1 Kings · Chapter 3

V. 1. Pharaoh-As being a powerful neighbour, whose daughter doubtless was first instructed in, and proselyted to the Jewish religion. It seems, this was designed by God to be a type of Christ, calling his church to himself, and to the true religion, not only out of the Jews, but even out of the Gentile world. City of David-Into David’s palace there. The wall-Which though in some sort built by David, yet Solomon is here said to build, either because he made it higher, and stronger, in which sense Nebuchadnezzar is said to have built Babylon, Daniel 4:30, or because he built another wall besides the former, for after this time Jerusalem was encompassed with more walls than one.

Verse 1. Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh] This was no doubt a political measure in order to strengthen his kingdom, and on the same ground he continued his alliance with the king of Tyre; and these were among the most powerful of his neighbours. But should political considerations prevail over express laws of God? God had strictly forbidden his people to form alliances with heathenish women, lest they should lead their hearts away from him into idolatry. Let us hear the law: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son; for they will turn away thy son from following me, &c. Exodus 34:16; Deuteronomy 7:3, 4. Now Solomon acted in direct opposition to these laws; and perhaps in this alliance were sown those seeds of apostacy from God and goodness in which he so long lived, and in which he so awfully died.

Those who are, at all hazards, his determinate apologists, assume, 1. That Pharaoh’s daughter must have been a proselyte to the Jewish religion, else Solomon would not have married her. 2. That God was not displeased with this match. 3. That the book of Canticles, which is supposed to have been his epithalamium, would not have found a place in the sacred canon had the spouse, whom it all along celebrates, been at that time an idolatress. 4. That it is certain we nowhere in Scripture find Solomon blamed for this match. See Dodd.

Now to all this I answer, 1. We have no evidence that the daughter of Pharaoh was a proselyte, no more than that her father was a true believer. It is no more likely that he sought a proselyte here than that he sought them among the Moabites, Hittites, &c., from whom he took many wives.

2. If God’s law be positively against such matches, he could not possibly be pleased with this breach of it in Solomon; but his law is positively against them, therefore he was not pleased. 3. That the book of Canticles being found in the sacred canon is, according to some critics, neither a proof that the marriage pleased God, nor that the book was written by Divine inspiration; much less that it celebrates the love between Christ and his Church, or is at all profitable for doctrine, for reproof, or for edification in righteousness. 4. That Solomon is most expressly reproved in Scripture for this very match, is to me very evident from the following passages: DID NOT SOLOMON, king of Israel, SIN by these things? Yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel; nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin; Nehemiah 13:26. Now it is certain that Pharaoh’s daughter was an outlandish woman; and although it be not expressly said that Pharaoh’s daughter is here intended, yet there is all reasonable evidence that she is included; and, indeed, the words seem to intimate that she is especially referred to. In 1 Kings 3:3 it is said, Solomon LOVED THE LORD, walking in the statutes of David; and Nehemiah says, Did not Solomon, king of Israel, SIN BY THESE THINGS, who WAS BELOVED of HIS GOD; referring, most probably, to this early part of Solomon’s history. But supposing that this is not sufficient evidence that this match is spoken against in Scripture, let us turn to 1 Kings 11:1, 2, of this book, where the cause of Solomon’s apostasy is assigned; and there we read, But King Solomon loved many STRANGE WOMEN, TOGETHER WITH THE DAUGHTER OF PHARAOH, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites: of the nations concerning which the Lord said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in unto them; neither shall they come in unto you; for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: SOLOMON CLAVE UNTO THESE IN LOVE. Here the marriage with Pharaoh’s daughter is classed most positively with the most exceptionable of his matrimonial and concubinal alliances: as it no doubt had its predisposing share in an apostacy the most unprecedented and disgraceful.

Should I even be singular, I cannot help thinking that the reign of Solomon began rather inauspiciously: even a brother’s blood must be shed to cause him to sit securely on his throne, and a most reprehensible alliance, the forerunner of many others of a similar nature, was formed for the same purpose. But we must ever be careful to distinguish between what God has commanded to be done, and what was done through the vile passions and foolish jealousies of men. Solomon had many advantages, and no man ever made a worse use of them.

Verse 1. Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh — As being a powerful neighbour. And took Pharaoh’s daughter — To wife, which was not unlawful, if she was first instructed in, and made a proselyte to, the Jewish religion, as, in all probability, she was. For Solomon was not yet fallen from God, but loved the Lord, and walked in the statutes of David, (verse 3,) and therefore would not have married a gross idolater, which would have been directly contrary to God’s law, and most pernicious in its consequences. It is true he afterward loved many strange women, and the wives he married alienated his heart from Jehovah, and drew him in to worship strange gods: but the gods of the Egyptians are not reckoned among them, nor does it appear that Pharaoh’s daughter was one of the wives whose example or conversation had such a pernicious influence. On the contrary, it is likely she was a worshipper of the true God, and that Solomon’s taking her to wife was designed by God to be a type of Christ calling his church to himself and to the true religion, not only from among the Jews, but even out of the Gentile world. This, it is thought, plainly appears from the forty-fifth Psalm, and the book of Canticles. And brought her into the city of David — Into David’s palace there. Until he had made an end of building the house of the Lord — The temple designed for the worship and honour of God. And the wall of Jerusalem round about — Which, though in some sort built by David, yet Solomon is here said to build, either because he made it higher and stronger, in which sense Nebuchadnezzar is said to have built Babylon, (Daniel 4:30,) or because he built another wall besides the former, for after this time Jerusalem was encompassed with more walls than one.

Verse 1. Solomon—took Pharaoh’s daughter. It would appear from the 45th Psalm, which the rabbins with one consent affirm, was the nuptial ode for this marriage, that David had made arrangements for it prior to his demise. The law, Deuteronomy 7:3, it is thought did not bear on this point, but against marriages with the Canaanites.

SOLOMON’S AFFINITY WITH EGYPT, 1.

1. Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh — This seems to have been his first act of foreign policy, and was, perhaps, designed to counteract the influence of Hadad the Edomite, who had fled to Egypt during David’s reign, and was now securely housed in the royal family. See 1 Kings 11:14-22. Every thing in the history of Hadad naturally conspired to make him a settled enemy of the kingdom of Israel; and, perhaps, at a later period, he had a hand with Jeroboam in planning the revolt of the ten tribes of Israel. Solomon, doubtless, expected to strengthen his kingdom by this affinity with Egypt, and to prevent invasion from that quarter. It was the first intercourse between these nations since the time of the Exodus, and the first of those foreign alliances which brought the Israelites into disastrous intimacy with the heathen powers. Its immediate effect was probably favourable to Solomon by increasing his fame and comparative importance among the nations, and adding to his dominions, (1 Kings 9:16,) but it resulted in a commerce forbidden by the law, (1 Kings 10:26-29,) and thus involved the Israelitish kingdom in numerous evils. The Pharaoh here named is by Winer and Ewald identified with Psousennes, the last king (in Manetho’s table) of the twenty-first dynasty; called also the Tanite dynasty from the city Tanis, the scriptural Zoan, which was then the place of the royal residence. Took Pharaoh’s daughter — According to the letter of the law only marriage with the Canaanitish tribes was forbidden, (Exodus 34:16,) and intermarriage with nations outside of Canaan was not only not prohibited but tolerated in the examples, never rebuked, of Joseph’s marriage with the daughter of an Egyptian priest, (Genesis 41:45;) of Moses’s marriage with a daughter of Midian, (Exodus 2:21,) and that of Boaz and Ruth. But though the law did not forbid these marriages, they were not in harmony with its spirit; and it was by foreign marriages that Solomon’s heart was seduced from the worship of Jehovah. See note on 1 Kings 11:1. The city of David — This was built upon Mount Zion, the Jebusite stronghold, and has been identified for centuries with the southwestern hill of the modern city — “the upper city” of Josephus. See notes on 2 Samuel 5:6, 7, and compare Josephus, Wars, 5:4, 1. But recently this locality of Zion has been called in question. Thrupp, Fergusson, and Rawlinson identify Zion with Moriah, and so locate “the city of David” on the eastern, or temple, mountain. The chief reasons for this identification are: 1.) That in many passages Zion is distinguished from Jerusalem. For example, 2 Kings 19:31; Psalm 51:18; Joel 3:16; Zechariah 1:17. These passages, however, are all poetic parallelisms, and Zion may be distinguished from the rest of the city as being its most conspicuous feature. 2.) The passages which speak of Zion as the “holy hill,” or chosen seat of Jehovah, are thought applicable only to the temple mountain: (Psalm 2:6; 132:13; Isaiah 60:14; Jeremiah 31:6; Joel 3:17, 21; Zechariah 8:3:) but on whichever mountain “the city of David’’ was built, it was consecrated by the ark of God before the temple was erected, and so would ever be celebrated as “chosen” and “holy.” Afterwards the ark was transferred from the city of David to the temple. Compare 2 Samuel 6:16; 1 Kings 8:1. 3.) Some passages in 1 Maccabees (4:37, 60; 7:33) seem to identify Zion with the temple mount, as, “they went up to Mount Zion and saw the sanctuary desolate, and the altar profaned.” But all this may have been seen from the modern Zion, as one looked across the valley; and Zion may also be used in the wider sense of Jerusalem. 4.) Finally, Psalm 48:2 is thought to be decisive against the modern Zion, which is the most southern extremity of the city. But it may well be asked, in reply, what more beauty of situation or elevation has Moriah than the modern Zion “on the sides of the north?” The passage is very properly rendered by Gesenius thus: “Beautiful in its elevation, the joy of the whole earth, is Mount Zion; (the joy) of the remotest north is the city of the Great King.” But if we retain the rendering “sides of the north,” we may either understand the reference to its appearance as being immediately north of the border of Judah, (Joshua 15:8,) or, as Alexander suggests, “As it rose upon the view of the army returning from the south.” From whatever quarter viewed, the modern Zion is more noticeable for its elevation than Moriah. Until more conclusive evidences are adduced to overthrow the ancient tradition, we therefore prefer to locate the city of David on the southwestern hill, “the upper city,” which, elevated so conspicuously above the neighbouring heights, would be most naturally fixed upon by the Jebusites as their stronghold, or castle. Subsequently Solomon removed his Egyptian wife “out of the city of David” to his own palace, (1 Kings 9:24; 2 Chronicles 8:11,) which seems to have been built upon the southern slope of Moriah. See note at the beginning of chap. 7. Until… his own house — He had no appropriate palace of his own as yet, and he esteemed the palace of David, where the ark had been brought, too holy for the residence of a foreign princess. See 2 Chronicles 8:11. Whence it appears that Pharaoh’s daughter must have dwelt for many years, not in the royal house, as Thenius thinks, but in some private residence upon Mount Zion, somewhat apart from the more sacred places. House of the Lord — The temple. The wall of Jerusalem — This, though strongly fortified by David, (2 Samuel 5:9,) was greatly enlarged and strengthened by Solomon. See 1 Kings 9:15; 11:27.

