1 Kings · Chapter 11

Verse 1. Many strange women] That is, idolaters; together with the daughter of Pharaoh: she was also one of those strange women and an idolater. But many think she became a proselyte to the Jewish religion; of this there is no evidence.

Verse 1. King Solomon loved many strange women — It was not a fault in him that he married Pharaoh’s daughter; she being a proselyte, as is generally supposed, to the Jewish religion. But in marrying so many other women besides, he committed two sins against the law; one in multiplying wives, and another in marrying those of strange nations, who still retained their idolatrous religion; which was expressly against the law, as the next verse declares.

Verse 1. Solomon loved many strange women, of gentile nations, and was connected with them. To this day thousands of women in India are married to great men merely as a mark of honour, and they die at home without ever seeing their unlawful husbands.

THE SINS OF SOLOMON, 1-8.

We come now to that strange, dark period in Solomon’s career — so strangely dark, and in contrast with his earlier piety and glory so deeply sad, that even the author of Chronicles passes it over in silence, and some modern critics pronounce it incredible and psychologically impossible. We find Jewish pride on the one hand, and German rationalism on the other, uniting to deny or else explain away the literal truth of the history. But there the record stands, and will stand, in unpleasant but simple naked truth, whose obvious meaning none can doubt, holding up to the world a most impressive lesson of human frailty, and showing the terrible danger to spiritual life of the vain pomp and glory of the world. “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” 1 Corinthians 10:12. In the earlier part of his reign Solomon was rich towards God, but later he multiplied to himself gold and silver, and horses and chariots, and wives and concubines. In seeking to surpass the magnificence and glory of the kings of the nations, he fell even lower than they all; for better are they who never knew the way of truth, than he who, having been blessed with superior light from God, turns away and runs headlong into a foul idolatry. Solomon’s fall was no sudden apostasy, and doubtless many a deep and wearing heart-struggle did he pass through ere the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life, finally gained over him the mastery. We infer from the warnings against transgression contained in the Divine communication of 1 Kings 9:6, that already the Lord saw in him tendencies that threatened danger; and we suppose that these tendencies grew stronger and stronger until they resulted in the dark and fatal apostasy which this chapter unfolds to us. Compare Nehemiah 13:26.

1. Loved many strange women — Chiefly princesses, (verse 3,) the daughters of the many vassal kings who were tributary to Solomon. How strange that he who in his Proverbs (Proverbs 2:16-19; 5:3-4; 7:5-27) could give such noble counsel to avoid the strange woman, should be himself taken in her snare. Together with the daughter of Pharaoh — That is, besides the daughter of Pharaoh. She was the wife of his youth and of his better days; and although his marriage with her was not in harmony with the spirit of the law, (see note on 1 Kings 3:1,) had he remained true to her no particular harm would have resulted, for we cannot find that she ever seduced him to idolatry. But when he essayed to take other foreign wives, and especially of nations among whom the Hebrews were positively forbidden to marry, his fall was speedy and fatal. Moabites, Ammonites — According to the letter of the law (Exodus 34:11, 16; Deuteronomy 7:1, 3) only marriage with the Canaanitish nations was prohibited; but Moabites and Ammonites were forbidden to enter the congregation until the tenth generation, and the Edomites until the third. Deuteronomy 23:3, 8. Indeed, the spirit of the law was against intermarriage with any and all who would be likely to turn the heart after false gods.

Verse 2. Concerning which the Lord said — Ye shall not go in unto them — This relates especially to the Hittites and the Zidonians, and consequently the rest of the seven nations of Canaan, with whom they were forbidden to make any marriage, (Exodus 34:16; Deuteronomy 7:3,) for the weighty reason here mentioned. For though they might marry women of other nations, if these women embraced the true religion, yet of the seven nations of Canaan they might not, although they were converted to their religion; lest the venom should lurk and lie hid, and at last break out and infect them. Great was the foresight wherewith God endowed Moses in giving this precept, as Grotius remarks; and the not observing it was of fatal consequence to the Israelites, and laid the foundation of their utter ruin. Solomon clave unto these in love — Was extravagantly fond of them. He had much knowledge; but to what purpose, when he knew not how to govern his appetites?

THE SINS OF SOLOMON, 1-8.

We come now to that strange, dark period in Solomon’s career — so strangely dark, and in contrast with his earlier piety and glory so deeply sad, that even the author of Chronicles passes it over in silence, and some modern critics pronounce it incredible and psychologically impossible. We find Jewish pride on the one hand, and German rationalism on the other, uniting to deny or else explain away the literal truth of the history. But there the record stands, and will stand, in unpleasant but simple naked truth, whose obvious meaning none can doubt, holding up to the world a most impressive lesson of human frailty, and showing the terrible danger to spiritual life of the vain pomp and glory of the world. “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” 1 Corinthians 10:12. In the earlier part of his reign Solomon was rich towards God, but later he multiplied to himself gold and silver, and horses and chariots, and wives and concubines. In seeking to surpass the magnificence and glory of the kings of the nations, he fell even lower than they all; for better are they who never knew the way of truth, than he who, having been blessed with superior light from God, turns away and runs headlong into a foul idolatry. Solomon’s fall was no sudden apostasy, and doubtless many a deep and wearing heart-struggle did he pass through ere the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life, finally gained over him the mastery. We infer from the warnings against transgression contained in the Divine communication of 1 Kings 9:6, that already the Lord saw in him tendencies that threatened danger; and we suppose that these tendencies grew stronger and stronger until they resulted in the dark and fatal apostasy which this chapter unfolds to us. Compare Nehemiah 13:26.

1. Loved many strange women — Chiefly princesses, (verse 3,) the daughters of the many vassal kings who were tributary to Solomon. How strange that he who in his Proverbs (Proverbs 2:16-19; 5:3-4; 7:5-27) could give such noble counsel to avoid the strange woman, should be himself taken in her snare. Together with the daughter of Pharaoh — That is, besides the daughter of Pharaoh. She was the wife of his youth and of his better days; and although his marriage with her was not in harmony with the spirit of the law, (see note on 1 Kings 3:1,) had he remained true to her no particular harm would have resulted, for we cannot find that she ever seduced him to idolatry. But when he essayed to take other foreign wives, and especially of nations among whom the Hebrews were positively forbidden to marry, his fall was speedy and fatal. Moabites, Ammonites — According to the letter of the law (Exodus 34:11, 16; Deuteronomy 7:1, 3) only marriage with the Canaanitish nations was prohibited; but Moabites and Ammonites were forbidden to enter the congregation until the tenth generation, and the Edomites until the third. Deuteronomy 23:3, 8. Indeed, the spirit of the law was against intermarriage with any and all who would be likely to turn the heart after false gods.

V. 3. Seven hundred wives, &c.-God had particularly forbidden the kings to multiply either horses or wives, Deuteronomy 17:16,17, we saw 1 Kings 10:29, how he broke the former law, multiplying horses: and here we see, how he broke the latter, multiplying wives. David set the example. One ill act of a good man may do more mischief than twenty of a wicked man. Besides, they were strange women, of the nations which God had expressly forbidden them to marry with. And to compleat the mischief, he clave unto these in love; was extravagantly fond of them, Solomon had much knowledge. But to what purpose, when he knew not how to govern his appetites?

Verse 3. He had seven hundred wives, princesses] How he could get so many of the blood royal from the different surrounding nations, is astonishing; but probably the daughters of noblemen, generals, &c., may be included.

And three hundred concubines] These were wives of the second rank, who were taken according to the usages of those times; but their offspring could not inherit. Sarah was to Abraham what these seven hundred princesses were to Solomon; and the three hundred concubines stood in the same relation to the Israelitish king as Hagar and Keturah did to the patriarch.

Here then are one thousand wives to form this great bad man’s harem! Was it possible that such a person could have any piety to God, who was absorbed by such a number of women? We scarcely allow a man to have the fear of God who has a second wife or mistress; in what state then must the man be who has one thousand of them? We may endeavour to excuse all this by saying, “It was a custom in the East to have a multitude of women, and that there were many of those whom Solomon probably never saw,” &c., &c. But was there any of them whom he might not have seen? Was it for reasons of state, or merely court splendour, that he had so many? How then is it said that he loved many strange women?-that he clave to them in love? And did he not give them the utmost proofs of his attachment when he not only tolerated their iniquitous worship in the land, but built temples to their idols, and more, burnt incense to them himself? As we should not condemn what God justifies, so we should not justify what God condemns. He went after Ashtaroth, the impure Venus of the Sidonians; after Milcom, the abomination of the Ammonites; after Chemosh, the abomination of the Moabites; and after the murderous Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon. He seems to have gone as far in iniquity as it was possible.

Verse 3. He had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines — This was multiplying them prodigiously indeed, and pouring contempt on the divine prohibition in the most notorious manner. David had multiplied wives too, although to no such extent as this; but probably the bad example which he had set in this particular, had encouraged Solomon to think it, if not lawful, yet a lesser evil than it really was. One ill act of a good man may do more mischief than twenty of a wicked man. “Without knowing the customs of the princes of the East,” says Dr. Dodd, “their pomp and sumptuousness of living, one might be tempted to wonder of what possible use was this milliad of wives and concubines. But as Solomon was between forty and fifty years old before he ran into this excess, we cannot but think that he kept this multitude of women more for state than otherwise. Darius Codomanus was wont to carry along with him in his camp no less than three hundred and fifty concubines in time of war; nor was his queen offended at it, for the women used to reverence and adore her, as if she had been a goddess. Father Le Compte, in his history of China, tells us that the emperor has a vast number of wives, chosen out of the prime beauties of the country, many of which he never so much as saw in his whole life: and, therefore, it is not improbable that Solomon, as he found his riches increase, might enlarge his expenses, and endeavour to surpass all the princes of his time in this, as well as in all other kinds of pomp and magnificence.” He was guilty, however, of a flagrant violation of the divine law.

Ver. 3. Seven hundred wives. In the Canticle or Song of Solomon, he says that he had sixty queens, eighty concubines, and virgins without number, who were employed as maids and servants in his various palaces. Hence we ought candidly to allow, though he had a thousand women in his palaces, he had not intercourse with more than the law of custom accounted his wives. What is far worse, those indulgences rendered his salvation doubtful, and proved calamitous to his posterity. It is true, Ahasuerus and most of the eastern kings did the same. Esther 2:3. But from Solomon a better example might have been expected; for the divine law forbade the kings of Israel to imitate the tyrants of the gentiles in multiplying wives. Happy, had he obeyed his own proverb: Delight thyself in the wife of thy youth, and let her breasts satisfy thee at all times.

3. Seven hundred wives — Some have thought by a supposed corruption in the text to reduce the seven hundred to seventy, and the three hundred concubines to eighty, and have referred to Song of Solomon 6:8, as giving support to this conjecture. But all this proceeds from the false idea that an Oriental sovereign has intercourse with all his wives and concubines. The harem of an Eastern monarch is even at the present day looked upon as a sort of state necessity, and the king’s rank and greatness is estimated according to its extent. He multiplies his wives according to his wealth and power, though many of them he never sees at all. Darius Codomannus is said to have taken three hundred and sixty concubines in his camp when he marched against Alexander. So Solomon, wishing to surpass all other kings in the fame of greatness, filled his harem with a thousand women. Among these he had his favourites, who at length turned his heart from God; but the large majority of the thousand he probably never knew personally at all.

V. 4. 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.

Verse 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.

Ver. 4. When Solomon was old. This should have been a ripening time for heaven; but alas, these foreign queens, having all along secreted their idols, now took advantage of the king’s weakness to get little altars and chapels erected for them. What good results from foreign alliances by marriage! The quarrels, the wars, and the mischiefs are often far more than the advantages.

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 1 Kings 15:14.

V. 5. Milcom-Called also Moloch.

Verses 5-7. Solomon went after Ashtoreth — Called also Astarte. See on Judges 2:13. And after Milcom — The same, it is thought, with Molech, who is here called an abomination, because highly detested by God. Solomon built a high place for Chemosh — That is, an altar upon a high place, as the manner of the heathen was. Concerning Chemosh, see Numbers 21:29. In the hill that is before Jerusalem — In the mount of Olives, which was nigh to Jerusalem, as if to confront the temple. From this act this hill was called the mount of corruption, 2 Kings 23:13. O sad effects of riches and prosperity on mankind! How insolent do they make them, and how forgetful of God! Wisely did Agar pray, Give me not riches, lest I be full and say, Who is the Lord?

