so frequently impressed on the people that there is "a Divine sentence on the lips of kings." No special inspiration seemed to be needed either to correct or to corroborate so infallible a wisdom. But the heaven-enkindled spark of inspiration can never be permanently suffocated. Priests as a body have often proved amenable to royal seductions, but individual prophets are irrepressible.
What were the priests doing in the face of so fearful an apostasy? Apparently nothing. They seem to have sunk into comfortable acquiescence, satisfied with the augmentation of rank and revenue which the Temple and its offerings brought to them. They offered no opposition to the extravagances of the king, his violations of the theocratic ideal, or even his monstrous tolerance for the worship of idols. That prophets as a body existed in Judah during the early years of this reign there is no proof.
The atmosphere was ill-suited to their vocation. Nathan probably had died long before Solomon reached his zenith.
Of Iddo we know almost nothing. Two prophets are mentioned, but only towards the close of the reign-Ahijah of Shiloh, and Shemaiah; and there seems to have been some confusion in the roles respectively assigned to them by later tradition.
But the hour had now struck for a prophet to speak the word of the Lord. If the king, surrounded by formidable guards and a glittering court, was too exalted to be reached by a humble son of the people, it was time for Ahijah to follow the precedent of Samuel. He obeyed a divine intimation in selecting the successor who should punish the great kings rebellion against God, and inaugurate a rule of purer obedience than now existed under the upas-shadow of the throne. He was the Mazkir, the annalist or historiographer of Solomons court; {2Ch_9:29} but loyalty to a backsliding king had come to mean disloyalty to God. There was but one man who seemed marked out for the perilous honor of a throne. It was the brave, vigorous, ambitious youth of Ephraim who had risen to high promotion and had won the hearts of his people, though Solomon had made him the task-master of their forced labor. On one occasion Jeroboam left Jerusalem, perhaps to visit his native Zeredah and his widowed mother. Ahijah intentionally met him on the road. He drew him aside from the public path into a solitary place. There, seen by none, he took off his own shoulders the new stately abba in which he had clad himself, and proceeded to give to Jeroboam one of those object-lessons in the form of an acted parable, which to the Eastern mind are more effective than any words. Rending the new garment into twelve pieces, he gave ten to Jeroboam, telling him that Jehovah would thus rend the kingdom from the hands of Solomon because of his unfaithfulness, leaving his son but one tribe that the lamp of David might not be utterly extinguished. Jeroboam should be king over Israel; to the House of David should be left but an insignificant fragment. God would build a sure house for Jeroboam as He had done for David, if he would keep His commandments, though the House of David "should not be afflicted forever." {1Ki_11:34-39}
A scene so memorable, a prophecy of such grave significance, could hardly remain a secret. Ahijah may have hinted it among his sympathizers. Jeroboam would hardly be able to conceal from his friends the immense hopes which it excited; and as his position probably gave him the command of troops he became dangerous. His designs reached the ears of Solomon, and he sought to put Jeroboam to death. The young man, who had probably betrayed his secret ambition, and may even have attempted some premature and abortive insurrection, escaped from Jerusalem, and took refuge in Egypt. There the Bubastite dynasty had displaced the Tanite and from Shishak I, the earliest Pharaoh whose individuality eclipsed the common dynastic name, he received so warm a welcome that, according to one story, Shishak gave him in marriage Ano, the elder sister of his Queen Tahpanes (or Thekemina, LXX) and of Hadads wife. He stayed in Egypt till the death of Solomon, and then returned to Zeredah, either in consequence of the summons of his countrymen, or that he might be ready for any turn of events.
Under such melancholy circumstances the last great king of the united kingdom passed away. Of the circumstances of his death we are told nothing, but the clouds had gathered thickly round his declining years. "The power to which he had elevated Israel," says the Jewish historian Gratz, "resembled that of a magic world built up by spirits. The spell was broken at his death." It must not, however, be imagined that no abiding results had followed from so remarkable a rule. The nation which he left behind him at his death was very different from the nation to whose throne he had succeeded as a youth. It had sprung from immature boyhood to the full-grown stature of manhood. If the purity of its spiritual ideal had been somewhat corrupted, its intellectual growth and its material power had been immensely stimulated. It had tasted the sweets of commerce, and never forgot the richness of that intoxicating draught which was destined in later ages to transform its entire nature. Tribal distinctions, if not obliterated, had been subordinated to a central organization. The knowledge of writing had been more widely spread, and this had led to the dawn of that literature which saved Israel front oblivion, and uplifted her to a place of supreme influence among the nations. Manners had been considerably softened from their old wild ferocity. The more childish forms of ancient superstition, such as the use of ephods and teraphim, had fallen into desuetude. The worship of Jehovah, and the sense of His unique supremacy over the whole world, was fostered in many hearts, and men began to feel the unfitness of giving to Him that name of "Baal" which began henceforth to be confined to the Syrian sun-god. Amid many aberrations the sense of religion was deepened among the faithful of Israel, and the ground was prepared for the more spiritual religion which, later reigns found its immortal expositors in those Hebrew prophets who rank foremost among the teachers of mankind.