V. 2. Only-This particle is used here, and ver. 3, as an exception to Solomon’s integrity and as a blemish to his government, That he himself both permitted and practised this which was expressly forbidden, Leviticus 17:3,4 Deuteronomy 12:13,14. High places-Which were groves, or other convenient places upon hills, in which the patriarchs used to offer up their sacrifices to God; and from them this custom was derived both to the Gentiles and the Jews: and in them the Gentiles sacrificed to idols, the Hebrews to the true God. Because, &c.-Which reason was not sufficient, for there was a tabernacle, to which they were as much confined as to the temple, Exodus 40:34-38, &c.

Verse 2. The people sacrificed in high places] Could there be any sin in this, or was it unlawful till after the temple was built? for prophets, judges, the kings which preceded Solomon, and Solomon himself, sacrificed on high places, such as Gibeon, Gilgal, Shiloh, Hebron, Kirjath-jearim, &c. But after the temple was erected, it was sinful to offer sacrifices in any other place; yet here it is introduced as being morally wrong, and it is introduced, 1 Kings 3:3, as being an exceptionable trait in the character of Solomon. The explanation appears to be this: as the ark and tabernacle were still in being, it was not right to offer sacrifices but where they were; and wherever they were, whether on a high place or a plain, there sacrifices might be lawfully offered, previously to the building of the temple. And the tabernacle was now at Gibeon, 2 Chronicles 1:3. Possibly the high places may be like those among the Hindoos, large raised-up terraces, on which they place their gods when they bathe, anoint, and worship them. Juggernaut and Krishnu have large terraces or high places, on which they are annually exhibited. But there was no idol in the above case.

Verse 2. Only the people sacrificed in high places — Which were groves, or other convenient places upon hills. In such places the patriarchs had been wont to offer up their worship, and sacrifices to God; and from them this custom was derived both to the Gentiles and the Jews; and in them the Gentiles sacrificed to idols, and the Hebrews to the true God. But this custom was expressly forbidden by God to his people, except in some extraordinary cases, and they were commanded to offer their sacrifices and other oblations only in the place which the Lord should choose, and where his tabernacle, altar, and ark should be, Leviticus 17:3-5; Deuteronomy 12:10-14. It is, therefore, here mentioned as an exception to Solomon’s integrity and glory, and the happiness of his reign, and as a blemish to his government, that he permitted and practised what was thus so expressly forbidden. Possibly he permitted it because he thought it better to allow of an error in a circumstance, than occasion a neglect of God’s worship altogether, which he apprehended would follow upon a severe prohibition of that practice. For the people’s hearts were generally and constantly set upon these high places, as appears from the following history; and they were not willing to submit to the trouble and charge which the bringing their sacrifices to one place would cause, nor, indeed, would they yield to it until the temple was built: and, as that was speedily to be done, Solomon seems to have thought it more advisable to delay enforcing obedience to God’s law in this point for the present, than by force to drive them to it. These, however, and all other prudential considerations, ought to have given place to the will and wisdom of God. Because there was no house built to the name of the Lord — For his service, and to the honour, and praise, and glory of his name; that is, of his majesty, and all his perfections, which were to be adored and manifested there. But this reason for their sacrificing in high places was not sufficient; because there was a tabernacle, to which they were as much confined as they were afterward to the temple.

Ver. 2. Only the people sacrificed in high places, to the Lord, as their fathers and as Samuel had done. Moses however names but one place which the Lord should choose. Deuteronomy 16. There could be but one Calvary.

STATE OF RELIGION AT THE BEGINNING OF SOLOMON’S REIGN, 2, 3.

2. Only — A particle apparently having reference to the last sentence of 1 Kings 2:46. The unsettled state of Divine worship was now the only thing that seemed to show that the kingdom was not as thoroughly established as it might be. The people sacrificed in high places — A practice more or less prevalent in Israel from the time of the Judges. See note on 1 Samuel 9:12. It brought the Divine service of Israel into a resemblance of the idolatrous practices of the heathen, who always erected their altars on the tops of hills or mountains, presuming they were nearer Deity and heaven. This sacrificing in high places was not idolatry; they worshipped Jehovah, the true God, on elevated spots, and therefore by the high places so frequently mentioned in the following history we must not understand idolatrous shrines. But even this worship of Jehovah, in such places, was fraught with danger on account of its resemblance to heathen customs. There was danger to Israel that this sacrificing on high places might degenerate into heathenish idolatry; and so the kingdom itself was unsafe as long as this state of things continued, for pure religion and appropriate worship of the true God are indispensable supports of a righteous and permanent government. Because there was no house built — Herein was the reason and excuse for the unsettled state of Divine worship, both at that time and previously. See note on 1 Samuel 9:12.

V. 3. Yet-Although he miscarried in the matter of high places, yet in the general, his heart was right with God. Statutes-According to the statutes or commands of God, which are here called the statutes of David; not only because they were diligently practised by David, but also because the observation of them was so earnestly pressed upon Solomon, and fortified with David’s authority and command.

Verse 3. And Solomon loved — Or, Yet he loved, the Lord — Although he miscarried in the matter of high places, yet, in the general, his heart was right with God. Walking in the statutes — According to the statutes or commands of God, which are here called the statutes of David; not only because they were diligently practised by David, but also because the observation of them was so earnestly pressed upon Solomon, and fortified with David’s authority and command.

3. Solomon loved the Lord — This further shows that the sacrificing in high places was not the result of alienation from Jehovah. Statutes of David — Customs, usages, and laws of religious conduct practiced by David. But it does not appear that David ever sacrificed or burnt incense in high places. The contrary is implied in this verse; and it is more than intimated that though this worship was tolerated because not offered to false gods, and because there was no house yet built to Jehovah, still both Solomon and his people were censurable for allowing it such great extent and prominence, and thereby paving the way for future idolatry in Israel. It would have been safer and better to have sacrificed only before the ark of the covenant, as Solomon did after his return from Gibeon, (verse 15;) or else only at Gibeon, where the tabernacle was. 1 Chronicles 16:39.

Verse 4. The king went to Gibeon — Because the tabernacle was there, and the great brazen altar which Moses made. For after Shiloh was destroyed, they were carried to Nob; and the priests being there slain by Saul, they were removed to Gibeon, 2 Chronicles 1:3-6. That was the great high place — The most eminent and frequented; and, possibly, was a high and raised ground. A thousand burnt-offerings did Solomon offer — This undoubtedly includes the peace-offerings which were killed and dressed for the entertainment of the guests who were invited to the sacrifices; for it can hardly be supposed that so many were wholly consumed on the altar at one time of sacrificing.

SOLOMON’S WISE CHOICE, 4-15.

4. Gibeon — The modern el-Jib, a few miles northwest of Jerusalem. See note on Joshua 9:3. That was the great high place — The most distinguished and sacred of all the heights on which the people were wont to sacrifice, for there were the tabernacle and the brazen altar. 2 Chronicles 1:3, 5. A thousand burnt offerings — This great number corresponded with the thousands of the congregation that went with Solomon to the high place, (see 1 Chronicles 1:2, 3,) and also denoted the national significance of the occasion. So at the dedication of the temple Solomon offered twenty-two thousand oxen, and one hundred and twenty thousand sheep, or, as elsewhere expressed, “Sheep and oxen, that could not be told nor numbered for multitude.” See 1 Kings 8:5, 63. We are not to suppose that all these offerings were made at the same instant or by one person; still less that Solomon offered them with his own hands. Scores of priests officiated on such occasions, and the sacred festival lasted many days.

Verse 5. The Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream] This was the night after he had offered the sacrifices, (see 2 Chronicles 1:7,) and probably after he had earnestly prayed for wisdom; see Wisdom 7:7: Wherefore I prayed, and understanding was given me: I called upon God, and the spirit of wisdom came to me. If this were the case, the dream might have been the consequence of his earnest prayer for wisdom: the images of those things which occupy the mind during the day are most likely to recur during the night; and this, indeed, is the origin of the greater part of our dreams. But this appears to have been supernatural.

Gregory Nyssen, speaking of different kinds of dreams, observes that our organs and brain are not unlike a musical instrument; while the strings of such instruments have their proper degree of tension, they give, when touched, a harmonious sound, but as soon as they are relaxed or screwed down, they give no sound at all. During our waking hours, our senses, touched by our reason, produce the most harmonious concert; but as soon as we are asleep, the instrument is no longer capable of emitting any sound, unless it happen that the remembrance of what passed during the day returns and presents itself to the mind while we are asleep, and so forms a dream; just as the strings of an instrument continue to emit feeble sounds for some time after the musician has ceased to strike them.-See GREG. NYSS. Deuteronomy opificio hominis, cap. xii., p. 77. Oper. vol. i., edit. Morell., Par. 1638.