Ver. 5. Ashtoreth. See Joshua 23:7. Judges 10:6.

5. Went after — This expression seems to show that Solomon was actually guilty of idolatry. Compare Deuteronomy 11:28; 13:2; 28:14. Yet the exact extent to which he went into idolatry is left uncertain. He probably never so far apostatized as to forget Jehovah, and neglect the ordinary service of the temple. Ashtoreth — See on Judges 2:13. Milcom — Called also Molech, (verse 7;) and Moloch. Amos 5:26. The fire god of the Ammonites, an abomination, particularly in that he was worshipped by the offering of human sacrifices. See on Leviticus 18:21. Some have distinguished Milcom and Molech as two different deities, chiefly because of the difference in the names and because they seem, in 2 Kings 23:10, 13, to have been worshipped at two different places, the Mount of Olives and the Valley of Hinnom. But the similarity of the names, both from the same Hebrews root, (Ëlm µklm,) is a stronger argument for their identity than the slight difference is for the contrary; and the same idol may have been worshipped in two different places near Jerusalem.

V. 6. Did evil-That is, did not worship God wholly, but joined idols with him.

Verses 5-7. Solomon went after Ashtoreth — Called also Astarte. See on Judges 2:13. And after Milcom — The same, it is thought, with Molech, who is here called an abomination, because highly detested by God. Solomon built a high place for Chemosh — That is, an altar upon a high place, as the manner of the heathen was. Concerning Chemosh, see Numbers 21:29. In the hill that is before Jerusalem — In the mount of Olives, which was nigh to Jerusalem, as if to confront the temple. From this act this hill was called the mount of corruption, 2 Kings 23:13. O sad effects of riches and prosperity on mankind! How insolent do they make them, and how forgetful of God! Wisely did Agar pray, Give me not riches, lest I be full and say, Who is the Lord?

THE SINS OF SOLOMON, 1-8.

We come now to that strange, dark period in Solomon’s career — so strangely dark, and in contrast with his earlier piety and glory so deeply sad, that even the author of Chronicles passes it over in silence, and some modern critics pronounce it incredible and psychologically impossible. We find Jewish pride on the one hand, and German rationalism on the other, uniting to deny or else explain away the literal truth of the history. But there the record stands, and will stand, in unpleasant but simple naked truth, whose obvious meaning none can doubt, holding up to the world a most impressive lesson of human frailty, and showing the terrible danger to spiritual life of the vain pomp and glory of the world. “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” 1 Corinthians 10:12. In the earlier part of his reign Solomon was rich towards God, but later he multiplied to himself gold and silver, and horses and chariots, and wives and concubines. In seeking to surpass the magnificence and glory of the kings of the nations, he fell even lower than they all; for better are they who never knew the way of truth, than he who, having been blessed with superior light from God, turns away and runs headlong into a foul idolatry. Solomon’s fall was no sudden apostasy, and doubtless many a deep and wearing heart-struggle did he pass through ere the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life, finally gained over him the mastery. We infer from the warnings against transgression contained in the Divine communication of 1 Kings 9:6, that already the Lord saw in him tendencies that threatened danger; and we suppose that these tendencies grew stronger and stronger until they resulted in the dark and fatal apostasy which this chapter unfolds to us. Compare Nehemiah 13:26.

1. Loved many strange women — Chiefly princesses, (verse 3,) the daughters of the many vassal kings who were tributary to Solomon. How strange that he who in his Proverbs (Proverbs 2:16-19; 5:3-4; 7:5-27) could give such noble counsel to avoid the strange woman, should be himself taken in her snare. Together with the daughter of Pharaoh — That is, besides the daughter of Pharaoh. She was the wife of his youth and of his better days; and although his marriage with her was not in harmony with the spirit of the law, (see note on 1 Kings 3:1,) had he remained true to her no particular harm would have resulted, for we cannot find that she ever seduced him to idolatry. But when he essayed to take other foreign wives, and especially of nations among whom the Hebrews were positively forbidden to marry, his fall was speedy and fatal. Moabites, Ammonites — According to the letter of the law (Exodus 34:11, 16; Deuteronomy 7:1, 3) only marriage with the Canaanitish nations was prohibited; but Moabites and Ammonites were forbidden to enter the congregation until the tenth generation, and the Edomites until the third. Deuteronomy 23:3, 8. Indeed, the spirit of the law was against intermarriage with any and all who would be likely to turn the heart after false gods.

V. 7. An high place-That is, an altar upon the high place, as the manner of the Heathens was. The hill-In the mount of olives, which was nigh unto Jerusalem, 2 Samuel 15:30, and from this act was called the mount of corruption, 2 Kings 23:13. As it were, to confront the temple.

Verse 7. The hill that is before Jerusalem] This was the Mount of Olives.

Verses 5-7. Solomon went after Ashtoreth — Called also Astarte. See on Judges 2:13. And after Milcom — The same, it is thought, with Molech, who is here called an abomination, because highly detested by God. Solomon built a high place for Chemosh — That is, an altar upon a high place, as the manner of the heathen was. Concerning Chemosh, see Numbers 21:29. In the hill that is before Jerusalem — In the mount of Olives, which was nigh to Jerusalem, as if to confront the temple. From this act this hill was called the mount of corruption, 2 Kings 23:13. O sad effects of riches and prosperity on mankind! How insolent do they make them, and how forgetful of God! Wisely did Agar pray, Give me not riches, lest I be full and say, Who is the Lord?

Ver. 7. Chemosh, the god of drunkenness, Priapus.

7. Chemosh — The national god of the Moabites; worshipped also by the Ammonites, probably with abominable practices similar to those used in the worship of Molech. See on Judges 11:24; Numbers 21:29. The hill that is before Jerusalem — That is, the hill now known as the Mount of Olives. On its three most conspicuous eminences it is probable that the idol altars were erected, and not, as some will have it, on the southern slope, now known as the “Mount of Offence.”

V. 8. And sacrificed, &c.-See what need those have to stand upon their guard, who have been eminent for religion. The devil will set upon them most violently: and if they miscarry, the reproach is the greater. It is the evening that commends the day. Let us therefore fear, lest having run well, we come short.

Verse 8. And likewise did he for all his strange wives — For what he granted to one, the others would be disposed to claim, or else complain of his unkindness to them. One would have expected from his wisdom and piety rather to have found him instrumental in converting them all to his religion, than to be himself seduced to theirs! But, alas! he does not appear to have taken any pains with them for any such purpose, being too much given up to his pleasures, and thinking, perhaps, that he could reconcile his religion with theirs, and find a good meaning in all their superstitious. And sacrificed unto their gods — See what need those have to stand upon their guard, who have been eminent for religion. The devil will set upon them most violently; and if they miscarry, the reproach is the greater. It is the evening that commends the day. Let us therefore fear, lest, having run well, we come short.

8. Likewise did he for all — He may have erected altars to other idols than the ones here named, but probably the national deities of the Zidonians, Ammonites, and Moabites were sufficient for the religions of all the strange wives; and in building altars for these three he made provision for his Edomite and Hittite wives as well as the rest. Certain it is that no mention is anywhere made of Solomon erecting altars to any other gods than these.

Verse 9. The Lord was angry with Solomon] Had not this man’s delinquency been strongly marked by the Divine disapprobation, it would have had a fatal effect on 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 offense, 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, and thus given him the most direct proof of his being and of his providence. The promises of God had been fulfilled to him in the most remarkable manner, and in such a way as to prove that they came by a Divine counsel, and not by any kind of casualty. 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 Ashtaroth 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.

Verses 9, 10. The Lord was angry with Solomon — Displeased with his actions, and determined to punish him for them; in which sense we are generally to understand such expressions, for we must always remember that human passions can have no place in God. Because his heart was turned from the Lord, who had appeared to him twice — First at Gibeon, in the beginning of his reign, (1 Kings 3:5,) and then at Jerusalem, after the building of the temple. And had commanded him concerning this thing — For in both those visions, the happiness promised him was declared to depend upon his observing God’s statutes. And when he began to build the temple, he was divinely admonished that he had better desist than go on in that work, unless he purposed to walk according to all God’s commandments, 1 Kings 6:12, 13. But he kept not, &c. — Which was the greater crime, because God had so often admonished him of his duty, and done such great things for him.

THE LORD’S ANGER AGAINST SOLOMON, 9-13.

9. The Lord was angry — Divine anger, as presented in the Bible, is no sudden burst of passion, no low and hateful motion of revenge, as human anger often is, and with which, perhaps, too many are ever prone to associate their idea of Divine anger. It is rather the deep, eternal antagonism of holiness to sin, of truth to error, of right to wrong. Our God cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance; and how much soever he may love a 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 become obnoxious to the Divine anger. See note on Judges 2:14. Appeared unto him twice — At Gibeon and Jerusalem. 1 Kings 3:5 and 9:2, where see notes.

Verses 9, 10. The Lord was angry with Solomon — Displeased with his actions, and determined to punish him for them; in which sense we are generally to understand such expressions, for we must always remember that human passions can have no place in God. Because his heart was turned from the Lord, who had appeared to him twice — First at Gibeon, in the beginning of his reign, (1 Kings 3:5,) and then at Jerusalem, after the building of the temple. And had commanded him concerning this thing — For in both those visions, the happiness promised him was declared to depend upon his observing God’s statutes. And when he began to build the temple, he was divinely admonished that he had better desist than go on in that work, unless he purposed to walk according to all God’s commandments, 1 Kings 6:12, 13. But he kept not, &c. — Which was the greater crime, because God had so often admonished him of his duty, and done such great things for him.

THE LORD’S ANGER AGAINST SOLOMON, 9-13.

9. The Lord was angry — Divine anger, as presented in the Bible, is no sudden burst of passion, no low and hateful motion of revenge, as human anger often is, and with which, perhaps, too many are ever prone to associate their idea of Divine anger. It is rather the deep, eternal antagonism of holiness to sin, of truth to error, of right to wrong. Our God cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance; and how much soever he may love a 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 become obnoxious to the Divine anger. See note on Judges 2:14. Appeared unto him twice — At Gibeon and Jerusalem. 1 Kings 3:5 and 9:2, where see notes.

Verse 11. Forasmuch as this is done of thee] Was not this another warning from the Lord? And might not Solomon have yet recovered himself? Was there not mercy in this message which he might have sought and found?

Verses 11-13. Wherefore the Lord said unto Solomon — Probably by some prophet. I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and give it to thy servant — Namely, Jeroboam, whom God permitted to rise into power and influence, that he might take the greatest part of his kingdom from him. This was enough to astonish Solomon, or any man, to hear that all his splendour should be so soon eclipsed! Notwithstanding, in thy days I will not do it — Or, not suffer it to be done; for in this sense these expressions are to be taken. For David thy father’s sake — For my promise made to him. But will give one tribe to thy son — The tribe of Judah. Benjamin was not entirely his, but part of it adhered to Jeroboam, as Beth-el, 1 Kings 12:29; and Hephron, 2 Chronicles 13:19; both which were towns of Benjamin. For David my servant’s sake — Who, though he was guilty of great sins, yet never forsook God to follow the abominations of idols; nor ever swerved long from God’s commandments, but made haste to repent and amend his ways, whenever he offended. And for Jerusalem’s sake which I have chosen — Not literally, for the sake of the city Jerusalem, but for the great and precious purposes to mankind in general, which God intended to bring about, in his divine providence, by keeping up the knowledge of himself at Jerusalem.

11. The Lord said unto Solomon — Probably by the ministry of Ahijah the Shilonite. Verse 29. Thy servant — Jeroboam the son of Nebat. See verses 26-40.