But as for Solomon himself it is a melancholy thought that he is one of the three or four of whose salvation the Fathers and others have openly ventured to doubt! The discussion of such a question is, indeed, wholly absurd and profitless, and is only here alluded to in order to illustrate the completeness of Solomons fall. As the Book of Ecclesiastes is certainly not by him it can throw no light on the moods of his latter days, unless it be conceivable that it represents some faint: breath of olden tradition. The early commentators acquitted or condemned him as though they sat on the judgment-seat of the Almighty. They would have shown more wisdom if they had admitted that such decisions are-fortunately for all men-beyond the scope of human judges. Happily for us God, not man, is the judge, and He looks down on earth
"With larger other eyes than ours
To make allowance for us all."
Orcagna was wiser when, in his great picture in the Campo Santo at Pisa and in the Strozzi Chapel at Florence, he represented Solomon rising out of his sepulcher in robe and crown at the trump of the archangel, uncertain whether he is to turn to the right hand or to the left.
And Dante, as all men know, joins Solomon in Paradise with the Four Great Schoolmen. The great mediaeval poet of Latin Christianity did not side with St. Augustine and the Latin Fathers against the wise king, but with St. Chrysostom and the Greek Fathers for him. He did so because he accepted St. Bernards mystical interpretation of the Song of Songs:-
"La quinta luce, che tra noi pitt bella Spira di tale amor, che tutto il mondo Laggiu ne gola di saver novella. Entro ve lalta mente, u si profondo Saver fu messo, che si il vero e vero, A veder tanto non surse il secondo."
There is a famous legend in the Quran about the death of Solomon.
"Work ye righteousness O ye family of David; for I see that which ye do. And we made the wind subject unto Solomon And we made a fountain of molten brass to flow for him. And some of the genii were obliged to work in his presence by the will of his Lord. They made for him whatever he pleased of palaces, and statues, and large dishes like fishponds, and caldrons standing firm on their trivets; and we said, Work righteousness, O family of David, with thanksgiving; for few of my servants are thankful. And when we had decreed that Solomon should die, nothing discovered his death unto them, except the creeping thing of the earth that gnawed his staff. And when his body fell down, the genii plainly perceived that if they had known that which is secret they had not continued in a vile punishment."
The legend briefly alluded to was that Solomon employed the genii to build his Temple, but, foreseeing that he would die before its completion, he prayed God to conceal his death from them, so that they might go on working. His prayer was heard, and the rest of the legend may best be told in the words of a poet:-
King Solomon stood in his crown of gold,
Between the pillars, before the altar
In the House of the Lord.
And the king was old,
And his strength began to falter,
So that he leaned on his ebony staff,
Sealed with the seal of the Pentegraph.
And the king stood still as a carven king,
The carven cedar beams below,
In his purple robe, with his signet-ring,
And his beard as white as snow.
And his face to the Oracle, where the hymn
Dies under the wings of the cherubim.
And it came to pass as the king stood there,
And looked on the House he had built with pride,
That the hand of the Lord came unaware
And touched him, so that he died
In his purple robe and his signet-ring
And the crown wherewith they had crowned him king.
And the stream of folk that came and went
To worship the Lord with prayer and praise,
Went softly ever in wonderment,
For the king stood there always;
And it was solemn and strange to behold
The dead king crowned with a crown of gold.
"So King Solomon stood up dead in the House Of the Lord, held there by the Pentegraph,
Until out from the pillar there ran a red mouse,
And gnawed through his ebony staff;
Then fiat on his face the king foil down,
And they picked from the dust a golden crown."
The legends of the East describe Solomon as tormented indeed, yet not without hope. In the romance of Vathek he is described as listening earnestly to the roar of a cataract, because when it ceases to roar his anguish will be at an end.
"The king so renowned for his wisdom was on the loftiest elevation, and placed immediately beneath the Dome. The thunder, he said, precipitated me hither, where, however, I do not remain totally destitute of hope; for an angel of light hath revealed that, in consideration of the piety of my early youth, my woes shall come to an end. Till then I am in torments, ineffable torments; an unrelenting fire preys on my heart. The caliph was ready to sink with terror when he heard the groans of Solomon. Having uttered this exclamation, Solomon raised his hands towards heaven, in token of supplication; and the caliph discerned through his bosom, which was transparent as crystal, his heart enveloped in flames."