This may account, in some measure, for common dreams: but even suppose we should not allow that Solomon had been the day before earnestly requesting the gift of wisdom from God, yet we might grant that such a dream as this might be produced by the immediate influence of God upon the soul. And if Solomon received his wisdom by immediate inspiration from heaven, this was the kind of dream that he had; a dream by which that wisdom was actually communicated. But probably we need not carry this matter so much into miracle: God might be the author of his extraordinary wisdom, as he was the author of his extraordinary riches. Some say, “He lay down as ignorant as other men, and yet arose in the morning wiser than all the children of men.” I think this is as credible as that he lay down with a scanty revenue, and in the morning, when he arose, found his treasury full. In short, God’s especial blessing brought him riches through the medium of his own care and industry; as the inspiration of the Almighty gave him understanding, while he gave his heart to seek and search out by his wisdom, concerning all things under the sun, Ecclesiastes 1:13. God gave him the seeds of an extraordinary understanding, and, by much study and research, they grew up under the Divine blessing, and produced a plentiful harvest; but, alas! they did not continue to grow.

Verse 5. The Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream — As he had done to Jacob at Bethel, Genesis 28:13; and to others on different occasions, Genesis 20:3, and 26:24. Sleep is like a state of death to the soul; wherein the senses are locked up, and the understanding and will deprived of the free exercise of their functions. And yet this is no impediment to God in communicating his will to mankind; for no doubt he has power, not only to awaken our intellectual faculties, but to advance them above their ordinary measure of perception, even while the body is asleep. Solomon had prayed the day before with great fervency, and desired of God the gift of wisdom: see Wisd. 7:7. In the night-time God appeared unto him in a dream, and bade him ask whatever he would. Solomon, having his mind still full of the desire of wisdom, asked and obtained it: so that the prayer or desire he uttered in his dream was but the consequence of the option he had made the day before, when he was awake. In a word, though we should allow that the soul of man, when the body is asleep, is in a state of rest and inactivity; yet we cannot but think that God can approach it many different ways; can move and actuate it just as he pleases; and, when he is inclined to make a discovery of any thing, can set such a lively representation of it before the understanding, as shall make a man not doubt of the reality of the vision. See Calmet and Dodd.

Ver. 5. In Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night; and God said, Ask what I shall give thee. “And Solomon said, thou hast showed unto thy servant David my father great mercy, according as he walked before thee in truth, and in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart with thee, and thou hast kept for him this great kindness, that thou hast given him a son to sit on his throne, as it is this day. And now, oh Lord my God, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father. I know not how to go out and come in: and thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen, a great people which cannot be numbered, nor counted for multitude. Give therefore thy servant an understanding heart, to judge thy people, 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.” The Abbe Maury, in his Treatise on Eloquence, says, that “Saurin’s Sermon on the Wisdom of Solomon, is one of the best specimens of his eloquence.” As it has not yet been given in an English dress, I will here attempt a translation. But though I am well acquainted with the style and manner of this great man, having already translated two volumes of his Sermons; yet I must here solicit the indulgence which enlightened criticism will grant to a hasty production.

“Woe to thee, oh land, when thy king is a child.” In this way has the Sage expressed the calamities of states conducted by men destitute of experience; but the general maxim is not without exceptions. As we sometimes see the levities of youth in mature age, so we sometimes perceive in youth the gravity of sober years. There are some geniuses premature, whose early indications of reason anticipate old age; and who, if I may so speak, on leaving the cradle, discover talents worthy of the throne. A profusion of supernatural endowments coming to the aid of nature, exemplifies in those characters the happy experience of the prophet: “I have more understanding than all my teachers. I understand more than the ancients.”

Here is an illustrious proof. Solomon, in the early period of life, formed the correctest idea of government which had ever entered the mind of the profoundest philosophers, or the most consummate statesmen. Awed by the sceptre, he acknowledged the impotency of his arm to sway it. Of the high privilege granted him by heaven of asking whatsoever he would, he availed himself solely to ask wisdom. What an enlightened request, my brethren. How many aged men have we seen inferior in wisdom to this youth. On the other hand, God honoured a petition so wise, by super-adding to the petitioner every other endowment. He gave to Solomon wisdom, and with wisdom, glory and riches; he elevated him to a scale of grandeur, which no sovereign ever did or ever shall be allowed to equal. It is to this petition so judicious, and to this reply so magnificent, that we shall call your attention, after having bestowed a moment on three important circumstances connected with the occasion.

These are marked in the leading words of our text. In this divine revelation, the place, the manner, and the subject claim particular attention.

1. The place of this revelation. It was in Gibeon, about eight miles from Jerusalem. The people sacrificed on the brazen altar, constructed by divine command, then in Gibeon, where it had been removed, along with the tabernacle. 2 Chronicles 1:3.

2. The manner in which the revelation was communicated to Solomon, supplies a second source of reflection. It was, says the historian, in a dream. We have elsewhere remarked, that there are three sorts of dreams. Some are in the order of nature; others are in the order of providence; and a third class are in an order superior to both. Discours Histor. tom. 5. p. 184.

3. A reason very dissimilar supersedes our stopping to illustrate the subject; that is, because the subject has no need of illustration. The Lord was pleased to put Solomon to the proof, by permitting him to ask whatsoever he would. To this proof Solomon worthily corresponded; his sole request being for wisdom. God complied with the enlightened prayer, and in granting profound wisdom to his servant he superadded riches, glory and long life. It is this enlightened request, and this munificent reply we are now to examine. Four remarks demand attention in Solomon’s request to God, and four in God’s reply.

First, notice in Solomon’s request his recollection of past mercies, the mercies of David his father. Solomon makes this recollection with a view to obtain those divine favours and aids which his situation required. He aspired at the blessings which God confers on the children of faithful fathers. He wished to become the object of that promise in which God stands engaged to show mercy to thousands of generations, to them that love him.

This is the first object of our discourse. The privilege of an illustrious birth, I grant, is sometimes extravagantly strained. This kind of folly is not novel in the present age; it was the folly of the Hebrew nation. To most of the censures of the prophets, the Jews opposed this defence: “We are Abraham’s seed: we have Abraham to our father.” Matthew 3:9. What an apology! Does an illustrious birth sanction low and grovelling sentiments? Do the virtues of our ancestors excuse us from being virtuous? And has God uniformly engaged to excuse the profaneness of children, because their parents were pious? You are the children of Abraham; you have an illustrious origin; your ancestors were the models and glory of their age. Then you are the more inexcusable for being the reproach of your age: then you are the faithless depositaries of the nobility with which you have been entrusted: then you have degenerated from your former grandeur: then you shall be condemned to surrender to nature a corrupted blood, which you received pure from those to whom you owe your birth. It is true however, all being equal by nature, that in tracing one’s origin, it is a singular favour of heaven to be able to cast our eyes on a long line of illustrious ancestors. I am not about to offer the incense to idols of distinguished families. It is the church which has perfect notions of true nobility. To be accounted noble in the sanctuary we must give proof of virtue, and not of vain titles, which often owe their origin to the vanity, the seditions, and the fawning baseness of those who display them with so much pride. To be noble in the language of scripture, and to be impure, avaricious, haughty and implacable, are opposite ideas. But charity, but patience, but moderation, but dignity of soul, and a certain elevation of mind, place a man above the world and its maxims. These are the characteristics of nobility which distinguish children of supreme descent. In this view it is a high favour of heaven, in tracing one’s descent, to be able to cast the eye on a long line of illustrious ancestors. How often have holy men availed themselves of these motives to induce the Deity, if not to bear with the Israelites in the course of their crimes, at least to pardon them after the crimes have been committed. How often have they said in the supplications they opposed to the wrath of heaven, Oh Lord, remember Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, thy servants. How often has God yielded to the strength of these arguments. How often has he for the sake of the patriarchs, for the sake of David, heard prayer in behalf of their children. Let those maxims be deeply imprinted on the heart. Our own interest should be motive sufficient to prompt us to piety; but we should also be excited to it by the interest of our children. The recollection of our virtues is the best inheritance we can leave them after our decease. These virtues afford them pleas for the divine favour: the goodwill of heaven is in some sort entailed on families who fear the Lord. Happy the fathers who can say, when extended on the bed of death, ‘My children: I am about to appear before the awful tribunal, where there is no resource for poor mortals, but humility and repentance. Meanwhile I bless God, that notwithstanding my defects, which I acknowledge with confusion of face, you will not have cause to be ashamed on pronouncing the name of your father. I have been faithful to the truth, and have constantly walked before God in the uprightness of my heart.’ Happy the children who have such a descent.— ”Oh God, thou hast showed unto thy servant David, my father, great mercy, according as he walked before thee in truth, and in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart.” Here is the recollection of past mercies, the recollection which God approves, and the first object of our discourse. Consider, secondly, in the prayer of Solomon, the aspect under which he contemplated the regal power. He viewed it principally with regard to the high duties it imposed upon him. “Thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen; who is able to judge this thy so great a people, which cannot be numbered?” The answer of God is a correspondent seal to this idea of supreme authority; and what we here say of the regal power is applicable to every other office of trust and dignity. A man of integrity must not view them with regard to the emoluments they produce, but with regard to the duties they impose.

What end has society in view, in promoting individuals to high stations? Is it to augment their pride? Is it that they may live in a style the most expensive? Is it to flatter their arrogance and ambition? Is it to aggrandize their families by the ruin of the widow and the orphan? Is it to adore them as idols? Is it to become their slaves? Nobles of the earth, ask those subjects, to whom you are indebted for the high scale of elevation you enjoy? Ask, why this dignity has been conferred? They will say, it was to entrust you with their safety and repose; it was to procure fathers and protectors; it was to find peace and prosperity under your tribunals. To induce you to enter on those awful duties, they have accompanied them with those inviting appendages which soothe the cares, and alleviate the weight of office. They have distinguished you with titles, they have promised obedience, and ensured your salaries. Entrance then on a high office is to make a contract with the people, over whom you proceed to exercise authority; it is to make a compact by which certain duties are required on certain conditions. To require the emoluments when the conditions of the engagements are violated, is an abominable usurpation. I speak literally, and without a shadow of exaggeration; a magistrate who deviates from the duties of his office, after having received the emolument, ought to come under the penal statutes of those who take away their neighbour’s goods. These statutes require restitution. Before restitution, he is liable to this anathema: “Woe to him that encreaseth that which is not his own, and to him that ladeth himself with thick clay. For the stone shall cry out of the wall, and the beam out of the timber shall answer it.” Habakkuk 2:6-11. Before restitution he is unworthy of the Lord’s table; and is included in the curse we denounce against thieves, whom we repel from the holy eucharist. Before restitution he is unable to die in peace, and he is included in the list of those who shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

But into what strange reflections are we not led by our subject? What awful ideas does it not excite in the mind? Into what alarming consequences does it not involve certain kings? Ye Moseses, ye Elijahs, ye John Baptists, faithful servants of the living God, and celebrated in every age of the church for your fortitude, your courage, and your zeal; you, who knew not how to temporize, nor to tremble, even before Pharaoh, nor before Ahab, nor before Herod, nor before Herodias; why are you not in this pulpit? Why do you not to-day supply our place, to communicate to the subject all the energy of which it is susceptible? “Be wise oh ye kings, be instructed ye judges of the earth.”