V. 12. Fathers sake-For my promise made to him, 2 Samuel 7:12-15.

Verses 11-13. Wherefore the Lord said unto Solomon — Probably by some prophet. I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and give it to thy servant — Namely, Jeroboam, whom God permitted to rise into power and influence, that he might take the greatest part of his kingdom from him. This was enough to astonish Solomon, or any man, to hear that all his splendour should be so soon eclipsed! Notwithstanding, in thy days I will not do it — Or, not suffer it to be done; for in this sense these expressions are to be taken. For David thy father’s sake — For my promise made to him. But will give one tribe to thy son — The tribe of Judah. Benjamin was not entirely his, but part of it adhered to Jeroboam, as Beth-el, 1 Kings 12:29; and Hephron, 2 Chronicles 13:19; both which were towns of Benjamin. For David my servant’s sake — Who, though he was guilty of great sins, yet never forsook God to follow the abominations of idols; nor ever swerved long from God’s commandments, but made haste to repent and amend his ways, whenever he offended. And for Jerusalem’s sake which I have chosen — Not literally, for the sake of the city Jerusalem, but for the great and precious purposes to mankind in general, which God intended to bring about, in his divine providence, by keeping up the knowledge of himself at Jerusalem.

THE LORD’S ANGER AGAINST SOLOMON, 9-13.

9. The Lord was angry — Divine anger, as presented in the Bible, is no sudden burst of passion, no low and hateful motion of revenge, as human anger often is, and with which, perhaps, too many are ever prone to associate their idea of Divine anger. It is rather the deep, eternal antagonism of holiness to sin, of truth to error, of right to wrong. Our God cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance; and how much soever he may love a 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 become obnoxious to the Divine anger. See note on Judges 2:14. Appeared unto him twice — At Gibeon and Jerusalem. 1 Kings 3:5 and 9:2, where see notes.

V. 13. One tribe-Benjamin was not entirely his, but part of it adhered to Jeroboam, as Bethel, 1 Kings 12:29, and Hephron, 2 Chronicles 13:19, both which were towns of Benjamin.

Verse 13. Will give one tribe-for David my servant’s sake] 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 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. And for Jerusalem’s sake] 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!

Verses 11-13. Wherefore the Lord said unto Solomon — Probably by some prophet. I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and give it to thy servant — Namely, Jeroboam, whom God permitted to rise into power and influence, that he might take the greatest part of his kingdom from him. This was enough to astonish Solomon, or any man, to hear that all his splendour should be so soon eclipsed! Notwithstanding, in thy days I will not do it — Or, not suffer it to be done; for in this sense these expressions are to be taken. For David thy father’s sake — For my promise made to him. But will give one tribe to thy son — The tribe of Judah. Benjamin was not entirely his, but part of it adhered to Jeroboam, as Beth-el, 1 Kings 12:29; and Hephron, 2 Chronicles 13:19; both which were towns of Benjamin. For David my servant’s sake — Who, though he was guilty of great sins, yet never forsook God to follow the abominations of idols; nor ever swerved long from God’s commandments, but made haste to repent and amend his ways, whenever he offended. And for Jerusalem’s sake which I have chosen — Not literally, for the sake of the city Jerusalem, but for the great and precious purposes to mankind in general, which God intended to bring about, in his divine providence, by keeping up the knowledge of himself at Jerusalem.

13. One tribe — The tribe of Judah, to which David belonged, and into which the tribe of Benjamin seems to have been absorbed. 1 Kings 12:21.

Verse 14. The Lord stirred up an adversary] A satan, ˆcc. When he sent to Hiram to assist him in building the temple of the Lord, he could say, There was no satan, see 1 Kings 5:4; and all his kingdom was in peace and security,-every than dwelt under his vine, and under his fig tree, 1 Kings 4:25: but now that he had turned away from God, three satans rise up against him at once, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam.

Verse 14. The Lord stirred up an adversary to Solomon — All his glory, and riches, and human wisdom availed nothing to preserve his kingdom entire to his posterity, when he turned away from keeping God’s covenant, and fell into idolatry. Hadad the Edomite — A young prince of the royal family of Idumea, who fled into Egypt when David conquered that country; and, finding favour with the king, settled there.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

V. 15. In Edom-By his army, to war against it. To bury-The Israelites who were slain in the battle, 2 Samuel 8:13,14, whom he honourably interred in some certain place, to which he is said to go up for that end. And this gave Hadad the opportunity of making his escape, whilst Joab and his men were employed in that solemnity. Had smitten-Or, and he smote, as it is in the Hebrew: which is here noted as the cause of Hadad’s flight; he understood what Joab had done in part, and intended farther to do, even to kill all the males and therefore fled for his life.

Verse 15. Was gone up to bury the slain] The slain Edomites; for Joab had in the course of six months exterminated all the males, except Hadad and his servants, who escaped to Egypt. Instead of bury the slain, the Targum has to take the spoils of the slain.

Verses 15-17. When David was in Edom — By his army to war against it; and Joab was gone up to bury the slain — The Israelites who were slain in the battle, (2 Samuel 8:13, 14,) whom he honourably interred in some certain place, to which he is said to go up for that end. And this gave Hadad the opportunity of making his escape, while Joab and his men were all employed in the solemnity. After he had smitten, &c. — Or, and he smote, as it is in the Hebrew: which is here observed as the cause of Hadad’s flight; he understood what Joab had done in part, and intended further to do, even to kill all the males, and therefore fled for his life. With all Israel — That is, with all his army. Until he had cut off every male — That bore arms; for it is hardly to be thought that they cut off all the male children and youths. That Hadad fled — While Joab was busy in giving a solemn burial to the Israelites, certain Edomites took the opportunity to carry Hadad into Egypt.

15. When David was in Edom — See 2 Samuel 8:13, 14, and notes there. We bury the slain — The slain Israelites who fell in the Edomite war. From 1 Chronicles 18:12, it would seem that Abishai, Joab’s brother, had chief command in the great battle that was fought in the Valley of Salt, and which resulted in the slaughter of eighteen thousand Edomites. Doubtless many an Israelite perished in this battle; and Joab, rather than Abishai, took charge of their burial.

Verses 15-17. When David was in Edom — By his army to war against it; and Joab was gone up to bury the slain — The Israelites who were slain in the battle, (2 Samuel 8:13, 14,) whom he honourably interred in some certain place, to which he is said to go up for that end. And this gave Hadad the opportunity of making his escape, while Joab and his men were all employed in the solemnity. After he had smitten, &c. — Or, and he smote, as it is in the Hebrew: which is here observed as the cause of Hadad’s flight; he understood what Joab had done in part, and intended further to do, even to kill all the males, and therefore fled for his life. With all Israel — That is, with all his army. Until he had cut off every male — That bore arms; for it is hardly to be thought that they cut off all the male children and youths. That Hadad fled — While Joab was busy in giving a solemn burial to the Israelites, certain Edomites took the opportunity to carry Hadad into Egypt.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

Verse 17. Hadad being yet a little child.] ˆcq נער naar katan, a little boy; one who was apprehensive of his danger, and could, with his father’s servants, make his escape: not an infant.

Verses 15-17. When David was in Edom — By his army to war against it; and Joab was gone up to bury the slain — The Israelites who were slain in the battle, (2 Samuel 8:13, 14,) whom he honourably interred in some certain place, to which he is said to go up for that end. And this gave Hadad the opportunity of making his escape, while Joab and his men were all employed in the solemnity. After he had smitten, &c. — Or, and he smote, as it is in the Hebrew: which is here observed as the cause of Hadad’s flight; he understood what Joab had done in part, and intended further to do, even to kill all the males, and therefore fled for his life. With all Israel — That is, with all his army. Until he had cut off every male — That bore arms; for it is hardly to be thought that they cut off all the male children and youths. That Hadad fled — While Joab was busy in giving a solemn burial to the Israelites, certain Edomites took the opportunity to carry Hadad into Egypt.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

V. 18. Midian-He fled at first with an intent to go into Egypt, but took Midian, a neighbouring country, in his way, and staid there a while, possibly ‘till he had by some of his servants tried Pharaoh’s mind, and prepared the way for his reception. Paran-Another country in the road from Edom to Egypt, where he hired men to attend him, that making his entrance there something like a prince, he might find more favour from that king and people. Land-To support himself and his followers out of the profits of it.

Verse 18. These arose out of Midian] They at first retired to Midian, which lay to the southwest of the Dead Sea. Not supposing themselves in safety there, they went afterwards to Paran in the south of Idumea, and getting a number of persons to join them in Paran, they went straight to Egypt, where we find Hadad became a favourite with Pharaoh, who gave him his sister-in-law to wife; and incorporated him and his family with his own.

Verse 18. They arose out of Midian — They first went into Midian and stayed there a while, probably that they might send from thence to know whether Pharaoh would give them entertainment and protection. And came to Paran — Another country in the road from Edom to Egypt, where he hired men to attend him, probably either as guides, or that, making his entrance into Egypt in some degree like a prince, he might find more favour from the king and people. Which gave him a house, &c. — According to the manner of generous princes, who pity noble persons that are in distress, Pharaoh not only assigned him a house, and kept a table for him, that he might want nothing, but also gave him land, that out of the revenues of it he might provide himself an equipage suitable to his quality.

18. They arose out of Midian, and came to Paran — They first fled from Edom to Midian, and then, probably supposing themselves still insecure, they arose and went toward Egypt as far as some settlement in the desert of Paran, where they seem to have stayed awhile before proceeding to Egypt. The Midian here referred to was probably the same as that to which Moses fled from Pharaoh, (Exodus 2:15,) and lay in the Sinaitic peninsula south of Edom and around the mountains connected with Horeb. Paran was the vast wilderness north of Sinai and west of Edom, corresponding substantially with the modern desert et Tih. See on Genesis 21:21, and Numbers 10:12. Took men with them — Probably as guides through the wilderness.

V. 19. Found favour-God so disposing his heart, that Hadad might be a scourge to Solomon for his impieties.

Verses 19, 20. Hadad found great favour in the sight of Pharaoh — God so disposing Pharaoh’s heart, that Hadad might be a scourge to Solomon for his impieties. Here Hadad married the sister of Tahpenes the queen, who bare him a son. Whom Tahpenes weaned in Pharaoh’s house — Having as great a fondness for the child, as the king had for his father; and kept the feast generally made at the weaning of a child. In all these things the providence of God was conspicuous, thus causing Hadad and his family to rise into power and influence, that he might give the greater trouble to Solomon.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

Verses 19, 20. Hadad found great favour in the sight of Pharaoh — God so disposing Pharaoh’s heart, that Hadad might be a scourge to Solomon for his impieties. Here Hadad married the sister of Tahpenes the queen, who bare him a son. Whom Tahpenes weaned in Pharaoh’s house — Having as great a fondness for the child, as the king had for his father; and kept the feast generally made at the weaning of a child. In all these things the providence of God was conspicuous, thus causing Hadad and his family to rise into power and influence, that he might give the greater trouble to Solomon.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

V. 21. Joab-Whom he feared as much as David himself. Own country-Whither accordingly he came; and was there, even from the beginning of Solomon’s reign. And it is probable, by the near relation which was between his wife and Solomon’s; and, by Pharaoh’s intercession, he obtained his kingdom with condition of subjection and tribute to be paid by him to Solomon; which condition he kept ‘till Solomon fell from God, and then began to be troublesome, and dangerous to his house and kingdom.

Verses 21, 22. Hadad said — Let me depart, that I may go to my own country — To Edom, which he hoped to recover, now that the great enemies of it, David and Joab, (whom he feared as much as David,) were dead, and Solomon was young. Thither he accordingly came; and was there even from the beginning of Solomon’s reign. And, it is probable, by the near relation which was between his wife and Solomon’s, and by Pharaoh’s intercession, he obtained his kingdom with condition of subjection and tribute to be paid by him to Solomon; which condition he kept till Solomon fell from God, and then began to be troublesome and dangerous to his house and kingdom.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

Verse 22. Let me go in any wise.] It does not appear that he avowed his real intention to Pharaoh; for at this time there must have been peace between Israel and Egypt, Solomon having married the daughter of Pharaoh.