So Solomon passed away-the last king of all Palestine till another king arose a thousand years later, like him in his fondness for magnificence, like him in his tamperings with idolatry, like him in being the builder of the Temple, but in all other respects a far more grievous sinner and a far more inexcusable tyrant-Herod, falsely called "The Great."
And in the same age arose another King of Solomons descendants, whose palace was the shop of the carpenter and His throne the cross, and whose mortal body was the true Temple of the Supreme-that King whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and whose dominion endureth throughout all ages.
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On vv9, 14 1Ki_11:11. Forasmuch as this is done of thee; or,…
CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES.—
1Ki_11:11. Forasmuch as this is done of thee; or, is purposed of thee.
Read full note →
HOMILETICS OF 1Ki_11:9-13
THE DIVINE ANGER AND HUMAN DISOBEDIENCE
I. That the Divine anger is a fact. “And the Lord was angry with Solomon.” It is the fashion with many to expatiate on the Divine benevolence while they ignore the Divine anger. But the fact of that anger is one of the plainest and most awful revelations of the Bible (Isa_13:13; Joh_3:36; Rom_1:18). Divine anger is no sudden burst of passion, no low and hateful motion of revenge, as human anger often is, and with which too many are prone to associate their idea of the Divine anger. It is rather the deep, eternal antagonism of holiness to sin, of truth to error, of right to wrong. However much God may love the human soul as such, if that soul cleaves unto sin, it must of necessity place itself along with the sin in enmity towards God, and so be exposed to the Divine anger. It requires a sound judgment and a heart of tenderest love to speak with profit on the subject of the Divine anger.
II. That the Divine anger is excited by human disobedience. “Because his heart was turned from the Lord” (1Ki_11:9).
1. Disobedience is aggravated when committed against definite commands. “And had commanded him concerning this thing” (1Ki_11:10; comp. 1Ki_6:12; 1Ki_9:6). When law is violated ignorantly it is still a sin, but is not so aggravated as when committed with the full knowledge of the prohibition. Princes who have dominion over others are apt to forget the Divine dominion over them, and while they exact obedience from their own subjects, to neglect on their part to render obedience to the Great Ruler of all. The mariner who disregards the lights and landmarks which define the path of safety is the more reprehensible when he wrecks his vessel among the treacherous shoals.
2. Disobedience it aggravated when committed notwithstanding repealed Divine manifestation. The Lord “appeared unto him twice” (1Ki_11:9; comp. 1Ki_3:5; 1Ki_9:1-2). Good turns aggravate unkindnesses. It is a great privilege to receive the law through the lips of God’s ministers, but a greater still to hear it from the lips of God Himself. Solomon was singularly favoured with Divine blessings. His recalcitrance excited the greater displeasure, and merited the greater punishment. The Lord does not trifle with men in the declarations of His word, and He will not eventually allow men to trifle with Him.
III. That the Divine anger will manifest itself in some form of punishment (1Ki_11:11). The threat to divide the kingdom was carried out: the subsequent repentance and restoration of Solomon did not prevent it. There are some things in which repentance comes too late. Repentance does not arrest the course of physical law. It must have been a bitter experience to Solomon to know that the magnificent empire it had been his life-work to build up must ere long be rent asunder and crumble into ruins. “Solomon had let go the sincere service of God by sharing himself betwixt Him and his idols; his servant therefore shall share the kingdon with his son, and bear away the better half from him.” The Divine anger is not a theological scare-crow set up to frighten timid souls, but a terrible reality, as the evil-doer will by-and-by discover to his dismay. Homer has given expression to a similar idea:—
Fast by the threshold of Jove’s court are placed
Two casks, one stored with evil, one with good.
To whom He gives unmixed
The bitter cup, He makes that man a curse,
His name becomes a by word of reproach,
His strength is hunger-bitten, and he walks
The blessed earth unblest, go where he may.
IV. That the Divine anger is ever tempered with mercy.
1. Mercy in delaying punishment. “Notwithstanding in thy day I will not do it” (1Ki_11:12). Compare a similar mitigation of punishment promised to Josiah (2Ki_22:20). Delay affords space for repentance. If the opportunity it presents is despised, the punishment will be the heavier, and the sufferer be without excuse.