We remark, thirdly, in the prayer of Solomon, the sentiments of his own weakness; and in God’s reply, the high regard testified towards humility. The character of the king whom Solomon succeeded, the arduous nature of the duties to which he was called, and the insufficiency of his age, were to him three considerations of humiliation.

1. The character of the king whom he succeeded. “Thou hast showed unto thy servant David, my father, great mercy, according as he walked before thee in truth, and in righteousness, and in the uprightness of his heart with thee.” How dangerous to succeed an illustrious prince! The distinguished actions of a predecessor are so many sentences against the faults of him who has to succeed. The people are never wanting to make unfavourable contrasts between the past and the present. They recollect the virtues they have attested, the happiness they have enjoyed, the prosperity with which they have been loaded, and the distinguished qualifications of the prince of whom they have just been deprived by death. And if the idea of having had an illustrious predecessor, is on all occasions a subject of serious consideration for him who has to follow, never was there a prince who had juster reasons to be awed than Solomon. He succeeded a man who was the model of kings, in whose person were united the wisdom of a statesman, the valour of a soldier, the experience of a marshal, the illumination of a prophet, the piety of a good man, and even the virtue of a saint of the first rank.

2. The extent of the duties imposed on Solomon, is the second cause of his humility. “Who is able to judge this thy so great a people?” Adequately to judge a great nation, a man must regard himself no longer as his own, but be wholly devoted to the interests of the people. Adequately to judge a great nation, a man must have a consummate knowledge of human nature, of civil society, of the laws of nature, and of the peculiar laws of the people over whom he has to preside. Adequately to judge a nation, he must have his house and his heart ever open to the solicitations of those over whom he is exalted. Adequately to judge a people, he must recollect that a small sum of money, that a foot of land is as much to a poor man as a city, a province, and a kingdom are to a prince. Adequately to judge a people, he must habituate himself to the disgust excited by listening to a man who is quite full of his subject, and who imagines that the person addressed ought to be equally impressed with its importance. Adequately to judge a people, a man must be exempt from vice: nothing is more calculated to prejudice the mind against the purity of his decisions, than to see him captivated by some predominant passion. Adequately to judge a people, he must be destitute of personal respect: he must neither yield to the entreaties of those who know the way to his heart, nor be intimidated by the high tone of others who threaten to hold up as martyrs, the persons they obstinately defend. Adequately to judge a people, a man must expand, if I may so speak, all the powers of his soul, that he may be equal to the dignity of his duty, and avoid all distraction, which on filling the superior powers of the mind, obstructs its perception of the main object. And “who is sufficient for these things? Who is able to judge this thy so great a people?”

3. The snares of youth form a third object of Solomon’s fear, and a third cause of his humility. “I am but a little child: I know not how to go out and come in.” Some chronologists are of opinion that Solomon, when he uttered these words, “I am but a little child,” was only twelve years of age, which to us seems insupportable: for besides its not being proved, as we see by the event, the style in which David addressed this prince on investing him with the reins of government, sufficiently proves that he spake not to a child. He calls him wise, and it was on account of that wisdom that he entrusted him with the punishment of Joab, and of Shimei. It was therefore, I should suppose, at the age of twenty or twenty six years, that Solomon saw himself called to fill the throne of the greatest of kings, and to enter on those exalted duties of which we have given but an imperfect sketch. It is then that we give scope to presumption which has a plausible appearance, being as yet unmortified by the recollection of past follies. It is then that a suspicion of not being yet classed by mankind among great men, prompts a youth to place himself in that high rank. It is then that we regard counsel as an obstruction of the authority we attribute to ourselves. It is then that we oppose an untractable disposition to the advice of a faithful friend, who would lead us to propriety of conduct. It is then that our passions hurry us to excess, and become the arbiters of truth and falsehood, of equity and injustice.

Presumptuous youths, who make the assurance with which you aspire at the first offices of the state, the principal ground of success. I cannot better improve this head of my discourse than by affirming, that the higher notions you entertain of your own sufficiency, the lower you sink at the bar of equity and reason. The more you account yourselves qualified to govern, the less you are capable of doing it. The sentiment Solomon entertained of his own weakness, was the most distinguished of his royal virtues. The profound humility with which he asked God to supply his inability, was the leading disposition for obtaining divine support. Fourthly, we are come at length to the last, and to the great object of the history before us. We shall show you, on the one hand, our hero prefering the requisite talents, to pomp, splendour, riches, and all that is grateful to kings; and from the vast source opened by heaven, deriving nothing but wisdom and understanding. We shall show on the other hand that God, honouring a prayer so enlightened, granted to Solomon the wisdom and understanding he had asked, and with these, riches, glory, and long life. Who can forbear being delighted with the first object, and who can sufficiently applaud the magnanimity of Solomon. Place yourselves in the situation of this prince. Imagine for a moment that you are the arbiters of your own destiny, and that you hear a voice from the blessed God, saying, “Ask what I shall give thee.” How awful would this test prove to most of our hearers! If we may judge of our wishes by our pursuits, what strange replies should we make to this permission. What a strange choice would ours be. Our privilege would become our calamity, and we should have the awful ingenuity to find misery in the very bosom of happiness. Who would say, Lord, give me wisdom and understanding. Lord, help me worthily to discharge the duties of the station with which I am entrusted. This is the utmost of all my requests; and to this alone I would wish thy munificence to be confined. Who would not say, on the contrary, biassed by the circumstance of situation, or swayed by some predominant passion, Lord, augment my heaps of gold and silver; and in proportion as my riches shall encrease, diminish the desire of expenditure. Another, Lord, raise me to the highest scale of grandeur, and give me to trample underfoot the men who shall have the assurance to become my equals, and whom I regard as worms of the earth. How little for the most part do we know ourselves in prosperity: how incoherent are our ideas. Great God, do thou determine our lot, and save us from the reproach of making an unhappy choice by removing the occasion. Solomon was incomparably wiser. Filled with the duties of the high station to which he was raised, “Lord,” said he, “give thy servant an understanding heart to judge thy people, that I may discern between good and bad.”

But if we applaud the wisdom of Solomon’s prayer, how much more should we applaud the goodness and munificence of God’s reply? “Because thou hast asked this thing, and hast not asked for thyself long life, neither hast thou asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life of thine enemies, but hast asked for thyself understanding to discern judgment; behold, I have done according to thy word. Lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart; and I have also given thee that which thou hast not asked, both riches and honour, so that there shall not be any among the kings like unto thee all thy days.”

How amply was this promise fulfilled; and its fulfilment corresponded with the munificence of the Being from whom it had proceeded. In virtue of this promise, “I have given thee an understanding heart,” we see Solomon carrying the art of civil government to the highest point it can ever attain. Witness the profound prudence by which he discerned the real from the pretended mother. “Bring me a sword—divide the living child into two parts, and give half to the one and half to the other.” 1 Kings 3:24, 25. Witness the profound peace he procured for his subjects, and which made the historian say that “Judah and Israel dwelt safely, every man under his vine, and under his figtree.” Witness the eulogium of the sacred writers on this subject, that Solomon’s wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the east, and all the wisdom of Egypt; that he was wiser than Ethan, than Heman, than Chalcol, and Darda; that is to say, he was wiser than every man of his own age. Witness the embassies from all the kings of the earth to hear his wisdom. Witness the acclamation of the Queen who came from the remotest kingdom of the earth to hear this prodigy of wisdom. “It was a true report that I heard in mine own land of thy wisdom, and behold the half was not told me. Thy wisdom and prosperity exceed the fame which I heard. Happy are these thy men, happy are these thy servants, which stand continually before thee, and that hear thy wisdom.” 1 Kings 10:6-8.

And in virtue of this other promise, “I have given thee glory and riches,” we see Solomon raising superb edifices, forming powerful alliances, and swaying the sceptre over every prince, from the river even unto the land of the Philistines; that is, from the Euphrates to the eastern branch of the Nile, which separates Palestine from Egypt, and making gold as plentiful in Jerusalem as stones. 2 Chronicles 9:26, 27.

It would he easy to extend these reflections; but I should, on confining myself to this alone, incur the charge of having evaded the most difficult part of the subject, to dwell on that which is sufficiently plain. The extraordinary condescension which God evinced towards Solomon, the gifts with which he was endowed, the answer to his prayer, “I have given thee an understanding heart,” collectively involve a difficulty of the most serious kind. How could he harmonize those favours with the events? How could a man so wise commit those faults, and perpetrate those crimes which defiled him at the close of life? How could he follow the exorbitant pride of eastern princes, who boast of a harem filled with innumerable women? How in abandoning his heart to sensual pleasure, could he abandon his faith and his religion? And after having the baseness to offer incense to their beauty, how could he also offer incense to their idols? I meet this question with the greatest pleasure, as the solution we shall give will demonstrate—the difficulties of superior endowments—the danger of bad company—the peril of human grandeur—and the poison of voluptuousness.