Verses 21, 22. Hadad said — Let me depart, that I may go to my own country — To Edom, which he hoped to recover, now that the great enemies of it, David and Joab, (whom he feared as much as David,) were dead, and Solomon was young. Thither he accordingly came; and was there even from the beginning of Solomon’s reign. And, it is probable, by the near relation which was between his wife and Solomon’s, and by Pharaoh’s intercession, he obtained his kingdom with condition of subjection and tribute to be paid by him to Solomon; which condition he kept till Solomon fell from God, and then began to be troublesome and dangerous to his house and kingdom.

22. Let me go in any wise — Or, Send me by all means away. He was ambitious to recover the lost fortunes of his father’s house, and the luxurious ease of Egyptian court-life could not detain him. The sacred history does not give us the sequel of Hadad’s career; but Josephus, following the intimation of verse 25, and the Septuagint, or perhaps some older tradition, says that Pharaoh persuaded Hadad for a long time not to leave him; but when Solomon’s popularity began to decline, he permitted him to go, and Hadad at once went to Edom and tried to incite his countrymen to revolt from the Hebrew government. Failing in this, he joined himself to Rezon, whose hostility to Solomon is recorded verses 23-25.

V. 23. Who fled-When David had defeated him. Zobah-A part of Syria, between Damascus and Euphrates.

Verse 23. Rezon the son of Eliadah] Thus God fulfilled his threatening by the prophet Nathan: If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; 2 Samuel 7:14.

Verses 23, 24. Which fled from his lord Hadadezer — When David had defeated him. King of Zobah — A part of Syria, between Damascus and Euphrates. And he gathered men unto him — Some of those that fled when David defeated Hadadezer, 2 Samuel 10:18. And became captain over a band — Who listed themselves under him as their commander, with others, who readily joined them, and lived by robbery, as many Arabians did. And they went to Damascus — And took it while Solomon was wallowing in luxury: David had put a garrison into Damascus, and brought the people under tribute, 2 Samuel 8:5, 6; and so they probably continued during his life, and were subject to Solomon after his death, till that prince, doting upon strange women, minded not the defence of his conquests. This Rezon took advantage of, and invaded and got possession of Damascus, and reigned there, as Hadad did in Edom.

23. Rezon — What office or position under Hadadezer he held, to what particular part of his dominions he belonged, or what instigated his revolt from his lord, does not clearly appear. Possibly he belonged to that “border at the river Euphrates,” which revolted from the king of Zobah while he went to assist the Ammonites. See 2 Samuel 8:3; 10:6, and notes there.

V. 24. A band-Of soldiers, who fled upon that defeat, 2 Samuel 10:18, and others who readily joined them, and lived by robbery; as many Arabians did. Damascus-And took it, whilst Solomon was wallowing in luxury.

Verse 24. And reigned in Damascus.] Rezon was one of the captains of Hadadezer, whom David defeated. It seems that at this time Rezon escaped with his men; and; having lived, as is supposed, some time by plunder, he seized on Damascus, and reigned there till David took Damascus, when he subdued Syria, and drove out Rezon. But after Solomon’s defection from God, Rezon, finding that God had departed from Israel, recovered Damascus; and joining with Hadad, harassed Solomon during the remaining part of his reign. But some think that Hadad and Rezon were the same person.

Verses 23, 24. Which fled from his lord Hadadezer — When David had defeated him. King of Zobah — A part of Syria, between Damascus and Euphrates. And he gathered men unto him — Some of those that fled when David defeated Hadadezer, 2 Samuel 10:18. And became captain over a band — Who listed themselves under him as their commander, with others, who readily joined them, and lived by robbery, as many Arabians did. And they went to Damascus — And took it while Solomon was wallowing in luxury: David had put a garrison into Damascus, and brought the people under tribute, 2 Samuel 8:5, 6; and so they probably continued during his life, and were subject to Solomon after his death, till that prince, doting upon strange women, minded not the defence of his conquests. This Rezon took advantage of, and invaded and got possession of Damascus, and reigned there, as Hadad did in Edom.

24. He gathered men — Partly, perhaps, from among the fugitives that escaped the slaughter of David, and partly from disaffected portions of the kingdom. Went to Damascus — This was probably towards the close of David’s life, when the garrisons which were put in that section had become thinned or called away, and there was nothing at Damascus to raise any considerable opposition to Rezon and his band, and so he dwelt and reigned there.

V. 25. All adversity-He was a secret enemy, all that time; and when Solomon had forsaken God, he shewed himself openly. Beside-This infelicity was added to the former; whilst Hadad molested him in the south, Rezon threatened him in the north. But what hurt could Hadad or Rezon have done, to so powerful a king as Solomon, if he had not by sin made himself mean and weak? If God be on our side, we need not fear the greatest adversary. But if he be against us, he can make us fear the least: yea, the grasshopper shall be a burden. Syria-Over all that part of Syria, enlarging his empire the more, and thereby laying a foundation for much misery to Solomon’s kingdom.

Verse 25. He was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon — This, perhaps, is not to be understood of the whole reign of Solomon, which for the most part was peaceable, but of all the days which remained of his life, from the time that his wives publicly exercised their idolatry, unto the day of his death. Or, it may mean, that he was a secret enemy all that time, and when Solomon had forsaken God, he showed himself openly. Besides the mischief that Hadad did — This infelicity was added to the former; while Hadad molested him in the south, Rezon threatened him in the north. But what hurt could Hadad or Rezon have done to so powerful a king as Solomon, if he had not by sin made himself mean and weak? If God be on our side, we need not fear the greatest adversary; but if he be against us, he can make us fear the least; yea, the grasshopper shall be a burden. And reigned over Syria — Over all that part of Syria, enlarging his empire the more, and thereby laying a foundation for much misery to Solomon’s kingdom.

25. All the days of Solomon — Whence it appears that he must have established himself at Damascus before, or soon after, the death of David. In what particular way he acted the part of an adversary does not appear, but perhaps it was, as Josephus states, by making occasional incursions into the land of Israel. His hostility was probably not of sufficient magnitude to cause Solomon, a man who loved peace, and was constitutionally averse to war, to raise an army or make any great effort to oppose him; but his neglect to pay tribute, and his hostile attitude toward Israel, would naturally trouble Solomon with constant apprehension of danger; and once, at least, he led or sent an expedition against Hamath-zobah, (see 2 Chronicles 8:3,) perhaps to put down an insurrection started by this same Rezon. Besides the mischief that Hadad — Here there seems to be something wanting in the Hebrew text. To say, he was an adversary besides the mischief, etc., is, to say the least, a strange manner of expression. The Septuagint, Vulgate, Syriac, and Arabic versions also vary from the Hebrew. The Septuagint, reading taz instead of taw, has: This is the evil which Adar did. And this is probably the true reading, and may still be made out of the Hebrew text by a simple changing of the Masoretic punctuation, and substituting z for w. The meaning then will be, This same kind of mischief (incursions in the land of Israel like those of Rezon) wrought also Hadad. He, like Rezon, became captain of a band, and excited insurrections, and ravaged remote portions of Solomon’s empire. He abhorred Israel, and reigned over Syria — If the correction above proposed be the true reading of the original Hebrew text, then these sentences should be understood of Hadad and not of Rezon. This would confirm the account of Hadad given by Josephus, (see note on verse 22,) that failing to persuade the people of Edom to revolt from Solomon he joined himself to Rezon, and became, first, master of a company of men, and then ruler of a part of Syria. Instead of over Syria, the Septuagint, Syriac, and Arabic read over Edom.

Verse 26. Jeroboam the son of Nebat] From the context we learn that Jeroboam while a young man was employed by Solomon to superintend the improvements and buildings at Millo, and had so distinguished himself there by his industry and good conduct as to attract general notice, and to induce Solomon to set him over all the labourers employed in that work, belonging to the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, called here the house of Joseph. At first it appears that Solomon employed none of the Israelites in any drudgery; but it is likely that, as he grew profane, he grew tyrannical and oppressive: and at the works of Millo he changed his conduct; and there, in all probability, were the seeds of disaffection sown. And Jeroboam, being a clever and enterprising man, knew well how to avail himself of the general discontent.

Verses 26-28. Even he lifted up his hand against the king — Probably made some secret attempts to raise a dissatisfaction against Solomon; for we do not read of any open attempt. And this was the cause, &c. — This was the occasion of Jeroboam’s advancement, as it follows in the next verse. Solomon built Millo, &c. — Solomon, being engaged in many buildings, made choice of such as he judged were fit persons to oversee his works; among whom Jeroboam was one. A mighty man of valour — Of great courage and strength of body. Solomon seeing — that he was industrious — Very diligent in the business wherein he had employed him, of overlooking his works. He made him ruler, &c. — Set him over those of the tribe of Benjamin who were employed in carrying stones, &c., for Solomon’s buildings; or over the taxes and tributes which were to be collected of the house of Joseph, that is, of Ephraim and Manasseh, or of Ephraim only, termed here, as often elsewhere, the house of Joseph.

26. Jeroboam the son of Nebat — Here we are first introduced to that distinguished person who figures so prominently in the following history as the first king in the kingdom of Israel. Zereda — In Septuagint written Sarida, and Sarira; Vulgate, Sareda. It was somewhere in the tribe of Ephraim, but its exact locality has not been found. In the long addition to the Hebrew text which the Septuagint gives after 1 Kings 12:24, and which adds somewhat to the history of Jeroboam, Sarira is represented as the place in Mount Ephraim to which Jeroboam returned from Egypt; there he assembled the whole tribe (skhptron) of Ephraim, and there he built a fortress. May it not be the same as Tirzah? See 1 Kings 14:17. Lifted up his hand — A form of expression indicating sedition within the kingdom, a rebellion; rather than hostility from without, like the troubles occasioned by Rezon and Hadad.

Verses 26-28. Even he lifted up his hand against the king — Probably made some secret attempts to raise a dissatisfaction against Solomon; for we do not read of any open attempt. And this was the cause, &c. — This was the occasion of Jeroboam’s advancement, as it follows in the next verse. Solomon built Millo, &c. — Solomon, being engaged in many buildings, made choice of such as he judged were fit persons to oversee his works; among whom Jeroboam was one. A mighty man of valour — Of great courage and strength of body. Solomon seeing — that he was industrious — Very diligent in the business wherein he had employed him, of overlooking his works. He made him ruler, &c. — Set him over those of the tribe of Benjamin who were employed in carrying stones, &c., for Solomon’s buildings; or over the taxes and tributes which were to be collected of the house of Joseph, that is, of Ephraim and Manasseh, or of Ephraim only, termed here, as often elsewhere, the house of Joseph.

Ver. 27. Solomon built Millo, the fortress which commanded the temple, on an elevation adjoining the wall of the temple.

27. Breaches — Rents in the walls, made by time and storms. It was while Solomon was repairing the walls and fortifications of Jerusalem, as noticed in 1 Kings 9:15, (where see note,) that Jeroboam showed his superior abilities, and was promoted by the king. 28. A mighty man of valour — An able and efficient workman. Charge of the house of Joseph — That is, of the levy of men from the Ephraimites who were descendants of Joseph, and sometimes thus called by their father’s name. The charge or burden of this tribe here means the labour they were required to perform in building Millo and repairing the walls of the city. This tribe was of course called on for its quota of men in the levy which Solomon raised, (1 Kings 5:13; 9:15,) and Jeroboam was at first among the labourers — perhaps an under officer; but at length, on account of his marked ability, was made overseer of all the workmen of his tribe.

V. 28. Charge-The taxes and tributes.

Verses 26-28. Even he lifted up his hand against the king — Probably made some secret attempts to raise a dissatisfaction against Solomon; for we do not read of any open attempt. And this was the cause, &c. — This was the occasion of Jeroboam’s advancement, as it follows in the next verse. Solomon built Millo, &c. — Solomon, being engaged in many buildings, made choice of such as he judged were fit persons to oversee his works; among whom Jeroboam was one. A mighty man of valour — Of great courage and strength of body. Solomon seeing — that he was industrious — Very diligent in the business wherein he had employed him, of overlooking his works. He made him ruler, &c. — Set him over those of the tribe of Benjamin who were employed in carrying stones, &c., for Solomon’s buildings; or over the taxes and tributes which were to be collected of the house of Joseph, that is, of Ephraim and Manasseh, or of Ephraim only, termed here, as often elsewhere, the house of Joseph.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

V. 29. Went-Probably to execute his charge. Were alone-Having gone aside for private conference; for otherwise it is most likely that he had servants attending him, who, though they hear not the words, yet might see the action, and the rending of Jeroboam’s coat; and thus it came to Solomon’s ears, who being so wise, could easily understand the thing by what he heard of the action, especially when a prophet did it.