2. Mercy in moderating the severity of punishment. “Howbeit I will not rend away all the kingdom, but will give one tribe to thy son” (1Ki_11:13). Two tribes were really retained. The tribe of Benjamin seems to have been absorbed into the tribe of Judah, to which David belonged (1Ki_12:21). This second mitigation of the sentence reveals the tender compassion of God, and His unwillingness to punish. Solomon did not at once turn from God: his defection was gradual; and Jehovah did not at once wrest the kingdom from him. This additional proof of the Divine mercy must have greatly affected Solomon; and there is room to hope that it led him to repent and retrace his wanderings. Kindness succeeds where a stern severity fails.
3. Mercy shown on account of ulterior Divine purposes. “For David my servant’s sake, and for Jerusalem’s sake which I have chosen” (1Ki_11:13). The line of the Messiah must be preserved. The prevailing lion must come out of the tribe of Judah: not only the tribe must be preserved, but the regal line and the regal right. All this must be done for the true David’s sake; and this was undoubtedly, observes Dr. A. Clarke, what God had in view by thus miraculously preserving the tribe of Judah and the royal line in the midst of so general a defection. As David was a type of the Messiah, so was Jerusalem a type of the true church: therefore the old Jerusalem must be preserved in the hands of the tribe of Judah, till the true David should establish the new Jerusalem in the same land and in the same city. And what a series of providences did it require to do all these things! The prosperous career of Solomon was only part of a great scheme for the benefit of the entire race; and the failure of even so great a man as Solomon must not be allowed to frustrate the Divine intention.
LESSONS:—
1. Man cannot sin with impunity.
2. The Divine anger is righteous.
3. The manifestation of the Divine anger it terrible.
4. God has more delight in showing mercy than in punishing.
5. He who most delights in mercy most resembles God.
GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES
1Ki_11:9. Had not this man’s delinquency been strongly marked by the Divine disapprobation, it would have had a fatal effect upon the morals of mankind. Vice is vice, no matter who commits it. And God is as much displeased with sin in Solomon as He can be with it in the most profligate, uneducated wretch. And, although God sees the same sin in precisely the same degree of moral turpitude as to the act itself, yet there may be circumstances which greatly aggravate the offence, and subject the offender to greater punishment. Solomon was wise; he knew better: his understanding showed him the vanity as well as the wickedness of idolatry. God had appeared unto him twice. The promises of God had been fulfilled to him in a most remarkable manner. All these were aggravations of Solomon’s crimes, as to their demerit; for the same crime has, in every case, the same degree of moral turpitude in the sight of God; but circumstances may so aggravate as to require the offender to be more grievously punished: so the punishment may be legally increased where the crime is the same. Solomon deserved more punishment for his worship of Ashtoreth than any of the Sidonians did, though they performed precisely the same acts. The Sidonians had never known the true God: Solomon had been fully acquainted with Him.—A. Clarke.
1Ki_11:9-11. The sin of idolatry.
1. Is a tendency of fallen humanity.
2. Is an insult to God.
3. Is a violation of the most specific prohibitions.
4. Is the cause of national disgrace and ruin.
1Ki_11:9-13. The punishments that fell upon Solomon show us—I. The holiness and righteousness of God (Psa_145:17; Jer_17:10; Luk_12:47). II. His faithfulness and mercy (1Ki_11:12-13). He knows how to punish so that His gracious promises remain firm (2Ti_2:13; Rom_3:3). God makes known to us His judgments through His Word, so that we may have time to repent and to turn unto Him (Eze_33:2). If judgment fell specially on Solomon, notwithstanding the fact that the Lord appeared unto him twice in a dream, and he was honoured with distinguished grace, what judgment must we expect, to whom He has appeared tenderly in Christ Jesus (1Co_1:30; Heb_2:3; Heb_10:29). God knows how, in the proper time, to belittle him who abandons and forsakes the Lord and His cause in order to become great and distinguished in the eyes of the world (Dan_4:34).—Lange.
1Ki_11:12-13. In the midst of the horror of this spectacle, able to affright all the sons of men, behold some glimpse of comfort. Was it of Solomon that David his father prophesied—“Though he fall he shall not be utterly cast down, for the Lord upholdeth him with His hand”? If sensible grace, yet final mercy, was not taken from that beloved of God. In the hardest of this winter, the sap was gone down to the root, though it showed not in the branches. Even while Solomon removed, that word stood fast: “He shall be my son, and I will be his father.” He that foresaw his sin, threatened and limited his correction (Psa_89:31-33). Behold, the favour of God doth not depend upon Solomon’s obedience. If Solomon shall suffer his faithfulness to fail towards his God; God will not requite him with the failing of his faithfulness to Solomon: if Solomon break his covenant with God, God will not break His covenant with the father of Solomon, with the son of David. He shall smart; he shall not perish. O gracious word of the God of all mercies, able to give strength to the languishing, comfort to the despairing, to the dying, life! Whatsoever we are, thou wilt be still thyself, O Holy one of Israel, true to thy covenant. The sins of thy chosen can neither frustrate thy counsel, nor outstrip thy mercies.—Bp. Hall.