First, the difficulties attendant on superior talents. Can we suppose that God, on the investiture of Solomon with superior endowments, exempted him from the law which requires men of the humblest talents to improve them? What is implied in these words, “I have given thee understanding?” Do they mean, I take solely on myself the work of thy salvation; and thou mayest live in voluptuousness and neglect? Brave the strongest temptations; I will obstruct thy falling? Open thy heart to the most seductive objects; I will interpose my buckler for thy preservation and defence?

On this subject, my brethren, we have need of a total reform in our views, and to abjure a system of theology, if I may so speak, inconceivably absurd. Some persons have formed notions of I know not what grace, which takes wholly on itself the work of our salvation; which suffers us to sleep as much as we choose in the arms of concupiscence and pleasure, and which redoubles its aids in proportion as the sinner redoubles resistance. Undeceive yourselves. God never yet bestowed a talent, without requiring its cultivation. The more superior are our endowments, the more our difficulties are augmented. The greater the efforts of grace to save us, the more should we labour at our salvation. The more it watches for our good, the more we are called to the exercise of vigilance. You—you who have more light than your neighbour, tremble; an account will be required of that superior light. You—you who have more genius than most men, tremble; an account will be required of that genius. You—you who have most advanced in the grace of sanctification, tremble; an account will be required of that grace. Do you call this truth in question? Go, go see it exemplified in the person of Solomon. Go, go see the abyss into which he fell by burying his talents. Go, go see this man endowed with talents superior to all the world. Go see him enslaved by seven hundred wives, and prostituted to three hundred concubines. Go see him prostrated before the idol of the Sidonians, and the abomination of the Ammonites; and by the awful abyss into which he was plunged by the neglect of his talents, learn to improve yours with sanctifying fear.

Our second solution of the difficulty proposed, and the second instruction we would derive from the fall of Solomon, is the danger of bad company; an instruction rendered the more essential by the dissipation of the age. A contagious disease extends its ravages for a thousand miles round us, and it excites in our mind terror and alarm. We use the greatest precaution against the danger. We guard the avenues of the state, and lay vessels on their arrival in port, under the strictest quarantine: we do not suffer ourselves to approach a suspected person. But the contagion of bad company gives us not the smallest alarm: we respire without fear an air the most impure and fatal to the soul. We form connections, enter into engagements, and contract marriages with profane, sceptical, and worldly people; and regard all those as declaimers and enthusiasts who declare, that evil communications corrupt good manners.

The danger of human grandeur is a new solution of the difficulty proposed, and a third source of instruction derived from the fall of Solomon. Mankind have for the most part a brain too weak to bear a high scale of elevation. Dazzled with the first rays of surrounding lustre, they can no longer support the sight. You are astonished that this prince, who reigned from the river even to the land of the Philistines; this prince, who made gold in his kingdom as plentiful as stones; this prince, who was surrounded with flatterers and courtezans; this prince, who heard nothing but eulogy, acclamation and applause; you are astonished that he should be intoxicated even with the high endowments God had granted him for the discharge of duty, and that he should so far forget himself as to fall into the enormities just described. Seek in your own heart, and in your life, the solution of this difficulty. We are blinded by the smallest prosperity, and our head is turned by the least elevation of rank. A name, a title, added to our dignity, an acre of land added to our estate, an augmentation of equipage, a little information added to our knowledge, a wing to our mansion, or an inch to our stature; here is more than enough to give us high notions of our own consequence, to make us assume a decisive tone, and wish to be considered as oracles.

Fourthly, the beguiling charms of pleasure are the last solution of the difficulty proposed, and the last instruction we derive from the fall of Solomon The sacred historian has not overlooked the cause of the vices of this prince. “Solomon loved many strange women,—and they turned away his heart” from the Lord. 1 Kings 11:1-3. We are here reminded of the wretched mission of Balaam. Commanded by powerful princes, allured by magnificent rewards, his eyes and his heart already devoured the presents which awaited his services. He ascended a mountain, he surveyed the camp of the Israelites, he invoked by turns the power of God’s Spirit, and the power of the devil. On finding all aid refused from prophecy, he had recourse to divination and enchantment. When just on the point of giving full effect to his detestable art, he felt himself counteracted by a sentiment of truth, and exclaimed, “there is no enchantment against Jacob, neither is there any divination against Israel.” He temporized: yes, he found a way to supersede all the prodigies which God had done and accomplished for his people. This way was pleasure. It was, that they should no more attack the Israelites with open force, but with voluptuous delights; that they should no more send among them wizards and enchanters, but the women of Midian, to allure them to their sacrifices. Then this people, before invincible, I will deliver into your hands.

Of the success of this advice, my brethren, you cannot be ignorant. But why does not every Balaam fall by the sword of Israel. Numbers 31:8. Why were not the awful consequences of this counsel restricted to the unhappy culprits, whom the holy hands of Phinehas and Eleazar sacrificed to the wrath of heaven. David, Solomon, Samson, and you, my brethren, you may yet preserve at least one part of your innocence. Let us arm then against voluptuousness. Let us distrust enchanting pleasure. Let us fear it, not only when it presents its horrors; not only when it discovers the frightful objects which attend its train,—adultery, incest, treason, apostasy, with murder and assassination: but let us fear it when clothed in the garb of innocency, when it sanctions the most decent freedoms, and assumes the pretext of religious sacrifices.

5. In a dream by night — This was one mode of Divine revelation. See marginal reference. In such cases the soul was raised to a state of Divine ecstacy and illumination, and held conscious intercourse with God or angels; but when the natural, waking consciousness returned, the person knew it was a dream. See verse 15.

V. 6. Truth-In the true worship of God, in the profession, belief, practice and defence of the true religion. So truth here contains all duties to God, as righteousness doth his duties to men, and uprightness the right manner of performing both sorts of duties. With thee-That is, in thy judgment, to whom he often appealed as the witness of his integrity.

Verses 6-8. According as he walked before thee in truth — In the true worship of God, in the profession, belief, practice, and defence of the true religion. So truth here contains all duties to God, as righteousness doth his duties to men, and uprightness the right manner of performing both sorts of duties. In uprightness of heart with thee — That is, in thy judgment, to whom he appealed as the witness of his integrity. I am but a child — So he was in years: not above twenty years old, and withal (which he principally intends) he was raw and inexperienced as a child in state affairs. How to go out, &c. — To govern my people, and manage affairs. Thy servant is in the midst of thy people — Is set over them to rule and guide them. A metaphor from the overseer of divers workmen, who usually is in the midst of them, that he may the better observe how each of them discharges his office. Which thou hast chosen — Thy peculiar people, whom thou takest special care of, and therefore wilt expect a more punctual account of my government of them.

SOLOMON’S WISE CHOICE, 4-15.

4. Gibeon — The modern el-Jib, a few miles northwest of Jerusalem. See note on Joshua 9:3. That was the great high place — The most distinguished and sacred of all the heights on which the people were wont to sacrifice, for there were the tabernacle and the brazen altar. 2 Chronicles 1:3, 5. A thousand burnt offerings — This great number corresponded with the thousands of the congregation that went with Solomon to the high place, (see 1 Chronicles 1:2, 3,) and also denoted the national significance of the occasion. So at the dedication of the temple Solomon offered twenty-two thousand oxen, and one hundred and twenty thousand sheep, or, as elsewhere expressed, “Sheep and oxen, that could not be told nor numbered for multitude.” See 1 Kings 8:5, 63. We are not to suppose that all these offerings were made at the same instant or by one person; still less that Solomon offered them with his own hands. Scores of priests officiated on such occasions, and the sacred festival lasted many days.

V. 7. Child-So he was in years: not above twenty years old; and withal (which he principally intends) he was raw and unexperienced, as a child, in state affairs. Go out, &c.-To govern my people, and manage affairs.

Verse 7. I know not how to go out or come in.] I am just like an infant learning to walk alone, and can neither go out nor come in without help.

Verses 6-8. According as he walked before thee in truth — In the true worship of God, in the profession, belief, practice, and defence of the true religion. So truth here contains all duties to God, as righteousness doth his duties to men, and uprightness the right manner of performing both sorts of duties. In uprightness of heart with thee — That is, in thy judgment, to whom he appealed as the witness of his integrity. I am but a child — So he was in years: not above twenty years old, and withal (which he principally intends) he was raw and inexperienced as a child in state affairs. How to go out, &c. — To govern my people, and manage affairs. Thy servant is in the midst of thy people — Is set over them to rule and guide them. A metaphor from the overseer of divers workmen, who usually is in the midst of them, that he may the better observe how each of them discharges his office. Which thou hast chosen — Thy peculiar people, whom thou takest special care of, and therefore wilt expect a more punctual account of my government of them.

7. I am but a little child — His exact age at this time is not known, but he was evidently still a youth, probably not more than twenty years of age. David, in his old age, spoke of him as “young and tender.” 1 Chronicles 29:1. Solomon, with graceful modesty and humility, feels and acknowledges his youth and inexperience. To go out or come in — An idiomatic expression denoting the whole official conduct of a ruler before his people. Compare Numbers 27:17.

V. 8. In the midst-Is set over them to rule and guide them. A metaphor from the overseer of divers workmen, who usually is in the midst of them, that he may the better observe how each of them discharges his office. Chosen-Thy peculiar people, whom thou takest special care of, and therefore wilt expect a more punctual account of my government of them.

Verses 6-8. According as he walked before thee in truth — In the true worship of God, in the profession, belief, practice, and defence of the true religion. So truth here contains all duties to God, as righteousness doth his duties to men, and uprightness the right manner of performing both sorts of duties. In uprightness of heart with thee — That is, in thy judgment, to whom he appealed as the witness of his integrity. I am but a child — So he was in years: not above twenty years old, and withal (which he principally intends) he was raw and inexperienced as a child in state affairs. How to go out, &c. — To govern my people, and manage affairs. Thy servant is in the midst of thy people — Is set over them to rule and guide them. A metaphor from the overseer of divers workmen, who usually is in the midst of them, that he may the better observe how each of them discharges his office. Which thou hast chosen — Thy peculiar people, whom thou takest special care of, and therefore wilt expect a more punctual account of my government of them.