Verse 29. When Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem] On what errand he was going out of Jerusalem, we know not.

Ahijah the Shilonite] He was one of those who wrote the history of the reign of Solomon, as we find from 2 Chronicles 9:29, and it is supposed that it was by him God spake twice to Solomon; and particularly delivered the message which we find in this chapter, 1 Kings 11:11-13.

Verse 29. When Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem — Probably to execute his charge. The Prophet Ahijah found him — Met with him as he was going along. “Ahijah was a native of Shiloh, and one of those who wrote the annals of King Solomon’s reign, 2 Chronicles 9:29. And he is thought to have been the person who spake twice to Solomon from God, once while he was building the temple, (1 Kings 6:12,) and again when he fell into his irregularities,” verse 11. They two were alone in the field — Having gone aside for private conference; for otherwise Jeroboam’s servants, (it being most likely he had servants attending him,) if they heard not the words, might have seen the action of rending his coat, and thus the matter might have come to Solomon’s ears.

29. At that time — While he had charge of the Ephraimite labourers at Jerusalem. The prophet Ahijah — Here we meet with another representative of that interesting order of men, divine messengers, who appear so often and so prominently during the time of the Hebrew monarchy. Ahijah seems to have been to Jeroboam very much what Samuel was to Saul, and Nathan was to David. He too, probably, announced to Solomon the word of the Lord as recorded in verses 11-13. His two genuine and authentic prophecies, each of great importance to the kingdom of Israel, are recorded here, verses 29-39, and 1 Kings 14:6-16. The Shilonite — So called because he dwelt at Shiloh. 1 Kings 14:2, 4. It is, perhaps, significant that this prophet dwelt at Shiloh, the ancient seat, and up to the time of Samuel the centre, of the national worship. Thence the ark had been taken to its capture, “and the Philistines destroyed Shiloh with such hideous barbarity, that centuries afterwards the heart of the people shuddered at the very mention of the name. They never restored the place. Even Jeroboam, though of the tribe of Ephraim, never ventured to use, as a rival to Jerusalem, a site consecrated by so many centuries of worship.” — SMITH, Prophecy a Preparation for Christ. Ahijah’s oracles seem like a voice from that olden sacred past — the voice of the God of Joshua and of Eli — still proclaiming blessings on the obedient, and penal woes on them that forget his name. He… clad himself — That is, Ahijah, not Jeroboam, had clad himself. A new garment — Probably a mantle thrown over the shoulder, similar to that which Samuel used to wear, and which was once used in a like symbolical action, 1 Samuel 15:27. Some interpreters see in the newness of the garment a symbol of the Hebrew monarchy, as yet young and undivided. “Here,” observes Rawlinson, “we find the first instance of that mode of delivering a divine message which became so common in later times, and which has been called ‘acted parable.’”

Verses 30-32. And rent it in twelve pieces — An emblem of what he was to acquaint him with; or rather a prediction of it. For there were two ways, in those ancient times, of foretelling future events; one in express words, the other by signs and resemblances, many instances of which we have often after this of Ahijah. And will give ten tribes to thee — Hence it is generally called, the kingdom of the ten tribes. But he shall have one tribe — Besides his own. Or Benjamin and Judah may, be looked upon as but one tribe, both of them having a share in the city of Jerusalem, and lying near one another.

30. Twelve pieces — The numbers used in this symbolical prophecy have themselves a sacred symbolism; and yet, like all symbols, must not be supposed capable of being pressed into a relation to all possible aspects of the case to which they are made to refer. Thus “twelve” is a sacred number, (see supplementary note on Luke 6, at the end,) and the twelve pieces here represented the twelve tribes, though, counting the two sons of Joseph, there were actually thirteen. So, too, the ten pieces represented the revolting tribes, not altogether because exactly ten tribes revolted, for it is doubtful whether those on the east of the Jordan, and Simeon in the south, had much to do with the matter, but rather because “ten” is the number of totality, and indicated that substantially all Israel would fall away from Rehoboam, as is in fact asserted in 1 Kings 12:20. Then, further, the prophet does not follow out the matter as we might suppose by making the two remaining pieces represent Judah and Benjamin, but says that one tribe should cleave to the house of David, that is, only a single part of the sovereignty of Israel. But besides Judah, it seems that the tribe of Benjamin, and a part of Simeon, adhered to Rehoboam. 1 Kings 12:21; 19:3. But the symbolism was sufficiently exact for the prophetic purpose, and it made an announcement never to be forgotten.

Verse 31. Take thee ten pieces] The garment was the symbol of the kingdom of Israel; the twelve pieces the symbol of the twelve tribes; the ten pieces given to Jeroboam, of the ten tribes which should be given to him, and afterwards form the kingdom of Israel, ruling in Samaria, to distinguish it from the kingdom of Judah, ruling in Jerusalem.

Verses 30-32. And rent it in twelve pieces — An emblem of what he was to acquaint him with; or rather a prediction of it. For there were two ways, in those ancient times, of foretelling future events; one in express words, the other by signs and resemblances, many instances of which we have often after this of Ahijah. And will give ten tribes to thee — Hence it is generally called, the kingdom of the ten tribes. But he shall have one tribe — Besides his own. Or Benjamin and Judah may, be looked upon as but one tribe, both of them having a share in the city of Jerusalem, and lying near one another.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

Verses 30-32. And rent it in twelve pieces — An emblem of what he was to acquaint him with; or rather a prediction of it. For there were two ways, in those ancient times, of foretelling future events; one in express words, the other by signs and resemblances, many instances of which we have often after this of Ahijah. And will give ten tribes to thee — Hence it is generally called, the kingdom of the ten tribes. But he shall have one tribe — Besides his own. Or Benjamin and Judah may, be looked upon as but one tribe, both of them having a share in the city of Jerusalem, and lying near one another.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

Verse 34. I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hands — Solomon held even the ten tribes as long as he lived. But I will make him prince all the days of his life — This was an admonition to Jeroboam not to molest Solomon in his life-time, by raising a rebellion against him; and also to walk in God’s ways as David did, and not fall into idolatry; for which sin God resolved to punish Solomon so severely as to rend the greatest part of his kingdom from his posterity. For David my servant’s sake — Not for his own sake; he had forfeited his crown to the justice of God; but for his father’s sake. “Children that do not tread in their parents’ steps,” says Henry, “yet often fare the better in this world for their good parents’ piety.”

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

SOLOMON’S ADVERSARIES, 14-40.

Although Jehovah’s love and promise to David secured to Solomon for life the unity of his vast realm, yet would he not permit the idolatrous king, who turned so vilely from the God of his father, to hold an undisturbed career till the end of life, but inflicted penal judgment upon him by raising up three adversaries, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam, who during his later years gave him great trouble by disturbing the peace of his kingdom, and giving him sad premonition of the misfortunes that must befall his descendants.

14. Hadad the Edomite — Probably a grandson, or at least not a remote descendant, of the Hadad (or Hadar) of 1 Chronicles 1:50. The name seems to have been common among the kings of Edom. Compare Genesis 36:35. Of the king’s seed — A member of the royal family.

Verse 36. That David my servant may have a light alway] That his posterity may never fail, and the regal line never become extinct. This, as we have already seen, was in reference to the Messiah. He was not only David’s light, but he was a light to enlighten the Gentiles.

36. A light alway before me — That is, a son to sit on the throne, and like a lamp or candle shine through the future ages, an evidence of the sure mercies of David, and a typical Messianic prophecy. Compare 2 Samuel 7:16.

Verse 37. According to all that thy soul desireth] It appears from this that Jeroboam had affected the kingdom, and was seeking for an opportunity to seize on the government. God now tells him, by his prophet, what he shall have, and what he shall not have, in order to prevent him from attempting to seize on the whole kingdom, to the prejudice of the spiritual seed of David.

Verse 37. I will take thee — From the condition wherein thou art, and place thee on a throne, as here follows. Thou shalt reign according to all thy soul desireth — According to thy utmost wishes and desires. It appears from this that he was a very aspiring and ambitious man, fond of power and pre-eminence; and it is not unlikely but he might at this time be plotting against Solomon, and contriving to rise to the throne. The Jews say, that when he was employed by Solomon in repairing and building Millo, as the expenses attending the work were very great, he took opportunities of reflecting upon Solomon as oppressive to his people, and of suggesting that which he thought would alienate them from his government, and infuse a spirit of sedition and revolt. He complained heavily, especially to his brethren of the tribe of Ephraim, “of the hard labour to which they were forced to submit, and the taxes they were obliged to pay; and to represent the whole affair as a work of vanity, merely to gratify a proud foreign woman, and a silly, doting king; for Solomon filled up a part of the valley of Millo to build a palace for Pharaoh’s daughter. By these insinuations, it is thought, Jeroboam wrought in the people a disaffection to Solomon and his government.” See Calmet’s Dict. under the word MILLO.

37. According to all that thy soul desireth — From this we may infer that Jeroboam already had an eye to the throne, and his soul yearned for regal power. His office of ruler of the house of Joseph (verse 28) had begotten within him lofty aspirations.

Verse 38. And build thee a sure house] He would have continued his posterity on the throne of Israel, had he not by his wickedness forfeited the promises of God, and thrown himself out of the protection of the Most High.

Verse 38. If thou wilt hearken to all that I command thee, &c. — He is hereby given to understand, that the grant of the crown to him and his descendants will be conditional, and that he and they will be upon their good behaviour.

38. Build thee a sure house — Perpetuate thy posterity in regal powers.

V. 39. For this-For this cause, which I mentioned ver. 33. Not for ever-There shall a time come when the seed of David shall not be molested by the kingdom of Israel, but that kingdom shall be destroyed, and the kings of the house of David shall be uppermost, as it was in the days of Asa, Hezekiah and Judah. And at last the Messiah shall come, who shall unite together the broken sticks of Judah and Joseph, and rule over all the Jews and Gentiles too.

Verse 39. But not for ever.] They shall be in affliction and distress till the Messiah come, who shall sit on the throne of David to order it and establish it in judgment and justice for ever. Jarchi says, on this verse, “When the Messiah comes, the kingdom shall be restored to the house of David.”

Verse 39. I will for this — For Solomon’s sin, mentioned verse 33; afflict the seed of David — By rending the greatest part of the kingdom from them; but not for ever — A time shall come when the seed of David shall not be thus molested by the kingdom of Israel, but shall flourish again in great power and prosperity; which it did in many illustrious kings of Judah, who reigned in glory when Jeroboam’s family was extirpated. And at last the Messiah came, who united together the broken sticks of Judah and Joseph, and rules over Jews and Gentiles also.

39. But not for ever — Literally, only not all the days. Here breaks in another ray of promise to the house of David, whose sons, though chastened and smitten with the rod of men, (compare 2 Samuel 7:14,) were to be the human line of fathers to that Great Son, who “shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.” Luke 1:33. The Rabbins say: “When Messiah comes, the kingdom shall be restored to the house of David.”

V. 40. Solomon-To whose ears this had come. Shishak-Solomon’s brother-in-law, who yet might be jealous of him, or alienated from him, because he had taken so many other wives to his sister, might cast a greedy eye upon the great riches which Solomon had amassed together, and upon which, presently after Solomon’s death, he laid violent hands, 2 Chronicles 12:9.

Verse 40. Sought-to kill Jeroboam.] He thought by this means to prevent the punishment due to his crimes.

Unto Shishak king of Egypt] This is the first time we meet with the proper name of an Egyptian king, Pharaoh being the common name for all the sovereigns of that country. Some suppose that this Shishak was the Sesostris so renowned for his wars and his conquests. But it is likely that this king lived long before Solomon’s time.