1Ki_11:13. One tribe remains to him—that is, of the Divine grace only a single part of the sovereignty over all Israel is left to him. This view is confirmed by the observation that even the standing distribution in the Old Testament of Israel into twelve tribes has its most proper ground, not in the fact that Jacob had exactly twelve sons, as after the recognition of Ephraim and Manasseh as separate tribes, the people properly formed thirteen tribes; but is to be sought in the import which this number had acquired in the remotest antiquity by the observation of the twelve months of the year, and the twelve signs of the zodiac.—Keil.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
Alexander MacLaren 1905 · Public Domain On vv4, 26 1 Kings
1 Kings
THE FALL OF SOLOMON
Read full note →
1Ki 11:4 - 1Ki 11:13.
Scripture never blinks the defects of its heroes. Its portraits do not smooth out wrinkles, but, with absolute fidelity, give all faults. That pitiless truthfulness is no small proof of its inspiration. If these historical books were simply fragments of national records, owning no higher source than patriotism, they would never have blurted out the errors and sins of David and Solomon as they do. Where else are there national histories of which the very central idea is the laying bare of national sins and chastisements? or where else are there legends of the people’s heroes which tell their sins without apology or reticence? The difference in tone augurs a different origin. The Old Testament histories are not written to tell Israel’s glories, or even, we may say, to recount its history, but to tell God’s dealings with Israel,-a very different theme, and one which finds its material equally in the glories and in the miseries, which respectively follow its obedience and disobedience. So Solomon’s fall is told in the same frank way as his wisdom and wealth; for what is of importance is not Solomon so much as God’s dealings with Solomon, when his heart was turned away. We are told that the narrative of Solomon’s reign is an ideal picture. Strange idealising which leaves the ideal king wallowing in a sty of sensuality and an apostate from Jehovah!
Here we are simply told of the two things,-his sin, and the divine judgment which it drew after it.
I. 1Ki 11:4 - 1Ki 11:8 tell the black story of Solomon’s apostasy. What was its extent? Did he himself take part in idolatrous worship, or simply, with the foolish fondness of an old sensualist, let these foreign women have their shrines? The darker supposition seems correct. The expression that he ‘went after other gods’ is commonly used to mean actual idolatry; and his wives could scarcely have been said to have ‘turned away his heart,’ if all that he did was to wink at, or even to facilitate, their worship. But, on the other hand, he does not seem to have abandoned Jehovah’s worship. The charge against him is that ‘his heart was not perfect,’ or wholly devoted to the Lord, or, as 1Ki 11:6 puts it, that he ‘went not fully’ after the Lord. His was a case of halting between two opinions, or rather, of trying to hold both at once. He wanted to be a worshipper of Jehovah and of these idols also.
Was his apostasy final? Yes, so far as we can gather from the narrative. Not only is there no statement of his repentance, but the silence with which he receives the divine announcement of retribution is suspicious; and the prophecy of Ahijah to Jeroboam, which obviously comes later in time than the threatenings of the text, treats the idolatry as still existing {1Ki 11:33}. Further, we learn from 2Ki 23:13 that the shrines which he built stood till Josiah’s time. If Solomon had ever abandoned his idolatry, he would not have left them standing. So we seem to have in him a case of a fall which knew no recovery, an eclipse which did not pass. The Book of Ecclesiastes, if of his composition, would somewhat lighten the darkness of such an end; but his authorship of it is now all but universally given up.
So there, on Olivet’s southern ridge, right opposite the Temple, stood the three altars, and there the king worshipped; and, if he did, he would have a crowd of imitators. The lessons of such a fall are many. First, it teaches the destructive effect of yielding to sensual indulgence. Solomon’s unbridled and monstrous polygamy sapped his manhood and his principle, darkened his clear spirit, blinded his keen eye, and turned a youth of noble aspiration and a manhood of noble accomplishment into an old age without dignity, reverence, or calm. All his wisdom was worth little if it could not keep him master of himself. A young man who lets his passions run away with him is less to be condemned than an old sensualist. God means that reason should govern impulses and desires, and that conscience should govern all and be governed by His will. The vessel is sure to be wrecked when the officers are sent below and the mutineers get hold of the helm.