8. That cannot be numbered — An acknowledged fulfilment of God’s promise to Abraham. Genesis 13:16. Solomon feels that he has been made king of the covenant people.

V. 9. An understanding heart-Whereby I may both clearly discern, and faithfully perform all the parts of my duty: for both these are spoken of in scripture, as the effects of a good understanding; and he that lives in the neglect of his duties, or the practice of wickedness, is called a fool, and one void of understanding. Discern-Namely in causes and controversies among my people; that I may not through mistake, or prejudice, or passion, give wrong sentences, and call evil good, or good evil. Absalom, that was a fool, wished himself a judge: Solomon, that was a wise man, trembles at the undertaking. The more knowing and considerate men are, the more jealous they are of themselves.

Verse 9. Give-an understanding heart to judge thy people] He did not ask wisdom in general, but the true science of government. This wisdom he sought, and this wisdom he obtained.

Verse 9. Give to thy servant an understanding heart — Whereby I may both clearly discern, and faithfully perform all the parts of my duty: for both these are spoken of in Scripture as the effects of a good understanding; and he that lives in the neglect of his duties, or the practice of wickedness, is called a fool, and one void of understanding. To judge thy people — Or govern, as that word is often used. That I may discern between good and bad — Namely, in causes and controversies among thy people; that I may not, through mistake, or prejudice, or passion, give wrong sentences, and call evil good, or good evil. Absalom, that was a fool, wished himself a judge: Solomon, that was a wise man, trembles at the undertaking. The more knowing and considerate men are, the more jealous they are of themselves.

9. An understanding heart — Noble choice! “It was the choice offered to the youthful king on the threshold of life, the choice so often imagined in fiction, and here actually presented in real life. The answer is the ideal answer of such a prince, burdened with the responsibility of his position. He made the demand for the gift which he, of all the heroes of the ancient Church, was the first to claim. He showed his wisdom by asking for wisdom. He became wise because he had set his heart upon it. This was to him the special aspect through which the Divine Spirit was to be approached, and grasped, and made to bear on the wants of men; not the highest, not the choice of David, not the choice of Isaiah; but still the choice of Solomon.” — Stanley. To judge thy people — The Oriental mind always associates the functions of the judge with the monarch, as he is expected to hear and decide important cases. See note on verse 16.

Verse 10. The speech pleased the Lord — For it manifested a disinterested mind and a public spirit, that desired, above all things, the honour of God and the good of his people, and to direct his conduct aright and to do justice.

SOLOMON’S WISE CHOICE, 4-15.

4. Gibeon — The modern el-Jib, a few miles northwest of Jerusalem. See note on Joshua 9:3. That was the great high place — The most distinguished and sacred of all the heights on which the people were wont to sacrifice, for there were the tabernacle and the brazen altar. 2 Chronicles 1:3, 5. A thousand burnt offerings — This great number corresponded with the thousands of the congregation that went with Solomon to the high place, (see 1 Chronicles 1:2, 3,) and also denoted the national significance of the occasion. So at the dedication of the temple Solomon offered twenty-two thousand oxen, and one hundred and twenty thousand sheep, or, as elsewhere expressed, “Sheep and oxen, that could not be told nor numbered for multitude.” See 1 Kings 8:5, 63. We are not to suppose that all these offerings were made at the same instant or by one person; still less that Solomon offered them with his own hands. Scores of priests officiated on such occasions, and the sacred festival lasted many days.

Verses 11, 12. Nor hast asked the life of thine enemies — That God would take away their lives, or put it into his power to destroy them. Behold I have done according to thy word — I have granted, and do at this present grant thy desire. And accordingly at this time God did infuse into him a far higher degree of wisdom than he had before possessed; and that not only to govern his people, and to know and do the several duties which he owed to God and them, but also the knowledge of divers arts and sciences, and of things human and divine, as appears from 1 Kings 4:29-34; and that in a far greater measure and proportion, than with the best natural understanding he could have attained by the most diligent study, if he had been employed therein from a child. So that there was none like thee before thee — Either no king, or rather no man. For in these respects he is preferred, (1 Kings 4:31,) not only before all kings, but before all men. No mere man, it appears, since the fall of Adam, ever equalled him in universal knowledge, especially in the art of well governing his people. But, it may be asked, did not the apostles excel him? Not in natural and political knowledge, but only in the knowledge of the mysteries of faith, which were more freely and more fully imparted in these latter times; the ignorance whereof was no disparagement to Solomon’s wisdom, because they were not discoverable by any creature without that divine revelation which God saw fit not to afford in Solomon’s time.

11. Understanding to discern judgment — Literally, to know to hear judgment; that is, ability to understand how to hear suits or causes, and dispense justice.

Verse 12. I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart] I have given thee a capacious mind, one capable of knowing much: make a proper use of thy powers, under the direction of my Spirit, and thou shalt excel in wisdom all that have gone before thee; neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee. But, query, Was not all this conditional? If he should walk in his ways, and keep his statutes and commandments, 1 Kings 3:14. Was it not to depend upon his proper use of initiatory inspirations? Did he ever receive all this wisdom? Did not his unfaithfulness prevent the fulfilment of the Divine purpose? Instead of being the wisest of men, did he not become more brutish than any man? Did he not even lose the knowledge of his Creator, and worship the abominations of the Moabites, Zidonians, &c., &c.! And was not such idolatry a proof of the grossest stupidity? How few proofs does his life give that the gracious purpose of God was fulfilled in him! He received much; but he would have received much more, had he been faithful to the grace given. No character in the sacred writings disappoints us more than the character of Solomon. None like thee before thee] That is, no king, either in Israel or among the nations, as the following verse explains.

Verses 11, 12. Nor hast asked the life of thine enemies — That God would take away their lives, or put it into his power to destroy them. Behold I have done according to thy word — I have granted, and do at this present grant thy desire. And accordingly at this time God did infuse into him a far higher degree of wisdom than he had before possessed; and that not only to govern his people, and to know and do the several duties which he owed to God and them, but also the knowledge of divers arts and sciences, and of things human and divine, as appears from 1 Kings 4:29-34; and that in a far greater measure and proportion, than with the best natural understanding he could have attained by the most diligent study, if he had been employed therein from a child. So that there was none like thee before thee — Either no king, or rather no man. For in these respects he is preferred, (1 Kings 4:31,) not only before all kings, but before all men. No mere man, it appears, since the fall of Adam, ever equalled him in universal knowledge, especially in the art of well governing his people. But, it may be asked, did not the apostles excel him? Not in natural and political knowledge, but only in the knowledge of the mysteries of faith, which were more freely and more fully imparted in these latter times; the ignorance whereof was no disparagement to Solomon’s wisdom, because they were not discoverable by any creature without that divine revelation which God saw fit not to afford in Solomon’s time.

12. Lo, I have given thee — It is the Father’s good pleasure to give wisdom to them that seek for it. “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.” James 1:5. None like thee — Solomon’s wisdom was, to a certain extent, a supernatural gift, a signal dispensation of Divine favour, which must not be classed with natural acquirements which are ordinarily obtained by dint of mental application alone. But while this much appears upon the face of the history before us, we must not suppose that all his knowledge was so special and supernatural an endowment as that he received it without any effort on his part. He doubtless studied and toiled like other men for his acquirements, but he was divinely and supernaturally assisted in a manner and to an extent which no other man ever enjoyed. We shall see further in 1 Kings 4:29-34, that Solomon’s wisdom comprehended natural science, political sagacity, and a deep insight into spiritual truths.

V. 13. All thy days-Whereby he signifies that these gifts of God were not transient, as they were in Saul, but such as should abide with him whilst he lived.

Verses 13, 14. I have given thee that which thou hast not asked — Or rather, I will give thee, as it is expressed in the parallel place, 2 Chronicles 1:12; I will as certainly give them as if I had already actually done it. For future things, which God is engaged to bring to pass, or foresees will take place, are often expressed in Scripture in the past time. So that there shall not be any among the kings — The succeeding kings of Israel, of whom he speaks. Or, hath not been, as it is in the Hebrew: and so it may be true of all the kings that then were or had been in the world, whereof none were like him in the things here mentioned, namely, riches and honour, or renown, as well as wisdom. All thy days — Whereby he signifies that these gifts of God were not transient, as they were in Saul, but such as should abide with him while he lived. And if thou wilt walk in my ways — This caution God gives him lest his great wisdom should make him proud, or careless, or presumptuous, as if he were out of all danger; and to oblige him to more care and circumspection, to avoid the snares and mischiefs to which so much prosperity and glory would probably expose him; and withal to justify himself, in case he should afterward alter the course of his providence toward Solomon.

13. Also… both riches, and honour — How true to the principle of the Divine government enunciated by Christ, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.” Matthew 6:33.

V. 14. And if-This caution God gives him, lest his wisdom should make him proud, careless, or presumptuous.

Verses 13, 14. I have given thee that which thou hast not asked — Or rather, I will give thee, as it is expressed in the parallel place, 2 Chronicles 1:12; I will as certainly give them as if I had already actually done it. For future things, which God is engaged to bring to pass, or foresees will take place, are often expressed in Scripture in the past time. So that there shall not be any among the kings — The succeeding kings of Israel, of whom he speaks. Or, hath not been, as it is in the Hebrew: and so it may be true of all the kings that then were or had been in the world, whereof none were like him in the things here mentioned, namely, riches and honour, or renown, as well as wisdom. All thy days — Whereby he signifies that these gifts of God were not transient, as they were in Saul, but such as should abide with him while he lived. And if thou wilt walk in my ways — This caution God gives him lest his great wisdom should make him proud, or careless, or presumptuous, as if he were out of all danger; and to oblige him to more care and circumspection, to avoid the snares and mischiefs to which so much prosperity and glory would probably expose him; and withal to justify himself, in case he should afterward alter the course of his providence toward Solomon.