Verse 40. Solomon sought therefore to kill Jeroboam — How Solomon came to know what was secretly transacted between Ahijah and Jeroboam alone, is a great question: perhaps the prophet made no scruple to report what he had delivered in the name of the Lord. Or, Jeroboam himself, being puffed up with the expectation of ascending the throne, could not conceal it, nor keep his own counsel, but told the matter to some of his confidants, who spread it abroad. But that Solomon should ever entertain a thought of endeavouring to defeat the purpose of God, is astonishing indeed! Jeroboam arose and fled — unto Shishak king of Egypt — Solomon’s brother-in-law, as is probable, who yet might be jealous of him, or alienated from him, because he had taken so many other wives to his sister; or might cast a greedy eye upon the great riches which Solomon had amassed together, and upon which, presently after Solomon’s death, he laid violent hands, 2 Chronicles 12:9. We may observe here that all the kings of Egypt, from the time of Abraham, are in the sacred history called by the name of Pharaoh, unless Rameses (mentioned Genesis 47.) be the name of a king, not of a country; so that this is the first we meet with called by his proper name, different from the rest of the Pharaohs. The opinion is pretty general that this was the great king, called by the Greeks Sesostris, who, having subdued Ethiopia, extended his conquests into Asia, as far as the Assyrians and Medes, as Josephus tells us, who calls him Sethosis.

Ver. 40. Solomon sought to kill Jeroboam, a brave but misguided man. This shows that when the glory of divine defence departed from Solomon, he lost his allies abroad, and all his friends at home. It is said that while Solomon almost destroyed the lower city to build the fortress of Millo, and make a grand ascent to the temple, and lay heavy imposts on the people, that Jeroboam opposed Solomon, and thereby incurred his high displeasure.

40. Solomon sought… to kill Jeroboam — He probably not only heard of Ahijah’s prophecy, but also saw in the youthful Ephraimite an insubordinate spirit and disposition to usurp his throne. Solomon’s relations to Jeroboam were strikingly similar to those of Saul to David. Solomon, like Saul, drew down upon himself by disobedience the anger of Heaven; and to him, as to Saul, the word of the Lord announced judgments that darkened all his future. Like Saul, he knew, and sought to kill, his rival. The beginning of his reign, like that of Saul’s, was popular and auspicious, but its end was sad and dark. But Jeroboam, unlike David, who would not lift up his hand against the Lord’s anointed, was ambitious to reign, and acted not with modesty and prudence towards his king. Shishak — This is the first instance in sacred history where the name of an Egyptian king is given as other than the common title Pharaoh, and it becomes therefore important in adjusting Egyptian and Hebrew chronology. The fact that he received and entertained the enemy and rival of Solomon clearly indicates that he was not the king whose daughter Solomon had married, (1 Kings 3:1,) and of this it is a noticeable confirmation that in Manetho’s table, where he is called Sesonchis, his name stands at the head of a new dynasty. On the Egyptian monuments his name is written Sheshonk. He was probably a usurper, who succeeded in dethroning the Pharaoh with whom Solomon had formed such a close alliance, and would therefore be no friend of Israel. See more at 1 Kings 14:25-28.

V. 41. The book-In the publick records, where the lives and actions of kings were registered from time to time, so this was only a political, not a sacred book.

Verse 41. The book of the acts of Solomon?] These acts were written by Nathan the prophet, Ahijah the Shilonite, and Iddo the seer; as we learn from 2 Chronicles 9:29. Probably from these were the Books of Kings and Chronicles composed; but the original documents are long since lost.

Verse 41. The rest of the acts of Solomon, &c. — It is probable that Solomon employed a chronologer, or historiographer, to write the annals of his reign, which public record is here termed, The book of the acts of Solomon. And out of these annals the sacred writer of this history took what he judged most useful, and omitted the rest, which he did not think so necessary to be related, or so instructive.

CLOSE OF SOLOMON’S HISTORY, 41-43.

41. The rest of the acts of Solomon — So this scriptural account of Solomon is professedly not a complete history. The writer only recorded such facts as served the purpose of sacred history, and plainly states that for fuller details his readers must look elsewhere. The same thing is true respecting many other parts of the sacred writings. How strange that some professed scholars have ignored this fact, and in their criticisms have assumed that the sacred writers recorded all they knew about the case in hand! The book of the acts of Solomon — The authorship and extent of this book cannot now be determined. It was probably a very full history of Solomon compiled from the public annals of the kingdom, and also from the works of contemporary prophets, like Nathan, Ahijah, and Iddo. See 2 Chronicles 9:29.

V. 42. Forty years-His reign was as long as his father’s, but not his life; sin shortened his days.

Verse 42. Solomon reigned-forty years.] Josephus says fourscore years, which is sufficiently absurd. Calmet supposes him to have been eighteen years old when he came to the throne, and that he died A.M. 3029, aged fifty-eight years; and, when we consider the excess in which he lived, and the criminal passions which he must have indulged among his thousand wives, and their idolatrous and impure worship, this life was as long as could be reasonably expected.

Verses 42, 43. The time that Solomon reigned — was forty years — His reign was as long as his father’s, but not his life: sin shortened his days. And Solomon slept with his fathers — This expression is promiscuously used concerning good and bad, and signifies only, that they died as their fathers did. And was buried in the city of David his father — Thus concludes the history of this great man; without any the least mention of his repentance, or of his bringing forth any of the proper fruits of repentance, such as pulling down the high places he had built for the worship of idols, and abandoning his idolatrous wives and concubines. Many Jews and Christians, however, think it extremely probable that he was awakened to a sense of his sin and misery by means of the message which God sent him, as recorded verse 11; and that he humbled himself before him, and became a true penitent from that time. They even judge that this is put out of dispute by the book of Ecclesiastes, written after his fall, as, they say, is evident, not only from the unanimous testimony of the Hebrew writers, but also from the whole strain of that book, which was manifestly composed long after he had finished all his works, and after he had liberally drunk of all sorts of sensual pleasures, and sadly experienced the bitter effects of the love of women. Now in this book he appears greatly to lament his own folly and madness, 1 Kings 7:25-28; 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, chap. 11:9, 10, and 12:13, 14. They think it probable, therefore, that as David wrote Psalm 51., so Solomon wrote this book, as a public testimony and profession of his repentance. On the other hand, many are of opinion, that the silence of the divine historian on this subject is an insuperable objection to all this, and that if he had truly repented, so considerable a circumstance of his life would not have been omitted, and that we should, at least, have been informed of his abolishing all the monuments of his idolatry, and those of his wives and concubines. Perhaps, as Dr. Dodd observes, “this is one of those questions which will for ever be a field of controversy, as we have no certain guide from the Scripture to direct us.” We may, however, safely conclude, that if Solomon did repent, yet as the sacred writer has not recorded that he did, but suffered the important circumstance to remain doubtful, he intended to leave a blot upon his memory, that all posterity might have before their eyes an awful example of human weakness, even in a man of the greatest endowments; and might learn thereby to watch and pray lest they should enter into temptation; and to beware of the beginnings and infatuations of vice, since even Solomon was not secure against its delusions; and, once unhappily immersed in it, perhaps, was never disengaged from it.

CLOSE OF SOLOMON’S HISTORY, 41-43.

41. The rest of the acts of Solomon — So this scriptural account of Solomon is professedly not a complete history. The writer only recorded such facts as served the purpose of sacred history, and plainly states that for fuller details his readers must look elsewhere. The same thing is true respecting many other parts of the sacred writings. How strange that some professed scholars have ignored this fact, and in their criticisms have assumed that the sacred writers recorded all they knew about the case in hand! The book of the acts of Solomon — The authorship and extent of this book cannot now be determined. It was probably a very full history of Solomon compiled from the public annals of the kingdom, and also from the works of contemporary prophets, like Nathan, Ahijah, and Iddo. See 2 Chronicles 9:29.

V. 43. Slept-This expression is promiscuously used concerning good and bad; and signifies only, that they died as their fathers did. But did he repent before he died? This seems to be put out of dispute by the book of Ecclesiastes; written after his fall; as is evident, not only from the unanimous testimony of the Hebrew writers, but also, from the whole strain of that book, which was written long after he had finished all his works, and after he had liberally drunk of all sorts of sensual pleasures, and sadly experienced the bitter effects of his love of women, Ecclesiastes 7:17, &c. which makes it more than probable, that as David writ Psalm 51:1-19. So Solomon wrote this book as a publick testimony and profession of his repentance.

Verse 43. Solomon slept with his fathers] He died in almost the flower of his age, and, it appears unregretted. His government was no blessing to Israel; and laid, by its exactions and oppressions, the foundation of that schism which was so fatal to the unhappy people of Israel and Judah, and was the most powerful procuring cause of the miseries which have fallen upon the Jewish people from that time until now.

I. IT may now be necessary to give a more distinct outline of the character of this king.

1. In his infancy and youth he had the high honour of being peculiarly loved by the Lord; and he had a name given him by the express authority of God himself, which to himself and others must ever call to remembrance this peculiar favour of the Most High.

There is little doubt that he was a most amiable youth, and his whole conduct appeared to justify the high expectations that were formed of him.

2. He ascended the Israelitish throne at a time the most favourable for the cultivation of those arts so necessary to the comfort and improvement of life. Among all the surrounding nations Israel had not one open enemy; there was neither adversary, nor evil occurrent, 1 Kings 5:4. He had rest on every side, and from the universal and profound peace which he enjoyed, the very important name Jedidiah, “beloved of the Lord” which was given him by Divine authority was changed to that of Solomon, the Peaceable, 2 Samuel 12:24, 25, which at once indicated the state of the country, and the character of his own mild, pacific mind.

3. To the dying charge of his pious father relative to the building a temple for the Lord, he paid the most punctual attention. He was fond of architecture, as we may learn from the account that is given of his numerous buildings and improvements; and yet it does not appear that he at all excelled in architectural knowledge. Hiram, the amiable king of Tyre, and his excellent workmen, were the grand directors and executors of the whole. By his public buildings he doubtless rendered Jerusalem highly respectable; but his passion for such works was not on the whole an advantage to his subjects, as it obliged him to have recourse to a burdensome system of taxation, which at first oppressed and exasperated his people, and ultimately led to the fatal separation of Israel and Judah.

4. That he improved the trade and commerce of his country is sufficiently evident: by his public buildings vast multitudes were employed; and knowledge in the most beneficial arts must have been greatly increased, and the spirit of industry highly cultivated.

Commerce does not appear to have been much regarded, if even known, in Israel, previously to the days of Solomon. The most celebrated maritime power then in the world was that of the Tyrians. With great address and prudence he availed himself of their experience and commercial knowledge, sent his ships in company with theirs to make long and dangerous but lucrative voyages, and, by getting their sailors aboard of his own vessels, gained possession of their nautical skill, and also a knowledge of those safe ports in which they harboured, and of the rich countries with which they traded. His friendly alliance with the king of Tyre was a source of advantage to Israel, and might have been much more so had it been prudently managed. But after the time of Solomon we find it scarcely mentioned, and therefore it does not appear that the Jews continued to follow a track which had been so successfully opened to them; their endless contentions, and the ruinous wars of the two kingdoms, paralyzed all their commercial exertions: till at length all the maritime skill which they had acquired from the expert and industrious Tyrians, dwindled down to the puny art of managing a few boats on the internal lakes of their own country. Had it not been for the destructive feuds that reigned between the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah, that country might have become one of the best and richest maritime powers of either Asia or Europe. Their situation was grand and commanding, but their execrable jealousies deprived them of its advantages, exposed them to the aggressions of their enemies, and finally brought them to ruin.

5. I have intimated that Solomon was truly pious in his youth; of this there can be no doubt; it was on this account that the Lord loved him, and his zeal in the cause of true religion, and high respect for the honour of God, are strong indications of such a frame of mind. Had we no other proof of this than his prayer for wisdom, and his prayer at the dedication of the temple, it would put the matter for ever beyond dispute, independently of the direct testimonies we have from God himself on the subject. He loved the worship and ordinances of God, and was a pattern to his subjects of the strictest attention to religious duties. He even exceeded the requisitions of the law in the multitude of his sacrifices, and was a careful observer of those annual festivals so necessary to preserve the memory of the principal facts of the Israelitish history, and those miraculous interventions of God in the behalf of that people.