Second, it warns us that till the very end of life a fall is possible. This ship went down when the voyage was nearly over. In sight of port it struck, and that not for want of beacons. What pathetic warning lies in that phrase, ‘when Solomon was old’! After so many years of high aims, so many temptations overcome, with such habits of wisdom and kingly nobility, after such prayers and visions, he fell; and, if he fell, who can be sure of standing? No length of life spent in holy thoughts and service secures us against the possibility of disastrous fall. Only one thing does,-’Hold Thou me up, and I shall be safe!’ John Bunyan saw a door opening down to hell hard by the gates of the Celestial City. When a man that has been had in reputation for wisdom and honour shames the record of his life by a great splash of mud on the white page, near its end, he seldom returns. An old apostate is usually finally an apostate.
Third, may we not venture to see a warning here against marriages in which there is not unity in the deepest things, and a common faith? ‘When you run in double harness, take a good look at the other horse.’ If a young Christian man or woman enters on such a union with one who is not a Christian, it is a great deal more probable that, in the end, there will be two unbelievers than that there will be two Christians.
We have nothing to do with pronouncing on Solomon’s final condition, But he stands on the page of this history, a sad, enigmatical figure, a warning to all young people to take heed that the attrition of the world does not rub off the bloom of early religion, or make them cynically ashamed of the unselfishness of their early desires. There is no sadder sight than an old man whose youthful enthusiasm for goodness and belief in the super-excellency of wisdom have withered, leaving him a hard worldling or a gross sensualist. Better the early days, when he was obscure and poor, and believed in wisdom and in the God of wisdom, than the late ones, when worldly success has spoiled him!
II. 1Ki 11:9 - 1Ki 11:13 give the divine retribution announced. The immediate connection of sin and punishment is the teaching intended by this close juxtaposition of these two halves of our narrative. However long the chastisement may be in bursting, the divine resolve to send it is instantaneously consequent on the crime. The chain that binds departure from God with loss of blessing may be of many or few links, but it is riveted on when the evil is done. How gravely, as with the voice of an indictment drawn in heaven, the aggravations of Solomon’s crime are set out, in that he had sinned against ‘the Lord’ who had appeared to him twice {once in his youthful vision, and once after the completion of the Temple}, ‘and had commanded him concerning’ the very sin that he had done. Sin is made more heinous by the abundance of God’s favours and the plainness of His commands. If we would remember God’s appearances to us and for us, and meditate on His revealed will, we should be more impregnable to the assaults of temptation.
We do not learn how the Lord said this to Solomon. Possibly it was by the same prophet who afterwards announced to Jeroboam his destiny; but, however announced, it seems to have been received in sullen silence, and to have wrought no softening nor change. Like all God’s threatenings, it was spoken that it might not be inflicted. Solomon was threatened before the prophet spoke to Jeroboam; and if Solomon had repented, Jeroboam would never have been spoken to. But he is too far gone to be stopped, though he has God’s own word for it that he is ruining his kingdom by his sin. We have as clear declarations of worse results from ours; but they do not stop some of us. How strange it is that men will put out their hands to grasp their sins, even though they have to stretch across the smoke of the pit for them!
Note how forbearance delays and diminishes retribution. The separation of the kingdom is deferred, and one tribe is left to the Davidic house; probably Judah is meant, and Benjamin is omitted as being small. Observe, too, how we have a double instance of the law of God’s providence which visits the father’s deeds on the children. The consequences of David’s goodness fall on Solomon, and the consequences of Solomon’s evil fall on Rehoboam. Stated in the language of the secular historian, that is to say that the consequences of great national virtues or crimes are seldom reaped by the generation that sowed the seed and did the deed, but take time to mature and work themselves out. Stated in the language of Scripture, it is, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.’ The separation of the kingdom was not brought about by miracle, but came in the natural course of things. A people ground down by heavy taxation and forced labour, to keep up the luxury of a court containing all that disgusting crowd of wives and concubines, was ripe for revolt, and when the sceptre fell into the hands of a headstrong fool, and there was a capable leader on the other side, discontent soon became rebellion, and rebellion soon became triumphant. It all flowed as naturally as possible from the same fountain as the idolatry of which it was the punishment; and so it teaches once more the great truth that ‘the world’s history is the world’s judgment,’ and that the so-called ‘natural consequences’ of our deeds are, even here and now, God’s retribution for our deeds.
What a lesson as to God’s great patience is here! What a solemn glimpse into man’s power to counterwork God’s purpose! So soon after its establishment did the house of David prove unworthy, and the experiment fail. Yet that long-suffering purpose is not turned aside, but persistently and patiently goes on its way, altering its methods, but keeping its end unaltered, bending even sin to minister to its design, pitying and warning the sinner ere it strikes the blow that the sinner has made needful.