14. If thou wilt walk in my ways — So the Divine promises were largely conditional. Then I will lengthen thy days — But this wise king, whose reign began so auspiciously, failed to meet the conditions of long-continued prosperity. “No character in the sacred writings,” says Dr. Clarke, “disappoints us more than the character of Solomon.”

V. 15. A dream-Not a vain dream, wherewith men are commonly deluded; but a divine dream, assuring him of the thing: which he knew, by a divine impression after he was awakened: and by the vast alteration which he presently found within himself in point of wisdom and knowledge. The ark-Which was there in the city of David, 2 Samuel 6:17, before which he presented himself in a way of holy adoration. Burnt offerings-Chiefly for the expiation of his and his peoples sin, through the blood of Christ, manifestly signified in these sacrifices. Peace offerings-Solemnly to praise God for all his mercies, and especially for giving him quiet possession of the kingdom, and for his glorious appearance to him in the dream, and for the promise therein made to him, and the actual accomplishment of it.

Verse 15. Behold, it was a dream — He perceived that it was a dream; not a vain dream, such as those wherewith men are commonly deluded, but a divine dream, assuring him of the things promised, which he knew, by a divine impression, after he was awaked, and by the vast alteration which he presently found within himself in point of wisdom and knowledge. And stood before the ark — Which was there in the city of David, (2 Samuel 6:17,) before which he presented himself in a way of holy adoration. And offered up burnt-offerings — Chiefly for the expiation of his and his people’s sin, through the blood of Christ, manifestly signified in these sacrifices. And peace-offerings — Solemnly to praise God for all his mercies, and especially for giving him quiet possession of the kingdom, and for his glorious appearance to him in the dream, and for the promise therein made to him, and the actual accomplishment of it.

15. Behold, it was a dream — Nevertheless it was a real Divine communication, given by inspiration of God. See note on verse 5. Came to Jerusalem — The tabernacle was at Gibeon, the ark at Jerusalem, and Solomon’s going from the former to the latter place with sacrificial offerings was a most significant act, opening a new epoch in the history of Israelitish worship. It was, probably, the last public service of the kind at Gibeon, and so, in effect, was a public transfer of sacrificial worship from the wandering, unsettled tabernacle, to that divinely chosen spot where alone henceforth Jehovah would be pleased to accept the more public offerings and vows of Israel. See Deuteronomy 12:5. It also symbolized that coming hour when, under the “greater than Solomon,” all separation of tabernacle and ark would be forever past, and the true worshippers would advance from a cultus that made locality a test, to find their great altar in the inner temple of the spirit, and to worship the Father in spirit and in truth. John 4:21-24.

V. 16. Harlots-Or, victuallers: for the Hebrew words signifies both. Yet that they are unmarried persons, seems probable, both because there is no mention of any husbands, whose office it was, if there were any such, to contest for their wives; and because they lived a solitary life in one house.

Verse 16. Then came there two women-harlots] The word ywnz zonoth, which we here, and in some other places, improperly translate harlots, is by the Chaldee (the best judge in this case) rendered ˆyqdnwp pundekayan, tavern-keepers. (See on Joshua 2:1.) If these had been harlots, it is not likely they would have dared to appear before Solomon; and if they had been common women, it is not likely they would have had children; nor is it likely that such persons would have been permitted under the reign of David. Though there is no mention of their husbands, it is probable they might have been at this time in other parts, following their necessary occupations; and the settling the present business could not have been delayed till their return; the appeal to justice must be made immediately.

Verse 16. Two women that were harlots — Or, victuallers; for the Hebrew word signifies both. Yet that they were unmarried persons seems probable, both because there is no mention of any husbands, whose office it was, if there were any such, to contest for their wives; and because they lived a solitary life in one house. Unto the king — Probably they had presented their cause to the inferior courts, and as they could not determine it, they now bring it to the king as the supreme magistrate, and famous for wisdom. And stood there before him — Desiring and expecting his sentence in the case.

Ver. 16. Two women that were harlots. The Chaldaic paraphrase reads, “two women of the tabernacle.” It would be difficult for two common women to gain the royal ear.

SOLOMON’S JUDICIAL SAGACITY, 16-28.

16. Then came there two women — This seems to have been the first judicial decision of the new king, and it established in all Israel (verse 28) his reputation as a wise ruler and judge. It is added here, immediately after the history of his journey to Gibeon, as an illustration of the wisdom which he asked and received from God. “A monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice,” says Kitto, “was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge which detects the clew of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth, where the evidence affords not even the clew to any grounds of decision.” And so this incident throws light upon the manners of those times. Even harlots, (for true criticism will not allow the Chaldee rendering of the word twnz by innkeepers,) persons of abandoned character, were permitted to appear in the royal presence and plead their own causes.

SOLOMON’S JUDICIAL SAGACITY, 16-28.

16. Then came there two women — This seems to have been the first judicial decision of the new king, and it established in all Israel (verse 28) his reputation as a wise ruler and judge. It is added here, immediately after the history of his journey to Gibeon, as an illustration of the wisdom which he asked and received from God. “A monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice,” says Kitto, “was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge which detects the clew of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth, where the evidence affords not even the clew to any grounds of decision.” And so this incident throws light upon the manners of those times. Even harlots, (for true criticism will not allow the Chaldee rendering of the word twnz by innkeepers,) persons of abandoned character, were permitted to appear in the royal presence and plead their own causes.

Verses 18-22. On the third day — this woman was delivered also — So that the children could not be distinguished by their age. No stranger was with us in the house — Therefore there was no witness on either side; and although there might be some difference distinguishable by an exact observer between the features of the two children, yet it is not probable that was much attended to by the neighbours who might be present to assist either or both of them in their labour; as they were persons, it seems, of suspected fame. And the testimonies of the women were of equal credit, that is, of no credit at all. Because she overlaid it — And so smothered it: which she justly conjectures, because there were evidences of that kind of death, but no appearance of any other cause thereof. Thus they spake before the king — Both peremptorily and vehemently affirmed the same thing; oft repeating the same words.

SOLOMON’S JUDICIAL SAGACITY, 16-28.

16. Then came there two women — This seems to have been the first judicial decision of the new king, and it established in all Israel (verse 28) his reputation as a wise ruler and judge. It is added here, immediately after the history of his journey to Gibeon, as an illustration of the wisdom which he asked and received from God. “A monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice,” says Kitto, “was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge which detects the clew of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth, where the evidence affords not even the clew to any grounds of decision.” And so this incident throws light upon the manners of those times. Even harlots, (for true criticism will not allow the Chaldee rendering of the word twnz by innkeepers,) persons of abandoned character, were permitted to appear in the royal presence and plead their own causes.

V. 19. Overlaid it-And so smothered it: which she justly conjectures, because there were evidences of that kind of death, but no appearance of any other cause thereof.

Verses 18-22. On the third day — this woman was delivered also — So that the children could not be distinguished by their age. No stranger was with us in the house — Therefore there was no witness on either side; and although there might be some difference distinguishable by an exact observer between the features of the two children, yet it is not probable that was much attended to by the neighbours who might be present to assist either or both of them in their labour; as they were persons, it seems, of suspected fame. And the testimonies of the women were of equal credit, that is, of no credit at all. Because she overlaid it — And so smothered it: which she justly conjectures, because there were evidences of that kind of death, but no appearance of any other cause thereof. Thus they spake before the king — Both peremptorily and vehemently affirmed the same thing; oft repeating the same words.

SOLOMON’S JUDICIAL SAGACITY, 16-28.

16. Then came there two women — This seems to have been the first judicial decision of the new king, and it established in all Israel (verse 28) his reputation as a wise ruler and judge. It is added here, immediately after the history of his journey to Gibeon, as an illustration of the wisdom which he asked and received from God. “A monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice,” says Kitto, “was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge which detects the clew of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth, where the evidence affords not even the clew to any grounds of decision.” And so this incident throws light upon the manners of those times. Even harlots, (for true criticism will not allow the Chaldee rendering of the word twnz by innkeepers,) persons of abandoned character, were permitted to appear in the royal presence and plead their own causes.

Verses 18-22. On the third day — this woman was delivered also — So that the children could not be distinguished by their age. No stranger was with us in the house — Therefore there was no witness on either side; and although there might be some difference distinguishable by an exact observer between the features of the two children, yet it is not probable that was much attended to by the neighbours who might be present to assist either or both of them in their labour; as they were persons, it seems, of suspected fame. And the testimonies of the women were of equal credit, that is, of no credit at all. Because she overlaid it — And so smothered it: which she justly conjectures, because there were evidences of that kind of death, but no appearance of any other cause thereof. Thus they spake before the king — Both peremptorily and vehemently affirmed the same thing; oft repeating the same words.

SOLOMON’S JUDICIAL SAGACITY, 16-28.

16. Then came there two women — This seems to have been the first judicial decision of the new king, and it established in all Israel (verse 28) his reputation as a wise ruler and judge. It is added here, immediately after the history of his journey to Gibeon, as an illustration of the wisdom which he asked and received from God. “A monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice,” says Kitto, “was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge which detects the clew of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth, where the evidence affords not even the clew to any grounds of decision.” And so this incident throws light upon the manners of those times. Even harlots, (for true criticism will not allow the Chaldee rendering of the word twnz by innkeepers,) persons of abandoned character, were permitted to appear in the royal presence and plead their own causes.

Verses 18-22. On the third day — this woman was delivered also — So that the children could not be distinguished by their age. No stranger was with us in the house — Therefore there was no witness on either side; and although there might be some difference distinguishable by an exact observer between the features of the two children, yet it is not probable that was much attended to by the neighbours who might be present to assist either or both of them in their labour; as they were persons, it seems, of suspected fame. And the testimonies of the women were of equal credit, that is, of no credit at all. Because she overlaid it — And so smothered it: which she justly conjectures, because there were evidences of that kind of death, but no appearance of any other cause thereof. Thus they spake before the king — Both peremptorily and vehemently affirmed the same thing; oft repeating the same words.