6. There can be no doubt that Solomon possessed the knowledge of governing well; of the importance of this knowledge he was duly aware, and this was the wisdom that he so particularly sought from God. “I am,” said he, “but a little child; I know not how to go out or come in; and thy servant is in the midst of a great people that cannot be counted for multitude. Give therefore thy servant an understanding heart to judge thy people, and that I may discern between good and bad; for who is able to judge this thy so great a people? And the speech pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this thing;” 1 Kings 3:8-10. This wisdom he did receive from God; and he is here a pattern to all kings, who, as they are the vicegerents of the Lord, should earnestly seek that wisdom which is from above, that they may be able to know how to govern the people intrusted to their care; because, in every civil government, there are a multitude of things on which a king may be called to decide, concerning which neither the laws, nor the commonly received political maxims by which, in particular cases, the conduct of a governor is to be regulated, can give any specific direction.

7. But the wisdom of Solomon was not confined to the art of government, he appears to have possessed a universal knowledge. The sages of the East were particularly distinguished by their accurate knowledge of human nature, from which they derived innumerable maxims for the regulation of man in every part of his moral conduct, and in all the relations in which he could possibly be placed. Hence their vast profusion of maxims, proverbs, instructive fables, apologues, enigmas, &c.; great collections of which still remain locked up in the languages of Asia, particularly the Sanscrit, Arabic, and Persian; besides those which, by the industry of learned men, have been translated and published in the languages of Europe. Much of this kind appears in the books of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus in the Apocrypha, and in the very excellent collections of D’Herbelot, Visdelou, and Galand, in the Bibliotheque Orientale. That Solomon possessed this wisdom in a very high degree, the book of Proverbs bears ample testimony, leaving Ecclesiastes for the present out of the consideration.

8. As a poet, Solomon stands deservedly high, though of his one thousand and five poems not one, except the book of Canticles, remains. This ode alone, taken in a literary point of view, is sufficient to raise any man to a high degree of poetic fame. It is a most interesting drama, where what Racine terms the genie createur, the creative genius, every where appears; in which the imagery, which is always borrowed from nature, is impressive and sublime; the characters accurately distinguished and defined, the strongest passion, in its purest and most vigorous workings, elegantly portrayed; and in which allusions the most delicate, to transactions of the tenderest complexion, while sufficiently described to make them intelligible, are nevertheless hidden from the eye of the gross vulgar by a tissue as light as a gossamer covering. Such is the nature of this inimitable ode, which, had it not been perverted by weak but well designing men to purposes to which it can never legitimately apply, would have ranked with the highest productions of the Epithalamian kind that ever came from the pen of man. But alas! for this exquisite poem, its true sense has been perverted; it has been forced to speak a language that was never intended, a language far from being honourable to the cause which it was brought to support, and subversive of the unity and simplicity of the ode itself. By a forced mode of interpretation it has been hackneyed to death, and allegorized to destruction. It is now little read, owing to the injudicious manner in which it has been interpreted.

It was scarcely to be expected that the son of such a father should not, independently of inspiration, have caught a portion of the pure poetic fire. Though the spirit of poetry, strictly speaking, is not transmissible by ordinary generation, yet most celebrated poets have had poetical parents; but in many cases the talent has degenerated into that of music, and the spirit of poetry in the sire has become a mere musical instrument in the hands of the son. This however was not the case with the son of David, for though vastly inferior to his father in this gift, he had nevertheless the spirit and powers of a first-rate poet.

9. His knowledge in natural history must have been very extensive; it is said, “He spake of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall. He spake also of beasts, of fowls, of reptiles, and of fishes;” 1 Kings 4:33. All this knowledge has perished; his countrymen, the prophets excepted, were without taste, and took no pains to preserve what they did not relish. A man of such mental power and comprehension under the direction of Divine light must have spoken of things as they are. His doctrine therefore of generation and corruption, of nutrition, vegetation, production, aliments, tribes, classes, families, and habits, relative to the different subjects in botany, zoology, ornithology, entomology, and ichthyology, which are all evidently referred to here, must have been at once correct, instructive, and delightful. I have already lamented the labour it has cost our Rays, Tourneforts, Linnes, Buffons, Willoughbys, Swammerdams, and Bloschs, to regain those sciences which possibly were possessed in their highest degree by the Israelitish king, and which, alas! are all lost, except a few traces in the book of Ecclesiastes, if that work can be traced to so remote an age as that of Solomon.

10. As a moral philosopher the author of the book of Ecclesiastes occupies no mean rank. At present we may consider this work as a production of Solomon, though this is disputed, and the question shall be considered in its proper place. This book contains such a fund of wisdom, applied to the regulation of life, and all referred to the proper end, that it most deservedly occupies a high place in Biblical ethics, and deserves the closest attention of every reader.

11. The proofs of Solomon’s vast wisdom, as brought into practical effect, lie in a very small compass, because his history in the Bible is short, his own writings in general lost, and the annals of his reign, as compiled by Nathan the prophet, Ahijah the Shilonite, and Iddo the seer, long since perished. The decision between the two harlots is almost the only instance. Of his interesting interview with the queen of Sheba, and the discussions into which they entered, we have only the fact stated, without the least detail of particulars. Those who have read the Concessus of Harari, or the Heetopadesa, of Veeshnoo Sarma, will regret that the conversations of the wisest of men, with probably the most intelligent of women, should have been lost to the world, which may be reasonably concluded to have been as far superior to the excellent works above referred to, as they are beyond the maxims of Rochefoucault, and the sayings of Madame Maintenon.

12. The wisdom of the East has ever been celebrated; and if we may believe their own best writers, much of what they possess has been derived from Solomon. Encomiums of his wisdom are everywhere to be met with in the Asiatic writers; and his name is famous in every part of the East. Most of the oriental historians, poets, and philosophers, mention Soliman ben Daoud, “Solomon the son of David.” They relate that he ascended the throne of Israel at the death of his father, when he was only twelve years of age, and that God subjected to his government, not only men, but good and evil spirits, the fowls of the air, and the winds of heaven. They agree with the sacred writers in stating that he employed seven years in building the temple at Jerusalem.

Solomon’s seal, and Solomon’s ring, are highly celebrated by them, and to these they attribute a great variety of magical effects. They state that without his ring he had not the science of government; and having once lost it, he did not remount his throne for forty days, as being destitute of that wisdom without which he could not decide according to truth and equity. But these things are probably spoken allegorically by their oldest writers. Of the throne of this prince they speak in terms of the most profound admiration. I have met with the most minute description of its magnificence, its ivory, gold, and jewels, and an estimate of its cost in lacs of rupees! According to those writers it had 12,000 seats of gold on the right hand for patriarchs and prophets, and as many on the left for the doctors of the law, who assisted him in the distribution of justice. In various parts of the Koran Solomon is spoken of in terms of the highest respect, and is represented as a true believer; though, through the envy of demons, magic and sorcery were attributed to him. Mohammed speaks of this in the second surat of his Koran. The story, in sum, is this: The devils, by God’s permission, having tempted Solomon without success, made use of the following stratagem to blast his reputation: they wrote several books of magic, and hid them under his throne; and, after his death, told the chief men that if they wished to know by what means Solomon had obtained absolute dominion over men, genii, and the winds, they should dig under his throne. This they did, and found the aforesaid books full of impious superstitions. The better sort would not learn these incantations; but the common people did, and published them as the genuine works of Solomon. From this imputation the Koran justifies him, by saying, Solomon was not an unbeliever, surat 2. From the wonder-working signet and ring of the Asiatics came the Clavicle of Solomon, so celebrated among the Jewish rabbins, and the Christian occult philosophers; for such things found in Cornelius Agrippa, and such like writers, are not late inventions, but have descended from a very remote antiquity, as the Koran and the various commentators on it sufficiently prove. See Calmet and Sale. The oriental traditions concerning this prince have been embodied in the Soliman Nameh of Ferdusi, in Persian, and in the Soliman Nameh of Uscobi, in Turkish. D’Herbelot mentions one of these histories in Persian verse, containing 1571 couplets.

Indeed, the traditions concerning the wonderful knowledge of Solomon, which abound so much in the East, are at least an indirect proof that many things relative to this prince have been preserved among them which are not mentioned in our sacred books, but which they have blended so miserably with fables that it is impossible now to distinguish the precious from the vile.

Works attributed to Solomon have existed in different ages, from his time till the present. Eusebius states that Hezekiah, finding the Jews putting too much confidence in the books of Solomon, relative to cures and different occult arts, ordered them to be suppressed. Josephus positively says that Solomon did compose books of charms to cure diseases, and conjurations to expel demons, Antiq., lib. viii., cap. 2. He states farther, that a Jew named Eliezar cured several demoniacs in the presence of Vespasian, by reciting the charms which had been invented by Solomon. R. D. Kimchi speaks of a book of Solomon entitled The Cure of Diseases, which Genebrard supposes to be the same work of which Josephus speaks. And Origen speaks of conjurations which were used by the Jews in his time, and which they professed to derive from the books of Solomon. There are still extant books of this kind attributed to Solomon, such as The Enchantments, The Clavicle, The Ring, The Hygromantia, The New Moons, and The Shadows of Ideas; but these, as they now stand, are the inventions of quacks and impostors, and entitled to no regard. If there were any books containing the wisdom of Solomon, they are either irrecoverably lost, or exist in mutilated fragments among the Asiatic sages; and are disfigured by being connected with improbable tales, and pretended mantras or charms.

II. Hitherto we have looked only at the bright side of Solomon’s character: we must now take a much less satisfactory view of this singular man; one in whom every thing great, glorious, wise, and holy, and every thing little, mean, foolish and impious, predominated by turns. He forsook the God of his mercies in a great variety of ways.

1. Whatever may be thought of the step in a political point of view, he most assuredly went out of the way of God’s providence, and acted contrary to his law, in making affinity with Pharaoh’s daughter. The sacred writers frequently refer to this; and it is never mentioned with approbation: it is rather associated with circumstances that place it in a reprehensible point of view. She was doubtless an idolater; and the question of her becoming a proselyte is far from being satisfactorily settled. I believe she was the first means of drawing off his heart from the true God.

2. His expensive buildings obliging him to have recourse to a system of oppressive taxation, was another flaw in his character. Though with great zeal and honourable industry, and at great expense, he built a temple for the Lord, which he completed in seven years, yet the expense here was little in comparison of what was incurred by his own house, called the house of the forest of Lebanon, in which he spent incredible sums, and consumed nearly thirteen years; almost twice the time employed in building the temple at Jerusalem. This would have had no evil operation provided he had not been obliged to impose heavy taxes on his subjects, which produced an almost universal disaffection. Add to this, he had a most expensive household; one thousand women, part wives, part mistresses, would require immense riches to support their pomp and gratify their ambition. The people therefore justly complained of an establishment which, notwithstanding the riches brought into the country, must be both odious and oppressive.

3. He began his reign by an inauspicious act, the death of his brother Adonijah. This was a sin against God and nature: and no art of man can ever wash out its guilt. If state policy required it, which is very questionable, what had that to do with the feelings of humanity, and the love of God? On no pretence whatever is Solomon justified in this act.

4. His inordinate love of women. He had no doubt formed matrimonial alliances with all kingdoms and neighbouring states, by taking their sisters and daughters to be his wives, to the fearful amount of no less than seven hundred! Politicians may endeavour to justify these acts by asserting, that in the Asiatic countries they were matters of a sound policy, rather than an argument of the prevalence of an irregular and unbridled passion. Let this stand for its value; but what can such apologists say for the additional three hundred concubines, for the taking of whom no such necessity can be pleaded? But even allowing that state policy might require such extensive alliances, what are we to say to the flagrant breaches of a most positive law of God? Most solemnly and most authoritatively had he said that his people should not give their daughters to the heathen, nor take the daughters of the heathen to be their wives; lest they should turn their hearts away from serving the Lord. In the face of this most positive declaration, Solomon took wives of the most idolatrous of the surrounding nations; who succeeded, according to what was foretold in turning his heart away from God.