Behind the figure of Solomon we see another. The wisest of men fell shamefully, captured by coarse lust, and apparently steeled against all remonstrances from Heaven. ‘A greater than Solomon is here.’ The faults of the human kings of Israel prophesy of the true King, who is to be the substance of which they were but faint shadows, and whose manhood was stained by no flaw, nor His kingdom ever rent from His pure hands. Solomon was wise, but Christ is ‘Wisdom.’ Solomon built a Temple, but also altars to false gods overtopping it across the valley; and his Temple was burned with fire. But Christ is the true Temple as well as Priest and Sacrifice. Solomon was by name ‘the peaceful,’ and his land had outward rest, darkened at the last by war and rebellion. But Christ is the Prince of Peace, and of His dominion there shall be no end. Solomon is the great example of the sad truth that the loftiest and wisest share in the universal sinfulness. Christ is the one flawless Man, who makes those who take Him for their King wise and peaceful, prosperous, and in due time sinless, like Himself.
Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On v5 1Ki 11:33. (See Scofield "Jdg 2:13").
Ashtoreth
1Ki 11:33. (See Scofield "Jdg 2:13").
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v14 Solomon’s Adversaries and Death
Solomon’s Adversaries and Death
v. 14. And the Lord stirred up an adversary unto Solomon, one of those who imperiled the peace of the kingdom and reminded Solomon of the fact that he owed the peace of his reign entirely to the grace of God, Hadad the Edomite; he was of the king’s seed in Edom, of royal descent.
Read full note →
v. 15. For it came to pass, when David was in Edom, 2Sa 8:14, and Joab, the captain of the host, was gone up to bury the slain, those that were killed when the Edomites invaded the country, after he had smitten every male in Edom, all those who bore arms, all this taking place during a period of six months,
v. 16. (for six months did Joab remain there with all Israel, until he had cut off every male in Edom,)
v. 17. that Hadad fled, he and certain Edomites of his father’s servants with him, to go in to Egypt, at a time when the predecessor of Solomon’s father-in-law reigned there, Hadad being yet a little child.
v. 18. And they arose out of Midian, on the west side of the Elanitic Gulf, in the southern part of Edom, and came to Paran, the desert between Sinai and the southern boundary of Canaan; and they took men with them out of Paran, and they came to Egypt, unto Pharaoh, king of Egypt, seeking refuge with him; which gave him an house and appointed him victuals, the necessary food for himself and his companions, and gave him land, showing true hospitality to his visitors.
v. 19. And Hadad found great favor in the sight of Pharaoh, so that he gave him to wife the sister of his own wife, the sister of Tahpenes, the queen, the chief of the king’s wives and the mistress of the harem.
v. 20. And the sister of Tahpenes bare him Genubath, his son, whom Tahpenes, probably at a special family feast, Gen 21:8, weaned in Pharaoh’s house; and Genubath was in Pharaoh’s household among the sons of Pharaoh, being educated with the princes of Egypt and ranking with them.
v. 21. And when Hadad heard in Egypt that David slept with his fathers, and that Joab, the captain of the host, was dead, his two most dangerous enemies thus being removed, Hadad said to Pharaoh, Let me depart that I may go to mine own country. He sought his dismissal, since the return to his own country now seemed safe.
v. 22. Then Pharaoh said unto him, But what hast thou lacked with me that, behold, thou seekest to go to thine own country? He was sure that no breach of hospitality had occurred. And he answered, Nothing, he had nothing to complain of on that score; howbeit, let me go in any wise, a request which Pharaoh undoubtedly did not refuse. So Hadad, as a kind of Bedouin chieftain, was able to stir up a good deal of trouble on the boundary.
v. 23. And God stirred him (Solomon) up another adversary, Rezon, the son of Eliadah, which fled from his lord Hadadezer, king of Zobah, at the time of David’s campaign in the north, 2Sa 8:3;
v. 24. and he gathered men unto him, and became captain over a band when David slew them of Zobah. And they went to Damascus, and dwelt therein, and reigned in Damascus, usurping the power in that part of Syria.
v. 25. And he was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon, beside the mischief that Hadad did; and he abhorred Israel, and reigned over Syria. As the power and fame of Solomon were declining, these men became bolder in their enmity and probably organized border raids, which were very unpleasant to the king.
v. 26. And Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, an Ephrathite of Zereda, in the mountains of Ephraim, Solomon’s servant, whose mother’s name was Zeruah, a widow woman, even he lifted up his hand against the king; it was an actual, open rebellion of a subject against the constituted authority.
v. 27. And this was the cause that he lifted up his hand against the king: Solomon built Millo, the citadel or fortress of Jerusalem, particularly of the upper city, and repaired the breaches of the city of David, his father, by walling up a ravine which might have afforded enemies access to the city.