21. When I had considered it in the morning — Here is a graphic word-picture. The true mother, with all the alarm and earnestness of a smitten heart, looks at the dead child again and again, and turns it over, scrutinizing every feature, and lo, it is not hers!

Verses 18-22. On the third day — this woman was delivered also — So that the children could not be distinguished by their age. No stranger was with us in the house — Therefore there was no witness on either side; and although there might be some difference distinguishable by an exact observer between the features of the two children, yet it is not probable that was much attended to by the neighbours who might be present to assist either or both of them in their labour; as they were persons, it seems, of suspected fame. And the testimonies of the women were of equal credit, that is, of no credit at all. Because she overlaid it — And so smothered it: which she justly conjectures, because there were evidences of that kind of death, but no appearance of any other cause thereof. Thus they spake before the king — Both peremptorily and vehemently affirmed the same thing; oft repeating the same words.

SOLOMON’S JUDICIAL SAGACITY, 16-28.

16. Then came there two women — This seems to have been the first judicial decision of the new king, and it established in all Israel (verse 28) his reputation as a wise ruler and judge. It is added here, immediately after the history of his journey to Gibeon, as an illustration of the wisdom which he asked and received from God. “A monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice,” says Kitto, “was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge which detects the clew of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth, where the evidence affords not even the clew to any grounds of decision.” And so this incident throws light upon the manners of those times. Even harlots, (for true criticism will not allow the Chaldee rendering of the word twnz by innkeepers,) persons of abandoned character, were permitted to appear in the royal presence and plead their own causes.

SOLOMON’S JUDICIAL SAGACITY, 16-28.

16. Then came there two women — This seems to have been the first judicial decision of the new king, and it established in all Israel (verse 28) his reputation as a wise ruler and judge. It is added here, immediately after the history of his journey to Gibeon, as an illustration of the wisdom which he asked and received from God. “A monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice,” says Kitto, “was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge which detects the clew of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth, where the evidence affords not even the clew to any grounds of decision.” And so this incident throws light upon the manners of those times. Even harlots, (for true criticism will not allow the Chaldee rendering of the word twnz by innkeepers,) persons of abandoned character, were permitted to appear in the royal presence and plead their own causes.

SOLOMON’S JUDICIAL SAGACITY, 16-28.

16. Then came there two women — This seems to have been the first judicial decision of the new king, and it established in all Israel (verse 28) his reputation as a wise ruler and judge. It is added here, immediately after the history of his journey to Gibeon, as an illustration of the wisdom which he asked and received from God. “A monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice,” says Kitto, “was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge which detects the clew of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth, where the evidence affords not even the clew to any grounds of decision.” And so this incident throws light upon the manners of those times. Even harlots, (for true criticism will not allow the Chaldee rendering of the word twnz by innkeepers,) persons of abandoned character, were permitted to appear in the royal presence and plead their own causes.

V. 25. Said-Though with a design far above the reach of the two women, or of the people present, who probably with horror expected the execution of it.

Verse 25. Divide the living child in two] This was apparently a very strange decision, and such as nothing could vindicate had it been carried into execution; but Solomon saw that the only way to find out the real mother was by the affection and tenderness which she would necessarily show to her offspring. He plainly saw that the real mother would rather relinquish her claim to her child than see it hewn in pieces before her eyes, while it was probable the pretender would see this with indifference. He therefore orders such a mode of trial as would put the maternal affection of the real mother to the utmost proof; the plan was tried, and it succeeded. This was a proof of his sound judgment, penetration, and acquaintance with human nature; but surely it is not produced as a proof of extraordinary and supernatural wisdom. We have several similar decisions even among heathens.

Suetonius, in his life of the Emperor Claudius, cap. xv., whom he celebrates for his wonderful sagacity and penetration on some particular occasions, tells us, that this emperor discovered a woman to be the mother of a certain young man, whom she refused to acknowledge as her son, by commanding her to marry him, the proofs being doubtful on both sides; for, rather than commit this incest, she confessed the truth. His words are: Feminam, non agnoscentem fllium suum, dubia utrinque argumentorum fide, ad confessionem compulit, indicto matrimonio juvenis. Ariopharnes, king of Thrace, being appointed to decide between three young men, who each professed to be the son of the deceased king of the Cimmerians, and claimed the crown in consequence, found out the real son by commanding each to shoot an arrow into the body of the dead king: two of them did this without hesitation, the third refused, and was therefore judged by Ariopharnes to be the real son of the deceased. Grotius, on this place, quotes this relation from Diodorus Siculus; I quote this on his authority, but have not been able to find the place in Diodorus. This is a parallel case to that in the text; a covert appeal was made to the principle of affection; and the truth was discovered, as in the case of the mother of the living child.

Verse 25. The king said — With seeming sincerity, though with a design far above the reach of the two women, or of the people present, who probably with horror expected the execution of his sentence. “Solomon knew at once that the only sign whereby to discover the true mother, would be her affection, and compassionate tenderness for her child; and therefore, in order to distinguish between the two, his business was to make trial of this. And if we suppose that, when he commanded the child to be divided, he spake with a sedate countenance and seeming earnestness, as the true mother’s petition to the king makes it apparent that he did; then we may suppose further, not only the two women, but all the people present, with dread and admiration expecting the execution of the thing; which when it ended in so just a decision, quite contrary to what they looked for, raised joy in every breast, and gave a more advantageous commendation to the judge. And yet Abarbinel, the Jewish commentator, thinks that all this was no great proof of Solomon’s extraordinary wisdom, nor could it beget that fear or reverence which the text (says verse 28) it procured to his person. His opinion, therefore, is, that Solomon made a discovery of the truth antecedent to this experiment; that by observing the countenance, the manner of speech, and all the motions of the women, he discerned the secret of their hearts, and penetrated to the bottom of the business; and that his commanding the child to be divided afterward was only to notify to the company what he before had discovered.” See Patrick and Calmet.

SOLOMON’S JUDICIAL SAGACITY, 16-28.

16. Then came there two women — This seems to have been the first judicial decision of the new king, and it established in all Israel (verse 28) his reputation as a wise ruler and judge. It is added here, immediately after the history of his journey to Gibeon, as an illustration of the wisdom which he asked and received from God. “A monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice,” says Kitto, “was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge which detects the clew of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth, where the evidence affords not even the clew to any grounds of decision.” And so this incident throws light upon the manners of those times. Even harlots, (for true criticism will not allow the Chaldee rendering of the word twnz by innkeepers,) persons of abandoned character, were permitted to appear in the royal presence and plead their own causes.

26. Let it be neither mine nor thine — Wordsworth compares this language of the false mother to the demands of schism in the Church of Christ, and calls it “the popular language of sects and sectaries, who say, Let various forms of religion be equally encouraged and patronized; there are numerous different ways all leading to heaven, and every man is free to choose which he likes best for himself, without any regard to the authority and judgment of Christ speaking in his Church. But the true mother shuns division and loves unity.” There may be some force in such comparison, if it is aimed against that wicked kind of schism which delights to make discord and dispute among the true disciples of Christ; but when aimed against the various evangelical denominations into which Protestant Christendom is divided, the comparison becomes ludicrous, and the comment above quoted may be turned upon its author and the Church party he represents with biting force. “High Churchism,” whether in Rome, England, or America, has been, in her legitimate results, the most schismatic of all “sects.” “Her zeal for unity,” which the above-named writer regards as “the evidence of her marriage and of her motherhood,” has never scrupled, when she had the power, to use the fagot and the sword in accomplishing her objects. So she has followed the fleshly methods of the child of that Sinai “which gendereth to bondage,” (Galatians 4:24, compare 29.) Not organic unity, but the unity of spiritual freedom, is the mark of that “Jerusalem which is the mother of us all.” Contemptible is that narrowness which sees in the unity of Romish ecclesiasticism a something better than the unity of spirit and of life which is the glory of evangelical Protestantism. The true mother in this narrative showed at least the spirit of concession and yielding to her rival; but when did ever the narrow ecclesiasticism of papacy or semi-papacy yield even the most trivial point to a rival “sect” in order to secure organic unity, or when did she ever say to her rival, in the spirit of the true mother, “Give her the living child?”

V. 27. She is the mother-As is evident from her natural affection to the child, which she had rather have given away from her, than destroyed.

Verses 27, 28. She is the mother — As is evident from her natural affection to the child, which she had rather have given away from her than destroyed. Wisdom of God — Divine wisdom, with which God had inspired him for the government of his people.

SOLOMON’S JUDICIAL SAGACITY, 16-28.

16. Then came there two women — This seems to have been the first judicial decision of the new king, and it established in all Israel (verse 28) his reputation as a wise ruler and judge. It is added here, immediately after the history of his journey to Gibeon, as an illustration of the wisdom which he asked and received from God. “A monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice,” says Kitto, “was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge which detects the clew of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth, where the evidence affords not even the clew to any grounds of decision.” And so this incident throws light upon the manners of those times. Even harlots, (for true criticism will not allow the Chaldee rendering of the word twnz by innkeepers,) persons of abandoned character, were permitted to appear in the royal presence and plead their own causes.

V. 28. Wisdom of God-Divine wisdom with which God had inspired him for the government of his people.

Verse 28. They feared the king] This decision proved that they could not impose upon him; and they were afraid to do those things which might bring them before his judgment-seat.

They saw that the wisdom of God was in him] They perceived that he was taught of God, judged impartially, and could not be deceived. What was done to the other woman we are not told; justice certainly required that she should be punished for her lies and fraud.

I KINGS

Verses 27, 28. She is the mother — As is evident from her natural affection to the child, which she had rather have given away from her than destroyed. Wisdom of God — Divine wisdom, with which God had inspired him for the government of his people.

28. The wisdom of God was in him — That is, wisdom given by God. The people perceived that their king was divinely gifted to execute justice. His manner of procedure was very foreign from our forms of justice, but it was truly Oriental, and showed the Divine gift of detecting and exposing the guilty, and defending the innocent, which is the great end of all true litigation.