5. He became an idolater. He worshipped “Ashtaroth, the Venus of the Sidonians; Milcom, the abomination of the Ammonites; Chemosh, the abomination of the Moabites; and Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon.” He did more: he built a temple to each of these; “and to all the gods of all his strange wives which burned incense, and sacrificed unto their gods,” 1 Kings 11:5-8.

6. By this time we may suppose that the light of God had entirely departed from his mind. He who knew so well the true God, now served him not; or, if he did, it was in conjunction with those idols, thus bringing the Supreme Being on a level with demons, or the figments of impure hearts and disordered fancies. We need not wonder at the tale of the mighty Samson betraying his life’s secret in the lap of Delilah; or of the unconquerable Hercules handling the distaff among the maids of Omphale, queen of Lydia; when we see the son of David, the once well-beloved of the Lord, the wisest of human beings, for the love of his millenary of wives and concubines, erecting temples to devils, and burning incense to them that were no gods; not considering that an idol is nothing in the world. To what an indescribable state of blindness and fatuity must this man have been brought, before he could have been capable of such acts as these! O Lucifer, son of the morning, how art thou fallen!

7. I have already hinted that Solomon’s oppressive taxation laid the foundation of that discontent which shortly after his death produced the separation of Israel and Judah; also the long and ruinous wars which drenched these states in blood: and this was doubtless the cause that ten-twelfths of the Jewish people became idolaters; which crime was punished, by the just judgments of God, by the Babylonish captivity, which lasted seventy years; and by the carrying away of the ten Israelitish tribes by the Assyrians, who are lost from the map of the universe, and no longer numbered among the children of men!

8. What greatly aggravates the whole of this most dismal tale is, that this strange defection from God, truth, reason, and common sense, was persisted in to his old age; or that in his old age, meaning undoubtedly his latter days, his wives turned away his heart from God. But his idolatry must have been of many years’ standing; he meddled with it in his connection with the princes of Egypt; each of his idolatrous wives in succession increased the propensity: to chastise him for this very idolatry the Lord stirred up an adversary unto him, Hadad, the Edomite, and Rezon, the son of Eliadah, who was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon, 1 Kings 11:14-25, which surely intimates that this idolatry was not the sin merely of his old age; as to chastise him for it Rezon was an adversary to Israel all his days. And as Solomon reigned forty years, we may fairly presume that a principal part of that time was spent in idolatrous practices.

9. This dismal account has a more dismal close still; for, in the same place in which we are informed of his apostasy, we are informed of his death, without the slightest intimation that he ever repented and turned to God. It is true that what is wanting in fact is supplied by conjecture; for it is firmly believed that “he did repent, and wrote the book of Ecclesiastes after his conversion, which is a decided proof of his repentance.” I am sorry I cannot strengthen this opinion; of which I find not the shadow of a proof.

1. The book of Ecclesiastes, though it speaks much of the vanity of the creatures, yet speaks little or nothing of the vanity or sin of idolatry. 2. It is not the language of a man who was recovering from a state of the most awful backsliding. Is there any direct confession of sin in it? Is there any thing in it like the penitential confessions of his father, or like the lamentations of Jeremiah? Is there any where to be heard in it the sighing of a broken heart, or strong crying and tears to deprecate the justice and implore the mercy of a deeply offended God? Does it any where exhibit the language of a penitent, or expressions suitable to the state and circumstances of this supposed penitent king of Israel? Excellent as it is in its kind, is it any thing more than a valuable collection of experimental ethics, relative to the emptiness of the creature, and the folly of earthly pursuits and worldly anxieties? 3. Nor is it even past doubt that Solomon wrote this book: it certainly does in several places bear evidences of times posterior to those of Solomon. Eminent scholars have discerned a deterioration in the style from the pure classical Hebrew, with an admixture of exotic terms that did not exist in the Hebrew language previously to the Babylonish captivity. But supposing that they are mistaken here, I still contend that it is not the language of a penitent soul. 4. It has been supposed, that, as Solomon was a type of Christ, it is not likely that he has finally perished. To this I answer, (1.) I know not that Solomon was a type of Christ. The reference to Song of Solomon 3:7; 8:11, 12, is to me no proof whatever of the point. (2.) Were it even otherwise, this would be no proof of his repentance, when the Scriptures are silent on the subject. The brazen serpent was a type of Christ, John 3:14, and was held in great veneration for a considerable time among the Jews; but when it became an incitement to idolatry, it was called nehushtan, a brazen trifle, taken down, and destroyed; 2 Kings 18:4. Typical persons and typical things may perish as well as others; the antitype alone will infallibly remain. 5. Finally, there seems every evidence that he died in his sins. His crimes were greatly aggravated: he forsook the Lord, who had appeared to him twice; his wives turned away his heart in his old age: there is not a single testimony in the Old or New Testament that intimates he died in a safe state. That awful denunciation of Divine justice stands point blank in the way of all contrary suppositions: “If thou forsake the Lord, he will cast thee off for ever,” 1 Chronicles 28:9. He did forsake the Lord; and he forsook him in his very last days; and there is no evidence that he ever again clave to him. Ergo,

Reader, let him that standeth take heed lest he fall; not only foully but finally. Certainly, unconditional final perseverance will find little support in the case of Solomon. He was once most incontrovertibly in grace. He lost that grace and sinned most grievously against God. He was found in this state in his old age. He died, as far as the Scripture informs us, without repentance. Even the doubtfulness in which the bare letter of the Scripture leaves the eternal state of this man, is a blast of lightning to the syren song of “Once in grace, and still in grace;” “Once a child, and a child for ever.” I shall close these observations with the account given by Abul Farage, an Arabic writer of the thirteenth century, in his work entitled The History of the Dynasties, p. 55. “But in this Solomon transgressed, because towards the end of his life he took other women of foreign nations besides the daughter of Pharaoh; nations with whom God had forbidden the children of Israel to form matrimonial alliances; but leaning towards their gods, he worshipped their idols. In the thirty-fourth year of his reign he built a house for idols in the mount which is opposite to Jerusalem; and the length of it was one hundred cubits, its breadth fifty, and its height thirty. He made also for himself golden shields, and a brazen sea, supported on the horns of brazen oxen. God reproved him for his infidelity, and gave him for punishment in this world that he took away from his son the greater part of the kingdom. Moreover, the duration of his reign was forty years; [Arabic] and he died without repentance, and was buried in the sepulchre of his father David.”

For other particulars relative to the different transactions of this reign, the reader is referred to the notes in the order of their occurrence; and to those treatises which have been written on the probability that Solomon did or did not repent of his idolatry: and also to the notes on Ecclesiastes, where the subject will be again reviewed.

I KINGS

Verses 42, 43. The time that Solomon reigned — was forty years — His reign was as long as his father’s, but not his life: sin shortened his days. And Solomon slept with his fathers — This expression is promiscuously used concerning good and bad, and signifies only, that they died as their fathers did. And was buried in the city of David his father — Thus concludes the history of this great man; without any the least mention of his repentance, or of his bringing forth any of the proper fruits of repentance, such as pulling down the high places he had built for the worship of idols, and abandoning his idolatrous wives and concubines. Many Jews and Christians, however, think it extremely probable that he was awakened to a sense of his sin and misery by means of the message which God sent him, as recorded verse 11; and that he humbled himself before him, and became a true penitent from that time. They even judge that this is put out of dispute by the book of Ecclesiastes, written after his fall, as, they say, is evident, not only from the unanimous testimony of the Hebrew writers, but also from the whole strain of that book, which was manifestly composed long after he had finished all his works, and after he had liberally drunk of all sorts of sensual pleasures, and sadly experienced the bitter effects of the love of women. Now in this book he appears greatly to lament his own folly and madness, 1 Kings 7:25-28; 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, chap. 11:9, 10, and 12:13, 14. They think it probable, therefore, that as David wrote Psalm 51., so Solomon wrote this book, as a public testimony and profession of his repentance. On the other hand, many are of opinion, that the silence of the divine historian on this subject is an insuperable objection to all this, and that if he had truly repented, so considerable a circumstance of his life would not have been omitted, and that we should, at least, have been informed of his abolishing all the monuments of his idolatry, and those of his wives and concubines. Perhaps, as Dr. Dodd observes, “this is one of those questions which will for ever be a field of controversy, as we have no certain guide from the Scripture to direct us.” We may, however, safely conclude, that if Solomon did repent, yet as the sacred writer has not recorded that he did, but suffered the important circumstance to remain doubtful, he intended to leave a blot upon his memory, that all posterity might have before their eyes an awful example of human weakness, even in a man of the greatest endowments; and might learn thereby to watch and pray lest they should enter into temptation; and to beware of the beginnings and infatuations of vice, since even Solomon was not secure against its delusions; and, once unhappily immersed in it, perhaps, was never disengaged from it.

43. Was buried in the city of David — See note on 1 Kings 2:10. The precedent of burying David in the holy city was followed in the burial of his descendants. Compare 1 Kings 14:31; 15:8, etc. Rehoboam his son — Apparently his only son. He was forty-one years old at the beginning of his reign, so he must have been born the year before Solomon’s enthronement. His mother was Naamah, an Ammonitess, who probably died before Solomon’s marriage with Pharaoh’s daughter. Compare 1 Kings 14:21. “Many a poor man,” says Hall, “hath a houseful of children by one wife, whereas this great king hath only one son by many housefuls of wives.”

Stanley says, “As Bacon is in English history ‘the wisest, greatest, meanest of mankind,’ so is Solomon in Jewish and in sacred history.” His character, as drawn in the Scriptures, is surely many-sided. The simple, unpretending child; the darling of Jehovah, (2 Samuel 12:25;) the chosen king; the seeker after wisdom, choosing her above all other things; the wise and sagacious judge; the powerful ruler and glorious sovereign, surpassing in many ways all the kings of the nations round about him; his navies traversing many a sea, and kings and princes from afar bringing and laying at his feet their gifts. But in his old age a despot, (1 Kings 12:4,) a polygamist, and an idolater. These last were doubtless the immediate causes of his own decline, and of the subsequent misfortunes of the nation. In his reign the Israelitish monarchy reached the highest pitch of worldly splendour, the memory of which is still preserved in many an Oriental legend and tradition. But that very splendour seemed to pervert the nation’s heart, and cause the cloud of Jehovah’s glory to depart from his people and his holy habitation. The outer splendour of his court and empire, the magnificence of his buildings, and his commerce with foreign nations, were, perhaps, not in themselves wrong. They might have been made the means of leading other nations to the knowledge of the one true God. But they were fraught with danger. Worldly glory has ever had the tendency to take away the heart from the pure and the good rather than to win it to the worship of God. So it was with Solomon, and so it ever has been. “How hardly shall a rich man enter the kingdom of God!” The thing is not impossible with God; but the dangers of wealth and worldly splendour far surpass their probable advantages to their possessor. And so the Church, whenever she has sought to increase her strength by a showing of worldly forces, has become shorn of her spiritual power. Viewed from the theocratic standpoint, Solomon’s reign was a grand failure. It corresponded largely with the sad failure of Saul, the first king of Israel. Saul’s misfortunes, however, were largely owing to his incapacity for government, as well as to moral obliquity. He was unequal to the exigencies of his age, and the task of successfully moulding into a monarchy the nation so long ruled by judges exceeded his powers. But with Solomon there was no lack of ability. His wisdom, sagacity, and power were equal to any possible emergency. But his grievous sins and neglect of God’s law brought on his ruin. His greatness and glory weaned his heart from God, and his wives led him into idolatry. Speculation as to his probable repentance and final salvation is idle and fruitless, and will always be governed by preconceived opinions. The sacred writers pass it over in utter silence, and give no shadow of intimation that he ever turned from his idolatry. The assumption that he repented of his sins, and afterwards composed the Book of Ecclesiastes as a record of his sad but profound experiences, is destitute of any valid or controlling proof; and the authorship of Ecclesiastes is altogether a matter of uncertainty. A mighty shadow clouds his latter days; and there, in Holy Writ, he stands depicted; one part of his life and character in strangest contrast with the other — the grandest and saddest personage of sacred history.