v. 28. And the man Jeroboam was a mighty man of valor, an energetic, capable man; and Solomon seeing the young man that he was industrious, he did his work well, he accomplished what he set out to do, he made him ruler over all the charge of the house of Joseph, the overseer of the levy of men out of the tribe of Ephraim, It is probable that the use of men of Ephraim for this work nourished the spirit of rebellion which Jeroboam afterwards used for his benefit.
v. 29. And it, came to pass at that time when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, when he had entered upon his work as superintendent, that the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him in the way; and he, Ahijah, had clad himself with a new garment, a large square piece of cloth, thrown over the shoulders and almost covering the entire body in the daytime and used at night for a coverlet; and they two were alone in the field.
v. 30. And Ahijah caught the new garment that was on him, he took hold of it with a firm grasp, and rent it in twelve pieces.
v. 31. And he said to Jeroboam, Take thee ten pieces; for thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee, the northern tribes being known as the Ten Tribes or Israel, more in a symbolic than in a literal way of speaking,
v. 32. (but he shall have one tribe for My servant David’s sake, Benjamin and the cities of Simeon being counted with Judah, and for Jerusalem’s sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel,)
v. 33. because that they have forsaken me, the people having taken their cue from the king and indulged in the idol worship which he permitted the members of his harem, and have worshiped Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Zidonians, Chemosh, the god of the Moabites, and Milcom, the god of the children of Ammon, and have not walked in my ways, to do that which is right in Mine eyes, and to keep My statutes and My judgments, as did David, his father.
v. 34. Howbeit, I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand, but I will make him prince, ruler, all the days of his life for David, my servant’s sake, whom I chose because he kept My commandments and My statutes;
v. 35. but I will take the kingdom out of his son’s hand, and will give it unto thee, even ten tribes.
v. 36. And unto his son will I give one tribe, that David, my servant, for whose sake all these merciful concessions were made, may have a light alway before Me in Jerusalem, for the upholding of his family, for the continuance of his race, the city which I have chosen Me to put My name there.
v. 37. And I will take thee, and thou shalt reign according to all that thy soul desireth, and shalt be king over Israel, the position which he was seeking even at that time.
v. 38. And it shall be, if thou wilt hearken unto all that I command thee, and wilt walk in My ways, and do that is right in My sight, to keep My statutes and My commandments, as David, My servant, did, that I will be with thee, and build thee a sure house, the dynasty founded by him would be well established, as I built for David, and will give Israel unto thee, giving him the dominion for which he was striving.
v. 39. And I will for this, on account of the defection practiced by Solomon, afflict the seed of David, but not forever. The descendants of David were to suffer humiliation, but only until such a time as the Lord considered best.
v. 40. Solomon sought therefore, having heard of this prediction, to kill Jeroboam, who probably proceeded to incite actual rebellion at once, 1Ki 11:26-27. And Jeroboam arose and fled into Egypt, unto Shishak, king of Egypt, a ruler hostile to the kingdom of Judah, and was in Egypt until the death of Solomon.
v. 41. And the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written in the Book of the Acts of Solomon? This was a secular book containing a history of the reign of Solomon, similar to that referred to 2Ch 9:29, from which the inspired writers took no more material.
v. 42. And the time that Solomon reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel was forty years, his entire age therefore not exceeding sixty by many years.
v. 43. And Solomon slept with his fathers, having evidently turned back to the Lord in true repentance, and was buried in the city of David, his father. And Rehoboam, his son, whose mother was Naamah the Ammonitess, 1Ki 14:21-31, reigned in his stead. Like Solomon, many a brand was snatched from the burning by God’s grace and again made a partaker of all His blessings.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 18, 20, 23, 26, 28, 31, 34, 37, 40 Ashtoreth ... Molech
Ashtoreth ... Molech
These are the names of false gods. (See: How to Translate Names)
Read full note →
Sidonians
This is the name of a people group. (See: How to Translate Names)
he followed Molech
Some version render this as "Milcom." (See: How to Translate Names)
what was evil in the sight of Yahweh
The phrase, "in the sight of" refers to someone's opinion. AT: "what Yahweh considered to be evil" (See: Metaphor)
translationWords
false god
evil
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 23, 26, 27, 29, 34, 36, 38, 39, 40 11:4-8 instead of being completely faithful: Although David had…
11:4-8 instead of being completely faithful: Although David had committed grievous sin, he genuinely repented when rebuked by God’s prophet (2 Sam 11:1–12:23; Ps 51:1-4). However, Solomon failed to heed God’s warnings (1 Kgs 3:14; 6:12-13; 9:4-9) or to learn from Israel’s past; instead, he reproduced their sins.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.